Newsweek: Attack on Christianity
Newsweek Magazine is easily the worst magazine ever written. Jon Meachem’s scholarship is laughable. His refusal to ever really engage arguments against his position makes him dishonest, discredited, and an all around shill for liberalism. That made the December issue of Newsweek interesting because it was supposed to take head-on the Biblical position against Homosexual Marriage. Meachem’s introductory letter shows that he can only dismiss and not refute. I won’t get into that as Christianity Today actually does a good job of showing the lack of logic in Meacham. Yet, one could still hold out hope for the cover story to really get into the meat of things. Well, let’s just say the people working for Meachem have patterned themselves after their fearful leader.
Lisa Miller, the religion editor no less, shows that she has no idea what the Bible teaches or where it teaches it. That is not good for a religion editor. She starts off her pro-gay marriage piece by pretending the Bible only teaches polygamy or is indifferent to marriage all together. She finds no direct teaching that marriage should be between a man and a woman? Seriously. She cannot find Genesis 2:21-24 which includes this: "Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and be joined to his wife and they shall become one flesh." The creation story is not hard to find, and you don’t even have to read very far into the Bible to find the story. God thought it was not good Adam was alone, so he made Eve and God brings Eve to Adam and creates marriage between one man and one woman. Newsweek mentions this verse somewhere in the middle, but dismisses it by saying that the Bible was written by men, not God. Maybe Newsweek should just have written a magazine on something they understood better. Instead, they focus on a few examples in the Bible of what they believe is the Bible teaching non-traditional marriage.
Miller quotes Abraham sleeping with Hagar as a poor example of marriage. Yet, Miller apparently forgets that Abraham is rebuked for his failure in his marriage, and his sexual SIN with Hagar started centuries of violence and hatred between the descendants of Ishmael (Arabs) and Isaac (Jews). A rather important point. She quotes David, but forgets he was rebuked in 2 Samuel 12 and never commits the sin of polygamy again after it. She quotes Solomon but forgets that he is led astray because of his wives and it was clearly a sin. She quotes Jacob, but forgets he was tricked into marring Leah, and it still is sin. Miller is able to avoid all of that because she refuses to acknowledge the standard set in the second chapter of the whole Bible. She takes historical narrative and refuses to apply the standards in place to that narrative. 2 Samuel assumes that you are familiar with the 10 Commandments, which are listed in previous books. But that does not aid Miller’s argument so she ignores it. She then goes on to claim that Jesus was indifferent to earthly attachments especially family. That whopper must have taken years of imagination to invent. Sure, Jesus preaches that we ought to seek first the Kingdom of Heaven and the things above, but does this mean that all earthly things are indifferent or worse? Of course not. Jesus shows great family attachment even on the cross by making sure someone takes care of his mother. Jesus did not get married, but does that prove anything? No, of course not. Jesus had no problem healing Peter’s mother-in-law, which can only happen by marriage. He had no problem attending a wedding at Cana. He said the kingdom of heaven belonged to little children, which can only come through marriage. A point Jesus was very clear on. Such biblical ignorance from Miller is enough to disturb, not to mention undermine her point.
However, in fairness, she really rests her case on something else entirely. Love. Of course Miller has no idea of Biblical Love because she completely refuses to let the Bible define the term. Is homosexual activity really loving? The Bible does not think so. God says it is not. Some of you are probably wondering what Newsweek does with all the verses condemning homosexuality. Well, they are thrown out the door with the idea of modern progress.
Most of us no longer heed Leviticus on haircuts or blood sacrifices; our modern understanding of the world has surpassed its prescriptions. Why would we regard its condemnation of homosexuality with more seriousness than we regard its advice, which is far lengthier, on the best price to pay for a slave?
First, these are not the only places where homosexuality is condemned contrary to Miller’s assertion. Second, we cannot throw out the law that easily. Reformed Confessions for centuries have talked about moral laws, ceremonial laws, and judicial laws, but such understanding is brushed aside by Miller as pointless. We can just ignore that part of the Bible. Why? Because Miller wants to have things her way and not God’s way. She even goes so far as to quote Miss Manners as a better authority than God.
Miller goes on to use the love and inclusiveness argument to push for gay marriage.
The practice of inclusion, even in defiance of social convention, the reaching out to outcasts, the emphasis on togetherness and community over and against chaos, depravity, indifference—all these biblical values argue for gay marriage.
Here we see that Miller again misses the point. Jesus is not arguing for inclusion. He is arguing for repentance. Yes, Christians are to reach out to the outcasts, the depraved, and even homosexuals. But the message Christ reaches out to them with is not “You are okay, come be a part of the community”, the message is "Repent and believe." Thus, the inclusion is based on the unity of repentance and belief in Jesus Christ is Lord and Savior. This rules out the idea of staying homosexual since that is a sin that needs to be repented of, despite the throwing away of bible verses done earlier in the article.
This whole article is an example of what "liberal Christianity" really is: a complete and total rejection of the Bible. The people at Newsweek have trouble seeing that some people really believe their Bible. That is a laughable suggestion to the people at this horrible magazine, but it is what we Bible Believers should start expecting. To be called names, mocked, and yes even persecuted. Following the Good Book is not easy. It is not going to get us in good with Sean Penn and the Academy Awards, and Newsweek will hate you, but the pleasure of the King of Kings is all that should matter.
1 Comments:
It's beyond me how giving someone AIDS or tearing their anus apart is "loving."
Discerner
Post a Comment