Posts Tagged ‘humanism’

My book coverWithout fanfare or ceremony, the deed is done!  I have just completed nearly two years of writing a book.

On May 2, 2014, it was officially published and made available on Amazon.  There is enough left in my well of words to say “thank you” to an extraordinarily patient and helpful support team.  You know who you are.

The title of the book is The Failure of Sex Education in the Church: Mistaken Identity, Compromised Purity.  It is not the book I dreamed of writing.  It is the book I was compelled to write after thirty years of working with and listening to parents and the children they care about.

The book is 250 pages with over 230 footnotes.  No, I’m not in graduate school, but yes, this is my thesis. It is a dissertation that covers more than the controversial subject of sex education.  It explains how humanists bestowed a mistaken identity upon our children and why, nearly a half century later, Christians still nod their approval.  Yet, everywhere I go, I hear people ask, “Why are children sexualized?” The fact that a book like this hasn’t already been written tells me that too many of us have been deceived about our identity.

Christians live in a foreign land.  We are called to be uncommon, but have accepted the common ways of our neighbors.  We have let the unbelievers identify us.

The Failure of Sex Education in the Church: Mistaken Identity, Compromised Purity is a “catechism” for parents, pastors, teachers, those struggling with sexual temptations, and everyone who is concerned about the sexualization of children.

For fifty years, Christians and non-Christians alike have been taught to believe that “children are sexual from birth”.  Nowhere in Scripture does God describe children this way.  The phrase was coined by a humanist named Alfred Kinsey who believed infants and children can enjoy and benefit from early sexual activity.  His social science was wrong, but his research was widely accepted.  Our nation and even the Church were set on a dangerous course.  By accepting Kinsey’s data and the expertise of other like-minded humanists, the Church played a role in bestowing a mistaken identity, compromising purity for multiple generations, and ultimately putting human lives at risk.

A false identity has both temporal and eternal ramifications.  With painstaking care, I have attempted to explain why the Church can no longer participate in a tragically flawed social experiment and going beyond diagnosis, I propose a hopeful, radical and thoroughly biblical remedy.

There is no personal delight in pointing out error.  I have persevered with this project because I am motivated by love for my own children and grandchildren and by love for God’s Word.  For the sake of all children, I believe that Christians need to know the origin of sex education, then ask:

  • What fellowship has light with darkness (2 Corinthians 6:14-16)?
  • Upon what foundation have we built?
  • Young or old, single or married, who does God say that I am and what does this mean?

For the sake of generational holiness and purity, it is my prayer that we encourage honest and kind dialogue.  The 107 questions and answers I offer in my book are a good place to start.

Curious?  Please visit Our Identity Matters to learn more.

The book may be ordered from Amazon.








Read Full Post »

Most of us have followed a car bearing the bumper sticker: Coexist.  Symbols of different religions make up each letter of the word.  Sounds good.  In order to “give peace a chance,” shouldn’t we all “coexist?”  But, what does this mean?

Not everyone in my circle of family, friends or neighbors believes exactly as I do.  Therefore, I “coexist” with people of many perspectives on life and of many faiths by treating them as the human beings God made them to be.  They are worthy, because of what Jesus Christ has done for us all, of my kindness.  Respect.  Civility.  Care.  Concern.  Help.

Does the bumper sticker “coexist” suggest something more?  If so, other questions follow.  Can the religion of humanism or atheism coexist with the Biblical worldview of Creation, The Fall, and Redemption?  Can the way of Mohammed, Buddha, or Gaia coexist with the God who calls Himself “I Am;” who spoke to Job, asking: “Were you there . . .  Have you commanded . . . Do you know how . . . ?”  Can Jesus Christ coexist with the religion of “save yourself?”

At every Titus 2 Retreat, I share the passage from Ezra 4:3.  It is a powerful message for Christians living in this “progressive” age.  The Israelites had been captive in Babylon for a long, long time.  When the Babylonian king told the Israelites they could return to their homeland, very few of God’s people chose to do so.  They had coexisted with the Babylonian religions and practices for so long that they didn’t want to return to their “old ways.”  A relatively small number of Israelites returned to re-build the decayed city of Jerusalem.

With such few workers, the re-building of Jerusalem was difficult.  Watching the process, some non-believing neighbors in the land offered their assistance.  (Did they have an agenda of their own?)  But, God cautioned His people not to accept the help of unbelievers.  Why?  1) The job of rebuilding Jerusalem was given exclusively to God’s people, 2) accepting help from non-believers would obligate God’s people to pagan ways, and 3) the potential for corruption in worship was too great if God’s people aligned themselves with non-believers.

Can people who call upon the name of the Lord Jesus Christ coexist with those who do not?  As kind and civil human beings who see each of their neighbors as creations of God: Yes.  But, as believers in the One True God who reveals Himself in three persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit: No.  We cannot “coexist” if the definition is “blend,” “bend,” or “bow to other gods.”  The Biblical worldview of male and female, children and family, education, human care, law, government, and even economics contrasts all others.

What partnership has righteousness with lawlessness?  Or what fellowship has light with darkness?  What accord has Christ with Belial . . . What agreement has the temple of God with idols (2 Corinthians 6:14-16)?”

In the end, it comes down to our answer to the question asked by Jesus:

Who do people say that the Son of Man is (Matthew 16:13)?”

Read Full Post »

Do you have a friend, professor, or neighbor who claims to take the moral high-road, yet stubbornly defends abortion?  Take a breath, and keep your composure.  Don’t make statements; rather, ask questions.

Mike Adams (Townhall.com 3/7/2011) offers 35 questions he gleaned in large part from Scott Klusendorf (www.prolifetraining.com).  Here are 18 of those questions:

  1. If abortion is not murder because the fetus is not a person then why make it “safe, legal, and rare”?
  2. If a woman were raped and got pregnant, which one would you kill: a) the baby, b) the rapist, or c) both?
  3. Are you comfortable with the fact that “a” is the only answer you  may choose according to (the present interpretation of) the Constitution?
  4. Abortion advocates frequently focus on the size of the fetus.  Why is that relevant?
  5. Do tall people have more rights than short people?
  6. Is murder permissible when the victim is sleeping and hence unaware of the surrounding environment?
  7. Should a woman abort a baby because it may be expensive and time-consuming to raise a child to adulthood?
  8. Should a woman be able to kill a puppy because it may be expensive and time consuming to feed and care for a dog?
  9. What gives human beings more value than dogs?
  10. Who do we expect better behavior from humans than from dogs?
  11. Which one of these is not like the others: a) Adult, b) toddler, c) unborn baby, d) dog?
  12. Does secular humanism assume that humans are inherently different from other life forms?  If not, why is it called humanism?
  13. Can a thoroughly materialistic (or Darwinist or secular humanist) worldview explain how or why anything has value or a right to life?
  14. Does the “right to choose” come from man or from God?
  15. If man grants rights can he also take them away?
  16. It has been said (by three Supreme Court Justices) that “At the heart of liberty is the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life.”  Does that mean a woman can define a baby’s rights out of existence because a woman is more powerful than a baby?
  17. Or does that mean a man can define a woman’s rights out of existence because, in a patriarchal society, a man is more powerful than a woman?
  18. Rights often confer power.  Should power also confer rights?

A long time ago, I learned the wisdom of asking questions.  Questions don’t condemn.  They just help people think.

I want to be a thinking person, don’t you?  (Thanks Mike!  Thanks Scott!)

(Mike Adams is a criminology professor at the University of North Carolina and author of Feminists Say the Darndest Things: A Politically Incorrect Professor Confronts “Womyn” On Campus.  Scott Klusendorf is a Summit Ministries faculty member and vibrant pro-life advocate.)

Read Full Post »