%20(1).png)
If we misunderstand God, creation and the fall, we will misunderstand what it means to be a human (anthropology). What's more, we will misunderstand what it means to be an image bearer of God.
As I'm finalizing teachings for camp, I'm screenshotting a lot of progressive memes and comments and realizing a few things:
1. Logical fallacies abound this month (june). Fallacies like 'Post Hoc ergo propter hoc, straw mans, and begging the question fallacies are coming out VERY strong.
2. Progressives censor opposing views A LOT: I see progressives deleting comments that challenge their positions, then brag about being about the truth. If the truth is on your side, you need to refute errors and not be afraid of opposing ideas. Part of it is that some really think that it's an "extreme" position to affirm that marriage is only between a man and a woman and to disagree with the view that:
"our psychology/desires does not equal our "true self/identity."
Progressives are now coming out the stating that it's literally "dangerous" "extreme" or "killing people" to not celebrate or affirm an LGBT identity.
Before we immediately think, "well, how could they state things so strongly that are obviously false"- we need to also consider that the issue is with their "anthropology" and "theology."
Many progressives REALLY believe that LGBT identity is CORE to someone's identity and that it's core to what it means to be an image bearer of God. Thus, when liberals say "gay pride" they aren't thinking it's the same thing as "sinful or boastful pride" but see it as similar to someone saying "I Love that God made me black, asian, hispanic, etc. and celebrate WHO I am."
They are thinking that it's a "coming to terms with the CORE of WHO they are" and that's why some LGBT apologists are so aggressive with "gay pride"- it's because of their anthropology drives their theology.
Thus many progressives would say that an LGBT identity is so core to WHO someone is that to NOT be "an ally" is psychologically damaging to someone and that it's not "truly welcoming others like Jesus did to those that are different."
Progressives also like to use the (false) analogy of Jesus welcoming the Samaritan to welcoming someone who identifies as LGBT and fully affirming then. They say that, "As Jesus welcomed a woman who couldn't control her upbringing/town, we should also welcome those who have no control over their feelings, attraction of identity that may be different than their biology. (what a low view of the Body though! Loving your body is such a more positive view of self!)
Yet, as we will see below, it is logically fallacious and misunderstands what it means to be an image bearer of God.
Which leads to the next point on the development of personhood theory and orientation.
3. Failure to understand what the "Imago Dei" actually means. Western progressives are ironically imposing a western liberal reading of the Bible onto the text of scripture with Rousseau and Freud presuppositions into the text of scripture.
Christopher Yuan describes the evolution of anthropology this way in his book, Holy Sexuality this way:
"Freud (1856-1939)- he wrote several articles on homosexuality. He viewed “homosexuality not as a sickness but as an inversion. Homosexual was just another variety of humanity. Thus, heterosexual and homosexual became new, secular categories for personhood” (ibid., pg 10). After Freud, the idea of “identity, based on feelings and behavior, blossomed in the fertile soil of burgeoning secular philosophies.
Carl Westphal (1870) was the earliest to utilize homosexuality as a way to characterize a person’s nature, not just his sexual practice.
German psychiatrist Richard Von Krafft-Ebing wrote one of the first works on sexual pathology, published in 1886. His book made the ideas of “sexual orientation-heterosexual and homosexual-more mainstream.” (Yuan, Holy Sexuality)
Thus, the cultural battle right now (as always) is at the core of what it means to be a human.
THIS is why we must address this within our churches and summer camps.
4. Progressives will always reinterpret rejection of LGBT as HATE because of their presupposition on what it means to be a human. This is because "homosexual" is a core identity marker/part of what it means to be made in the image of God. Some even view it as morally neutral (not sinful) and thus akin to accepting someone as being a certain skin color and loving them (see Baucham's new book, It's not like Being Black).
Thus, they reason that
(1) if their LGBT identity is core to who they are,
(2) they are made in the image of God
(3) God loves all image bearers, THEN
(4) if you don't "accept" their identity, it's like not accepting someone with a different skin color.
It's merely hate.
Thus, they are talking past others and Christians will continue to this until they go back and define their terms.
We have to be EXPLICITLY clear on what we mean when we say "ALL HUMANS" are image bearers of God. We mean (to state the obvious) that:
"ALL HUMANS have inherent, value, dignity and worth."
So, yes, it's truly a genuine affirmation from a Christian when he says that "I love you as a human but I want to call you to repent of your sexual immorality and find your identity in Christ alone. The homosexual has the same need as every sinner: repent and believe the gospel and find your identity in Christ alone!"
Yet, we also need to make sure people understand that definition does NOT mean your feelings, behavior, actions, desires, etc are PART of that definition.
Biblically speaking there are just those that are
(1) In Adam or (2) in Christ.
Thus, Biblically, there is no personhood category of "gay."
The person may identify as such, but as Yuan says, sexuality may be "how" we are (or feel) but that doesn't mean that it is "WHO" we are.
If we grant their first premise (or refuse to refute it) their conclusion that.....
"If you don't affirm this identity then you are spewing hate and it may lead to their harm" will always seem coherent to them.
So, we must back up to their original premise and show that, since this first one isn't true, the other ones don't logically follow. (for more, go to my other blog, "If you don't affirm..")
However, as with many false worldviews: coherence does not always equal correspondence to reality.
IF false premises are granted (or assumed) to be true, then people will think that other false premises that are loosely connected are also true and the viewpoint coheres well within itself.
Are you starting to see why Christians should study logic more frequently? Bad logic hurts people.
Does the Holy Spirit Work through Logic? Well, duh. Jesus is the second person of the Triune God...the Logic of God made flesh. the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Truth. Christians, please stop saying silly stuff like this. this only helps enable dangerous ideas to advance more in our society.
So, defining our terms on what it means to be an image bearer of God is VERY, VERY important. In fact, thinking logically is part of what it means to be an image bearer of God!