Advent-ure Day 19: Not Fair

We are called to adopt a viewpoint that is rooted in God's Word, to allow His truth to shape our
actions, and to be aware that the enemy would want to corrupt our minds. Colossians 3 says:
5 Therefore put to death your members which are on the earth: fornication, uncleanness, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry.
6 Because of these things the wrath of God is coming upon the sons of disobedience,
7 in which you yourselves once walked when you lived in them.

God has clear standards that are set forth for us in His Word - He has certain principles that He wants us to follow and desires that we allow the Word to govern our thinking on areas pertaining to sin and obedience.  Jesus came to save sinners, and that includes all of us; however, when we allow ourselves to be compromised on what the Scriptures point to as being sinful, then people are less likely to be able to define their sinful state and therefore will not recognize their need for a Savior.  We have to be clear on God's standards and the impact of His Savior.

+++++

We are on Day 19 of 25: A Christmas Advent-ure, from the Faith Radio Advent Guide, which features a corresponding Christmas song, Scripture, and song lyric for each day.  Granted, a number of the songs we've been enjoying as we have worked our way through the guide are traditional carols.  But, there are songs that we written in later times that are part of the guide, as well.

Take, for instance, Jesus, What a Wonderful Child, which is credited by multiple sources as being an African-American spiritual, although it has also been stated that Margaret Allison of the Angelic Gospel Singers.  The song presents snapshots of the Christmas narrative.

We can think about the significance of the birth of the Christ Child, which can motivate us to be grounded in His truth.  Our corresponding Scripture verse is Matthew 2:10; let's add verse 9, as well:
9 When they heard the king, they departed; and behold, the star which they had seen in the East went before them, till it came and stood over where the young Child was.
10 When they saw the star, they rejoiced with exceedingly great joy.

I have documented the struggle between so-called LGBTQ rights and religious freedom rights in our culture today.  Yesterday, on the program, Alexandra McPhee documented instances where people found themselves in violation of the law when they acted on faith principles, on convictions that they did not want to violate by performing artistic services for gay couples.

In 2015, a law was passed known as the Utah Compromise, which, according to J.C. Derrick of WORLD Magazine was “a SOGI law with religious exemptions." He wrote that, "The 2015 legislation remains the only statewide SOGI law enacted over the last seven years."

Derrick reports that based on this compromise, "Two major evangelical organizations have formally endorsed principles that would add sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) to federal nondiscrimination law."  That's right, presumably in exchange for religious freedom protection, these organizations favor granting special rights to LGBT individuals.  Derrick writes:

The boards of the Council for Christian Colleges and Universities (CCCU) and the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE) quietly passed similar motions in recent months, advancing a multiyear effort they say is necessary to preserve religious freedom.

This concept, called "Fairness for All" has been simmering for several years, as WORLD points out:

The board actions come two years after Hoogstra and NAE President Leith Anderson held a series of informational events about Fairness for All at locations around the country. In response, more than 75 Christian leaders signed an opposition statement titled “Preserve Freedom, Reject Coercion.”

Shirley Hoogstra is president of CCCU.  Wondering about the documented drift in Christian higher education?  Well, here is an organization to which a number of Christian colleges and universities belong.

The opposition statement still resides on the Breakpoint.org website, administered by the Colson Center for Christian Worldview.  And, the opponents of Fairness for All have become quite vocal as this news has spread over the past few days.

Regarding laws creating so-called "rights" based on sexual orientation and gender identity, or SOGI, the statement includes these words:

SOGI laws empower the government to use the force of law to silence or punish Americans who seek to exercise their God-given liberty to peacefully live and work consistent with their convictions. They also create special preference in law for categories based on morally significant choices that profoundly affect human relations and treat reasonable religious and philosophical beliefs as discriminatory. We therefore believe that proposed SOGI laws, including those narrowly crafted, threaten fundamental freedoms, and any ostensible protections for religious liberty appended to such laws are inherently inadequate and unstable.

Tony Perkins' Washington Update from the Family Research Council included these comments:

In a quiet motion this fall, their boards reportedly voted to subjugate biblical teachings on gender and sexuality in exchange for a flimsy fence of protection around their organizations. They believe -- quite naively -- that if they give in to the Left's demands, it will leave them alone. But the stories from the last decade paint a much different story.

On the far-Left, there's no such thing as live and let live. Liberals may want tolerance, but that doesn't mean they'll give it. If the cases against florists, bakers, and other wedding vendors make anything clear, it's that the LGBT agenda isn't about meeting people halfway. So while "Fairness for All" is a noble pursuit, it can't be achieved when special rights or extra-fairness are extended to some based on subjective, self-defined characteristics. That's special fairness for some, and the persecution of the many.

In other words, I would say a compromise with those who are not really interested in compromising with your deeply-held convictions is not a compromise, it's a surrender.  And, in a state of cultural warfare, this is a dangerous step.  This would not be a deal, in my estimation, but a disaster.

This so-called "compromise" does not have the force of law, although it may be an indicator or instigator of liberalized policies for member organizations.

Kristen Waggoner of the Alliance Defending Freedom, who argued on behalf of Christian baker Jack Phillips in the Masterpiece Cakeshop case, has a statement on the ADF website, including these
words: "Every person should be treated with dignity and respect. Unfortunately, sexual orientation and gender identity laws like the so-called ‘Fairness for All’ proposal undermine both fairness and freedom."

She also states:

“The freedom to live peacefully according to our beliefs, and to follow the dictates of our conscience, is a pre-political right, resting in our dignity as human beings, and codified by the First Amendment. It cannot be bought or sold, and it must not be surrendered. We can live at peace with each other without forcing anyone to sacrifice their freedom. Indeed, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled twice—in the Obergefell and Masterpiece Cakeshop decisions—that the government must respect the belief that marriage is between one man and one woman. Rather than respecting all sides, the so-called ‘Fairness for All’ proposal denies freedom for all and makes conformity the price of citizenship.”

So, this is certainly a non-starter, it seems, for a number of Christian organizations.  So, why do some feel this is necessary?  Is it spiritual tiredness or lack of spiritual sensitivity?  Many so-called tolerant LGBT activists have no interest in tolerating Biblical beliefs on sexuality - so why compromise?

There are cultural and personal applications when we consider this news story.  Certainly, as I have attempted to track, there is an infiltration of tolerance for the LGBT agenda in churches today.  And, we have to guard against areas of compromise.  We can recognize that compromise can lead to ideological defeat.  If we are not upholding and submitting to the authority of the Scriptures, we become vulnerable to allowing a cultural Christianity to take root that is unrecognizable when compared to the teachings of the Bible.

We can see how compromise can place us in a sense of identifying more with errant teaching than Biblical authority.  So, we have to know the Word, certainly, but we also have to allow God's Word to govern our thinking and our acting.  That doesn't mean we don't love those who hold to different viewpoints, because we are called to be compassionate to all, in order that we might demonstrate the character of Christ, but we must also guard against being intimidated into accommodating viewpoints that are contradictory to the Scriptures.