Refusing Homosexuals Service or Commerce

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Refusing Homosexuals Service or Commerce

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015...-court-ruling/

    I know to some people reading this, they will find my position odd, where it seems that I am often militant against what others see as acceptable. No, rather I am aggressive against any position, belief or propaganda in the Church that opposes sound doctrine. Sola scriptura (Latin ablative, "by Scripture alone").

    I think everyone by now is well aware of the defiant Kentucky county clerk, who continues to refuse to issue marriage licenses to gay couples. She said, “To issue a marriage license which conflicts with God’s definition of marriage, with my name affixed to the certificate, would violate my conscience. It is not a light issue for me. It is a Heaven or Hell decision. For me it is a decision of obedience.”

    Romans 13:1-7 states, “Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves." There is a gray line here, where in one sense we are to obey authorities, those who would govern this clerk. On the other hand, if the government would require we kill babies, then we would be committing murder, and violate the set ordinances detailed in Scripture. Contesting such a command would demand vigilance. Baking cakes or issued marriage certificates does not directly violate a cardinal tenant set forth, but rather challenges the individual personally about the sin choice of others. Different situation, entirely different results. The Romans were cruel to Israel, yet Jesus said to render until this corrupt empire what is due to the evil ruler, Caesar Augustus. You can be certain listeners and teachers gasped and doubted Jesus' sanity to propose such compliance to an evil and violating government. Jesus never once tried to set right the wrongs of his world, even when they tried to install him as King by force. His kingdom was of another realm, and his allegiance was only to One.

    Not that I condone homosexuals or any other type of perversion, however a Christian is not to resist a sinners personal choice based on conduct, where they are fallen, acting according to their base natures. They are the field ripe for harvest, not enemies to contest. "..Not at all meaning [avoid] the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world" 1 Cor. 5:10. It is impossible to live on earth without serving the unregenerate. Jesus was condemned by the scribes and Pharisees for associating with people of whose conduct they disapproved. The charge of eating and drinking with them which reveals to us that Jesus’ enemies did regard him as complicit in their behavior. But he did it anyway. Christians who can’t bake a cake for others or process a marriage license are putting themselves inside the bubble of Pharisaism.

    The only time scripture is definitively clear about separation or making a moral distinction about another person is due to conduct or choices of those in the faith alone. "But now I am writing to you that you must not associate with anyone who claims to be a brother or sister but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or slanderer, a drunkard or swindler. Do not even eat with such people" 1 Cor. 5:11. The passage goes on to say, "What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside?" We are not to make distinctions against those in the outer courts, but instead anyone who is a brother or sister whose life or conduct is grossly sinful; they are to be cast out. "God will judge those outside. "Expel the wicked person from among you"" 1 Cor. 5:13. Purification of the body isn’t practiced today as it was in the original church. Tolerated impurity has a consequence. “A little yeast leavens the whole batch of dough” as scripture mentions multiple times in different contexts. Allowance of lifestyle sin will contaminate the whole Church body as untreated cancer will devastate the body.

    Therefore scripturally speaking, it is problematic to support this woman’s stance as a champion for the faith, rather she is making unbiblical distinctions of the fallen when it is only God’s divine act of providence to make distinction among the wicked.

  • #2
    This is a great point, and one I wish were more broadly understood. Her role in her job is not to establish or interpret policy on behalf of the state. If she disagrees with the policy, and believes that element of her job violates her conscience (even though issuing licenses to marry is within the boundaries of the law) then she should quit that job. If she gets impeached, it will be for a legitimate dereliction of duty.

    God has defined marriage a certain way, and the state has defined it another. There's a problematic gap there. But... her employment is to carry out the State's laws, not God's. As admirable as her tenacity is, she is doing the Church no favors. This is not martyrdom. It is her recombining church and state at an individual level and imposing her morality as the trump card, denying someone's else's legal right.

    That's just not gonna get us anywhere.

    Thanks for expounding on this, Steven. It has frustrated me for a while; glad to hear your thoughts on it.

    Comment


    • #3
      Very well said! We are also propagating a misunderstanding of sin and God's amazing grace when we elevate one sin over another! Brothers and sisters, let us love and be people that have the sweet aroma of Jesus! The message of the Gospel should communicate something so much more than what is often poorly modeled and communicated, otherwise there will be no eternal impact!

      Comment


      • #4
        It seems you and I are on the same page this is what I had posted yesterday on one of the news feeds: County clerks--A Christian’s Duties to the State “Everyone must submit to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except from God, and those that exist are instituted by God. 2 So then, the one who resists the authority is opposing God’s command, and those who oppose it will bring judgment on themselves. 3 For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have its approval. 4 For government is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, because it does not carry the sword for no reason. For government is God’s servant, an avenger that brings wrath on the one who does wrong. 5 Therefore, you must submit, not only because of wrath, but also because of your conscience. 6 And for this reason you pay taxes, since the authorities are God’s public servants, continually attending to these tasks. 7 Pay your obligations to everyone: taxes to those you owe taxes, tolls to those you owe tolls, respect to those you owe respect, and honor to those you owe honor.” Romans 13:1-7

        I know many of the county clerks and most are devout Christians that don't believe in same sex marriage. They have all decided to follow the law. Because of separation of church and state, if you are an elected official or government worker you have to follow the law. This is not any different in the cooperate world or any other work place you follow the rules or leave. America is not the kingdom of God. There will never be any Gay marriage in God's Kingdom. Since we, the elect, are citizens of heaven we live by different standards than that of the world. The clerk is issuing a government document and it is not a statement of approval or disapproval. That wall of separation of church and state keeps the churches from being forced to perform the marriages. The apostate churches will do those weddings. This is all part of the great falling away prophesied in The Bible. The true believers will walk in holiness and be tolerant to those perishing hoping to snatch them from the fire.

        1 Corinthians 6 makes it clear there will be no homosexuals in heaven." 9 Don’t you know that the unrighteous will not inherit God’s kingdom? Do not be deceived: No sexually immoral people, idolaters, adulterers, or anyone practicing homosexuality,[d] 10 no thieves, greedy people, drunkards, verbally abusive people, or swindlers will inherit God’s kingdom. 11 And some of you used to be like this. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God." In 1 Thessalonians 4 we are told "3 For this is God’s will, your sanctification: that you abstain from sexual immorality, 4 so that each of you knows how to control his own body in sanctification and honor, 5 not with lustful desires, like the Gentiles who don’t know God. 6 This means one must not transgress against and defraud his brother in this matter, because the Lord is an avenger of all these offenses,[c] as we also previously told and warned you. 7 For God has not called us to impurity but to sanctification. 8 Therefore, the person who rejects this does not reject man, but God, who also gives you His Holy Spirit."

        The church is the failure to America with lazy preaching, easy believism, emotionalism, the lack of meat coming from the pulpits which have brought confusion to the flock. Most people you ask, who are living in sin, will tell you Jesus saved them from hell but was that Jesus' mission. He called us into adoption sanctification, service and transformation giving us power over sin. Jesus came to save us from our sins--not just the penalty of.

        Comment


        • #5
          I expressed that I disagree. I believe we have to look at all of scripture, not just certain verses. In the Old and New Testament there are examples of men and women of God disobeying the civil magistrate because of evil that arose. They were asked to do something or participate in an act that would defy God's Law. Daniel and his friends, Esther, Mordecai, Paul, Peter, the apostles, all disobeyed the civil magistrate. The Bible does point out in some of the verses you provided that we are to follow laws put in place by our governments because Christ has placed them there and reigns over them as King. Of we look at 1 Peter 2: 13-17, we find a significant piece to this puzzle. When is it okay to disobey the civil magistrate? When the civil magistrate does not punish those who do evil or praise those who do good, but praises the ones who do evil and punish those who do good.
          The reference about Caesar is not saying to take the side of the pacifist as the Jehovah's Witness do, but the context is that they were trying to trick Jesus.

          I think the best sermon out there on this subject is by a pastor in Bloomington by the name of Stephen Baker called Honor the King. You can find it on audio archives from the 2014 Clearnote Summer Conference Salt and Light.

          Jesus did not sit with sinners to promote peace. He always called those sinners to repentance and faith. We must always do this in love. What homosexuals may not realize is that Christians are the ones that love them the most. We are the ones who care enough to not see them perish forever.

          The American church has often painted Jesus as a Teddy Bear. We see Him as someone who winks at sin. We love ourselves too much and do not want to suffer being disliked by the world. We also put on a false humility and act as if the world seeing our goodness will bring about salvation. We are all sinners. Praise God for His mercy and grace. Luke 10 gives a very different picture of Jesus.

          If the government asks me to participate in something that violates God's law, I can flee, I can defend myself, and I can refuse. Those actions would all be biblical responses. This woman is standing for Gods Law and I do applaud her and praise God who is sustaining her. I believe we will all, very soon, be faced with these moral decisions.

          Comment


          • #6
            Good point. (I am concerned about her morbid obesity. Gluttony offends me.)

            I agree that her church should support her when she is justifiably fired for not doing her job.

            Though, her work could choose to accommodate her conscience, if they do so for others.

            Comment


            • #7
              The lady has been married 4 times and in an office where nepotism reigns. Rebecca read my commits above. She has given a propaganda outlet to the unrepentant. Our examples of Jesus and Paul was they focused on the Kingdom of God verses the kingdom of man. Neither preached against Rome, that I can remember, and that government was full of perversion. If we were going to be consistent we would not buy or sale products from cooperations that promote and give benefits for same sex union. The, fact is, it is just a government document and it is not approval or disapproval and it's her job to distribute it. The social security office is giving out benefits to them and nothing is said about that. We are to be tolerant and live in peace, as it is up to us ,by picking our battles wisely. God is tolerant, not the new progressive definition of acceptance, but one of tolerating that which is offensive--sin. It is no difference if you are in the military you have to follow orders. You just can't pick and choose which laws we will follow.

              Comment


              • #8
                The issue, though, Rebecca, is that the government did not ASK or otherwise compel her to participate. She ran for an office and got elected - and now she's using her beliefs as a justification for not doing the job she was elected to do.

                If she disagrees with the state law, or if it violates her conscience to administer it, she should not have voluntarily run for office. And if the law changed while she was in office, the honorable and proper thing to do would be to step down.

                Morality or not, the position that she was elected to does not give her the option to interpret or selectively enforce state laws, which is what she's doing.

                This is the wrong way to be 'right'.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Roger Chaney, I would be very careful about the judgment of her married life. I have been married twice and God saved me from my sin. I know a woman who had four husband's because three of them died. I did read your comments above and I disagree with them. What did Peter and the apostles do when they were told not to preach the gospel anymore? They defied their authority and continued to preach the gospel. Daniel opened his window to pray to God, a public act of disobedience. Jesus Christ spoke to the governing authority of Israel at the time with rebuke.

                  I agree we must truly stand for Gods Kingdom in all areas of our life even if that means not shopping at a favorite store any longer. We shouldn't pick and choose. We must stand against any evil we are told to uphold. God does not tolerate sin. He hates sin. He exhibits forbearance and shows mercy to some, His Church.
                  Mordecai sure did cause quite a stir when he was asked by a government official to bow down to him.

                  This woman is no different.

                  The law did change once she came to office and it may be more honorable to step down, or it may proclaim God's truth. My husband was an officer, now detective. He will not obey an order given if it violates God's Law. His first authority is to Christ. I do recommend listening to the sermon mentioned even if you disagree with me.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I was thinking of Daniel and some of the other examples Rebecca gave, as well. I don't have a hard stance for or against this—just questions as I learn more about what it looks like to live as a Christian in a hostile world.

                    I appreciate all the points and hope to pray through this and learn more.

                    Discussions like this are what I value most about this forum.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I guess I forgot about that part in Esther where Mordecai voluntarily runs for public office in Persia and then takes an oath to support the Persian constitution and faithfully execute the duties that come with the office, before he refuses to bow down to Haman.

                      Respectfully, Rebecca, it's not the same. And I feel like this particular nuance of the story is worth seeing clearly. She took an oath to uphold, among other things, the laws of the commonwealth of Kentucky in her duties. She put herself in a position where obeying God and fulfilling her oath of office are at odds - it was not thrust upon her.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Rebecca - forbearance and tolerance are interchangeable-synonyms. Romans: 2 And do you think this, O man, you who judge those practicing such things, and doing the same, that you will escape the judgment of God? 4 Or do you despise the riches of His goodness, forbearance (tolerance), and longsuffering, not knowing that the goodness of God leads you to repentance? 5 But in accordance with your hardness and your impenitent heart you are treasuring up for yourself wrath in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God, 6 who “will render to each one according to his deeds”: 7 eternal life to those who by patient continuance in doing good seek for glory, honor, and immortality; 8 but to those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness—indignation and wrath, 9 tribulation and anguish, on every soul of man who does evil, of the Jew first and also of the Greek; 10 but glory, honor, and peace to everyone who works what is good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. 11 For there is no partiality with God. Romans3: 21 But now the righteousness of God apart from the law is revealed, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, 22 even the righteousness of God, through faith in Jesus Christ, to all and on all who believe. For there is no difference; 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, 25 whom God set forth as a propitiation by His blood, through faith, to demonstrate His righteousness, because in His forbearance (tolerance) God had passed over the sins that were previously committed, 26 to demonstrate at the present time His righteousness, that He might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.

                        God has tolerated that which is offensive to Him. Tolerance is not acceptance. We tolerate that which we oppose that some may be saved. But as it saws above His toleration will end. Judgment is coming. God hates sin but He loves and tolerates the sinner. Now there are some clear teaches that we should not tolerate actions inside the Body of Christ.

                        Rebecca, let me apologize for the way it sounded when I brought up the four marriages. I'm sure she is a very nice lady and is sincere on her convictions. Years ago some county clerks would not issue marriage license for interracial marriage due to their religious convictions. That has not been forgotten and SCOTUS ruled the same on that and now they are being linked. So what lot of non-Christians hear (when they hear what she is doing) is we are all bigots. I do not want any walls that keeps me from preaching Christ. I worked in manufacturing and it was not allowed to discuss politics, or religion. I broke both of those rules but I felt convection for doing so later. I could have done that after work, at lunch or on breaks. My employer had purchased my time and I, as a Christian, should have been obedient because, by not doing so I lost part of my witness, was committing insubordination and technically stealing from them because they had purchased that time.

                        Obedience and repentance are both non-negotiable biblical doctrines. She is not preaching the gospel at work but she which she allowed to do that after work. Her job is to administer and register a government documents. That is not a sign of approval or disapproval. While at work she should do the job she is hired to do. Her actions will end up as a loss for our cause. I think you have some valid insights and I thank you for sharing. Discussion is what this diverse group of lovers of Christ is about.

                        Ephesians 6:5 Bondservants, obey your earthly masters with fear and trembling, with a sincere heart, as you would Christ, 6 not by the way of eye-service, as people-pleasers, but as bondservants of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart, 7 rendering service with a good will as to the Lord and not to man, 8 knowing that whatever good anyone does, this he will receive back from the Lord, whether he is a bondservant or is free. 9 Masters, do the same to them, and stop your threatening, knowing that he who is both their Master and yours is in heaven, and that there is no partiality with him, Something to consider.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Very grateful for everyone’s input! This is a difficult subject, as mentioned in the initial commentary; it can have some gray areas. One person wrote in support, "Civil disobedience must be the way of the Church going forward: marches on Washington, lying in the streets in protest, bullying our way into campaign speeches, and being loud, etc. The Left has shown us the way to victory, so let’s use their tactics, and turn this tide around into the direction facing “normal.” Let’s go all you clerks, start a movement!" That is unfortunately, exactly what is wrong with this reactive posture, responding like the ungodly.

                          Another government office worker responds with sarcasm, "As a devout Evangelical Christian it is a violation of my deeply held religious beliefs to issue a building permit to religious groups that preach false doctrine (Catholics, Jews, Mormons, etc.). Consequently, I simply won’t place my signature on those permits even though I work as a permit officer at the Louisville Department of Permits and Licensing. That means Monday through Sunday, I have a right to believe and practice what I believe." Where do the personal offense and discrimination standoffs end?

                          Certainly, pastors should hold fast to the doctrinal mandates for holiness and refuse to host or officiate a gay marriage. Gay's must not be allowed to serve at any capacity in the Church for obvious Scriptural reasons that don’t warrant repeating. However, allowing their attendance in a church is a whole different matter, the door must remain open. If the Word God is rightly divided, taught without waiver, they will either repent or depart anyway. Light correctly aimed and bright will always drive out darkness.

                          I listened to "Honor the King" by Stephen Baker from July 2014, because I strive to remain open minded and receptive to all: http://clearnotefellowship.org/audio...ght/honor-king He addresses being salt and light in the public square related to civil magistrates. The importance to submit to government authorities, but with certain exceptions, where he is in favor of not issuing marriage certificates to gays. He presses that Christians have the duty to disobey (22:50 to 27:08). He uses passage about the midwives mentioned in Exodus 1, refusing to kill babies because they feared God, which is correct action as I had used as an example initially. The case of Daniel who prayed even when it was signed that such should be put death, he prayed anyway. Defying a mandate due to personal spiritual habits of praying three times a day is not the same situation. He referenced Shadrach Meshach and Abednego refusing to bow to the graven image as resistance to the civil magistrate, again, not the same situation. His proof text was “We must obey God as ruler rather than men.” (Acts 5:27-29) However, none of his illustrations were well connected to the matter of issuing a certificate of marriage for reason of personal religious belief. It was simply his personal opinion that it was wrong, delivered as an uncontestable absolute.

                          John MacArthur shared a message in June of 2014 which provided a biblical view of this situation. He points out that commerce is one thing, but celebrating the union by participation or provision of that celebration, that is where the line must be drawn. We had discussed this a month or so ago, about attended a gay marriage celebration, how doing so crosses the threshold of coexisting with homosexuals into celebration of their openly defiant sin. John mentioned that no Christian is going to profile sexual preferences at a gas station, or at a grocery, or any other form of commerce or service. However personally and knowingly celebrating a gay union is a whole different matter. That is why the certificate issue is a gray area, as I had started the conversation. In one sense it is a marriage license of a legal civil union, in another is it aiding and abetting a sinful union by personal participation, but certainly not celebration.

                          While I respect her choice to deny the certificate, we can reference Matthew the tax collector, a civil authority, when his heart was transformed, he did not remain in office, refusing to collect taxes due to a personal belief, but immediately acted in restitution and abandoned his office. I earnestly believe this would be the correct free-will action for this Kentucky clerk.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Nehemiah and Daniel are great examples of knowing who is right in the gray areas. Daniel would not eat the royal food and wine from the kings table and God blessed him. Nehemiah is the cup-bearer of the king and ate everything from it. God blessed and used both.

                            SCOTUS has caused a great dilemma for all working Christians who want to honor God. Whether it’s in the clerk’s office, cooperate or private work places, other government offices stress has but put on all Christian employees. Some people have written that there is only one Christian county clerk in Kentucky. By that standard then, is she the only one in the United States? Who is issuing marriage licenses in all the counties in the America? I know some clerks have resigned but does that mean that the ones that stayed or the ones who replaced them don’t love Jesus? I know that to not be true.

                            Paul taught that we are supposed to control inside the body and leave the non-believers to God. 1 Corinthians 5:9 I wrote to you in a letter not to associate with sexually immoral people. 10 I did not mean the immoral people of this world or the greedy and swindlers or idolaters; otherwise you would have to leave the world. 11 But now I am writing you not to associate with anyone who claims to be a believer who is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or verbally abusive, a drunkard or a swindler. Do not even eat with such a person. 12 For what business is it of mine to judge outsiders? Don’t you judge those who are inside? 13 But God judges outsiders. Put away the evil person from among yourselves.

                            Jesus said Matthew 18:17 “If he pays no attention to them, tell the church. But if he doesn’t pay attention even to the church, let him be like an unbeliever and a tax collector to you.” So according to Jesus should we treat believers and nonbelievers differently? If we are going to be a light on a hill we cannot force our beliefs on others—God hasn’t forced it—He gave us freewill. We need to live our lives as living epistles and have an answer when asked for the hope we have. To achieve transparency and openness, in love for them, so they hear our message by tearing down walls and building trust. If we don’t we will be lumped in with the Westboro Baptist Church.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              One tiny issue about this complex subject: the state of Kentucky does not have within their law the right for same-sex couples to be married. Quite the opposite is in their constitution (if any ruling negates the one-man, one-woman description in their law, it is to be disregarded); which even the judge acknowledged in his ruling was "problematic" as the other clerks stated they weren't sure they had legal authority to grant such licenses without proper approval. So if she is abiding the law of Kentucky in the matter, she is in the right regardless of the contempt finding.

                              Comment

                              What's Going On

                              Collapse

                              There are currently 7641 users online. 0 members and 7641 guests.

                              Most users ever online was 8,272 at 07:19 AM on 03-28-2024.

                              Discerning the Truth Forum Statistics

                              Collapse

                              Topics: 298   Posts: 985   Members: 221   Active Members: 0
                              Welcome to our newest member, Markus Wagner.
                              Working...
                              X