Four people died in the Boston Marathon bombings and subsequent manhunt. Four people died in the Benghazi terrorist attack. We had wall-to-wall coverage of the first, virtually nothing on the second, although that may be changing. Hearings this week will highlight whistleblowers who have tales to tell about this administration’s attempt to cover up its incompetence and failure to act. That failure seems to be the result of lack of desire to call out Islamic terrorism for what it is and to ensure reelection by shoving the event under the rug. As the pressure mounts for the truth to be known, how does our president spend his time? What does he consider worthy of attention?

The NBA player is being hailed as a “hero” for coming forward with a declaration of his homosexuality. It’s kind of an upside-down world when that is celebrated and a solid Christian faith is not:

Here’s another example of how backward we have become morally:

Meanwhile, the jury is still out on Kermit Gosnell. One has to wonder if justice will be served there, given the moral state of the country. Who are the jurors? Will they realize the immensity of the depravity on display? Four died in Boston. Four died in Benghazi. Thousands died at the hands of Gosnell. He is the face of the entire abortion industry, which has rightly been termed the New Holocaust. As with Auschwitz, perhaps we should make Gosnell’s facility into a somber reminder of our departure from the laws of God:

Jim Wallis, one of the leaders of what might be termed the Christian Left, has now come out in favor of same-sex marriage. Ever since his days as a member of the 1960s radical group Students for a Democratic Society, which was grounded in socialist/communist philosophy, Wallis has tried to walk a fine line in an attempt to marry [pun intended] Biblical principles with a humanistic, atheistic worldview. It has been as spectacularly unsuccessful as the same-sex unions he now supports.

Wallis is the proverbial tip of the iceberg. He’s only the most obvious spokesperson for a phenomenon that threatens to split evangelicalism while it simultaneously destroys our Biblical basis for morality, law, and government. Can such views really coexist with what C. S. Lewis has called “mere Christianity”?

Genuine Christians can disagree on doctrine. They can disagree on how the Christian faith is demonstrated in society. There certainly is room for liberty of conscience. Yet when does liberty become licentiousness?

I disagree with Christians who espouse pacifism, but I don’t count them out of the kingdom; I merely consider them incorrect in their understanding of Scripture. I profoundly dissent from those who believe the government should follow policies of redistribution of wealth to achieve “fairness.” Many who promote this do so out of concern for the poor, yet they don’t realize how this vision of “helping” violates a number of Biblical principles and ultimately fails in its goal. They haven’t learned the lessons of history. Their hearts may be right in their desire to help, but all they accomplish is to spread the misery around.

It gets dicier when those who claim the name of Christ begin to advocate for positions that are directly contradictory to basic Biblical morality. Can someone really be a genuine Christian and promote abortion, or at least not be concerned about it? Is it simply a mistake when a professed Christian finds reasons to excuse homosexual behavior or is it rather a manifestation of a deeper rebellion against God’s call for holiness? I have my opinions on that, but, thankfully, God will be the final judge.

Thinking about this led me to a particular passage of Scripture, found in 1 Corinthians 3: 11-15. Here the apostle Paul speaks of how the Lord will judge the actions of His disciples:

For no man can lay a foundation other than the one which is laid, which is Jesus Christ. Now if any man builds on the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw, each man’s work will become evident; for the day will show it because it is to be revealed with fire, and the fire itself will test the quality of each man’s work. If any man’s work which he has built on it remains, he will receive a reward. If any man’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire.

The clear teaching is that in order to be a Christian, our foundation must be nothing else than absolute faith in Christ as Lord and Savior. As long as we have repented of sin, received His forgiveness, and are now motivated by His love, we are part of His kingdom. However, not all our works for Him have the same value. Some are described as especially fruitful—gold, silver, precious stones—while others are virtually useless for building the kingdom—wood, hay, and straw.

I submit that when those who seek to build God’s kingdom with ideas that undermine the very kingdom they seek to build, their works will be shown to have been nothing more than wood, hay, and straw. They will have done more damage than good. We should all examine our motives and our actions continually. I know I don’t want to feel shame when that “day” comes.

I’ve spent the past two days writing about the drift of our culture into acceptance of a type of sex God forbade. For many people, this whole issue is simply a matter of “democracy”—let the people decide what they want. When you introduce the moral element, they tell you that’s irrelevant. All that matters is that we are devoted to popular sovereignty. As a historian, I know that term well. The last time it was front and center in the political debate was prior to the Civil War. Popular sovereignty was supposed to solve the quandary of slavery. Let the people of the new territories decide for themselves if they want slavery or not. Stephen Douglas, the Illinois senator who championed this approach, infamously said slavery was not a moral issue.

Well, I can’t help but frame it morally. At its foundation, the push for same-sex marriage is a clear indication of our rebellion against the righteousness of God and His law. It is a perversion—and I use that word advisedly and with forethought—of the gift of sex. Only a people firmly rooted in Biblical truth can prevail against this headwind. Are we no longer that people?

Liberals/progressives, whose outlook is primarily secular, think opposition to homosexuality is foolish. Unfortunately, they are joined in this view by a growing number of those who continue to call themselves Christians. They adopt most of the progressive political agenda and attempt to stamp it with God’s favor. They are doing a disservice to the gospel, and the God, they claim to represent.

Then there are some conservatives who are abandoning the field of battle. Most often, that’s because they are little different than their erstwhile foes at the other end of the political spectrum. How can that be? They are basically secular also; their conservatism is not based on solid Biblical principles. So when the culture shifts, they have no anchor to hold them to their position. They attempt to mix political conservatism with moral relativism. It’s not a good mixture.

One particular strand in the conservative movement is more libertarian than conservative. That group has never been wedded to Biblical morality anyway. They don’t want the government telling anyone what to do in the moral realm. Many of them support the mislabeled pro-choice position on abortion and have no problem at all with homosexuality. Their presence in the conservative coalition waters down its moral foundations.

The only saving grace in modern American conservatism, and in our politics in general, is the part of our populace that brings its Christianity to bear on our culture and government. They are the ones Jesus was referring to when He said,

You are the salt of the earth; but if the salt has become tasteless, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled under foot by men.

You are the light of the world. A city set on a hill cannot be hidden; nor does anyone light a lamp and put it under a basket, but on the lampstand, and it gives light to all who are in the house.

Let your light shine before men in such a way that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father who is in heaven.

Salt preserves; light shows the way. Those in the church who have succumbed to the spirit of the age are the tasteless salt; they are no good for anything in this struggle. The responsibility therefore falls on those who still understand that truth is truth in all ages, and that it never changes. We need to preserve whatever remains of goodness in this land, and we need to be the ones who shine a light on the right path to take. Are we up to the challenge?

Yesterday I wrote about the casual acceptance our society is showing toward homosexual rights, all the way to same-sex marriage. In less than a generation, our moral fabric has been ripped apart on this issue, making us an altogether different people than we were when I was younger. The change has been so drastic that it almost takes one’s breath away at times. This is largely a cultural phenomenon—that’s where the changes began—but it has been aided by government. As Ronald Reagan used to say, the nine scariest words in the English language are “I’m from the government, and I’m here to help.” The government “helped” with abortion; now it wants to do so with the homosexual agenda, and it seeks to follow the same path through the Supreme Court:

If this agenda wins, the concept of marriage will be in tatters; there won’t be any reason to hold the line even with same-sex marriage. Think of the possibilities: polygamy, incest, men with boys, bestiality. Whenever a Christian warns about these perversions, we are told we’re being alarmist, that nothing like that could ever happen. Yet wasn’t that what we were told about same-sex marriage? Those warnings are now about to be proven true. Once a society loses its moral grounding, anything goes.

I’ve been saying for some time that Christians have to wake up to the reality that we are no longer the majority. It’s actually worse than that, potentially. If we continue to stand firm on our Biblical conviction that homosexuality is a sinful behavior, we may find ourselves the target of legislation calling us “haters” and “bigots.” Penalties will be assessed on individuals, churches, and other Christian organizations that refuse to bow down to the new immorality. Christian universities, such as the one where I teach, will have to decide whether they have the bedrock beliefs they have mouthed for so long; many, I fear, will fall in line with the new order.

Those who “stubbornly”—that’s one of the words that will be used to describe us—resist the emerging consensus may find that the agents of tolerance will suddenly transform into the agents of intolerance, all the while attacking us in the name of tolerance. The only thing toleration cannot abide are people who refuse to tolerate depravity. We will be the new enemies of society.

In other words, we need to prepare our hearts and minds now for the real possibility of persecution. It will start slowly, but just like the mad rush to same-sex marriage that we’ve witnessed the past few weeks, full-fledged persecution will be upon us before we have time to consider our options.

Now, I still hold out hope that this will not be inevitable, but it will take a rather significant reformation of hearts and renewal of minds to forestall it. Nothing less than a fresh outpouring of the Spirit of God is needed. That, I believe, is how we should pray.

God is a God of great compassion and mercy; He wants to continue to show mercy to this nation. Maybe it comes down to how many of His people He finds who are standing firm for the truth. I’m reminded of the scripture in Luke 18 when Jesus ponders, “When the Son of Man comes [back], will He find faith on the earth?”

Only we can answer that question.

We are a spiritually lost, logically challenged, perpetually confused people manipulated by a small group, aided by the media, that seeks to impose even greater evil upon us in the name of equality. I am unaware of any other sinful practice that has been so successfully foisted on this nation as that of homosexuality. Abortion, of course, is far worse in its consequences because of the stark fact that every abortion is a murder of an innocent child. Yet abortion hit us in one fell swoop via Roe v. Wade in 1973. We hardly saw it coming. The homosexual rights bandwagon, however, has been gaining momentum one step at a time for the past forty years. Now we find ourselves in a heretofore unimaginable position, on the verge of legalizing same-sex “marriage” nationwide.

I’m not usually all that surprised at the depths to which man’s depravity can sink, but I admit to amazement at the way this abomination has come to the forefront all of a sudden. One could say it began with Joe Biden’s public support, followed soon after by Obama’s. Now, nearly everyone on the Democrat side of the political spectrum is falling over themselves to voice their “evolved view.” The rest of the country, prepared for this like the proverbial frog in the pan of boiling water, having become accustomed to watching one television program after another showcase “normal” homosexuals who are being “bullied” by the rest of society, now seems to be calmly accepting what they consider to be inevitable.

I had thought the law might be one bulwark against this invasion of decency and common sense, but that is deserting us as well:

Even more disturbing is the erosion of moral principle on the conservative side of the political divide. Sen. Rob Portman of Ohio, a Republican, recently came out in favor of same-sex “marriage” because his son has declared himself to be homosexual. Is that how we are to make decisions in life, tossing aside morality to accommodate a family member’s sinful lifestyle? This was followed by the Republican National Committee telling fellow Republicans not to push disagreement with the gay agenda so as not to lose votes. I have news for the RNC—you are going to lose a whole lot more votes with that stance.

Even erstwhile conservative commentators are wobbly on the issue, as can be demonstrated by a political cartoon from someone who normally understands morality. Note how people who support Biblical moral stands are depicted in this one:

Rush Limbaugh intoned this past week that the battle on this issue is lost. He says it was lost as soon as we allowed homosexuality any legitimacy in our discourse. I agree with that last part. When we allowed civil unions, we gave it legitimacy. When we even gave in to the “marriage” talk, we gave it legitimacy. That’s why I’ve put quotation marks around that word in this post—same-sex marriage is an oxymoron of the highest caliber. Yet we now have serious debate about it, as if there is some ground for debate. There is not.

We have been swept along on a tidal wave of popular opinion, a popular opinion based mostly on emotion and misleading political rhetoric. Inevitability may be too strong a term, but we are dangerously close to it.

Meanwhile, where are the Christians? Some are fighting valiantly for the truth. Others who call themselves Christians have given themselves over to the emerging consensus. Anyone promoting sin cannot be a genuine Christian. A sin-promoting Christian may be the greatest oxymoron of all.

The culture shift of the past forty to fifty years has been astounding. I remember the late 1960s when it began in earnest. Being in college from 1969-1973, during the height of the Vietnam War, meant interacting with that shift constantly. Yet, even in the midst of such influences, my Christian faith was confirmed and became more real than ever.

This is what gives me hope.

Today, those influences are more in-your-face than before. We’ve seen radical changes in the acceptance of what was before deemed immoral sexual behavior. It now threatens basic organizations that used to promote values consistent with Biblical faith.

That cartoonist was taking a chance by clearly calling homosexuality a sin. I applaud his willingness to stand up for truth and accepting the consequences that may follow. How much longer will his syndicate put up with those views? We still have freedom of speech technically, but the pressure is being applied to bow to the “new wisdom.”

The family structure is breaking down. We now consider almost any arrangement to be a family. And parental oversight of their children? What has become of that?

When 70% of inner-city children have no father, we shouldn’t be surprised at the outcome. Another factor in the deterioration of morality is the steady diet of violence to which children are subjected. I’m not saying all violence needs to be censored, but there’s a way to portray it within a moral framework. Unfortunately, that is no longer the norm:

Then we attempt to fool ourselves into believing it does no harm.

Yes, things are demonstrably worse now than in my early years. Yet the remedy remains the same: the application of the gospel to individual lives. If enough lives are changed by the God who reaches out to the lost, a society can turn around. I’m not a wishful thinker; I see the reality. However, I see a deeper reality behind what the world sees. Until God gives up on us, I’m not going to give up either. That time may be coming, but until I’m convinced we’ve come to that stage, I will continue to speak up for the One who is the truth. If those who know Him are faithful to that calling, you never know what can happen.

Last Friday, I commented on the withdrawal of Louie Giglio from praying the benediction at the upcoming Obama inaugural. My goal was to point out the intolerance on the Left toward evangelicals who view homosexuality as a sin. We are to be considered “haters” and fringe elements in American society.

I want to revisit that story again, but from a different angle. One question I didn’t raise earlier was whether Giglio should have agreed to participate in the inaugural. One naturally would be honored to be asked to such a high-profile event, but is it wise to be part of something that celebrates another four years of Obama’s rule? I realize Christians will differ in their views of this, but let me state the case for what I have concluded, at least with respect to my conscience.

There is, in my mind, a distinct difference that can be made between the personal and the public in this instance. As a Christian, I want everyone to come to the knowledge of the truth, and I will take any opportunity afforded me to reach out to anyone with the gospel message. That includes even those who have done their best to undermine that truth. So if I were ever asked—and this is a stretch, I know—to a meeting with President Obama that was private, either one-on-one or with a small group of some kind—I would accept that invitation readily. We have to take advantage of all open doors to allow the Holy Spirit to touch the hearts of those who need redemption.

However, if I were invited instead to do what Giglio was invited to do—give the benediction at Obama’s inaugural—I would probably decline. Why? If I were on the platform with President Obama, it would appear as if I am in support of his policies. Public perception is very important. There are a lot of low-information voters out there who, without checking out the particulars, would simply assume I was an Obama supporter. Therefore, I would be linked unfairly to the following Obama policies and beliefs:

• Obama’s all-out promotion of abortion on demand. He is the most pro-abortion president in American history, even rejecting, when he was an Illinois state senator, a bill that would have allowed doctors and nurses to give medical aid to a child born alive during an attempted abortion. That is radicalism to the extreme, and I would never want to be associated with that. During his first presidential term, he also vociferously promoted continued funding of Planned Parenthood, which is the foremost provider of abortion in the nation. The latest statistics reveal that Planned Parenthood helped bring about 333,000 abortions in a recent year, a new record for that organization. This is horrific, and I must, in conscience, distance myself publicly from anyone who holds such extreme views.
• Obamacare, which I loathe as an engine of tyrannical governmental control over individuals, now is the vehicle by which Christian organizations are being persecuted for their beliefs in the area of abortion. The HHS mandates are attempting to force Christian colleges and businesses to offer abortifacient drugs and other means for furthering abortion in their healthcare plans. This is an outright attack on the First Amendment’s promise of liberty of conscience with respect to religious belief.
• Obama’s decision to promote homosexuality, not only as a legitimate lifestyle with no moral repugnance, but beyond that, his espousal of same-sex marriage. No president has ever promoted this false concept of marriage, and it is just as dangerous to the health of our society as his approval of abortion. In both cases, the family, as understood Biblically, is undermined.
• His total lack of concern for the constitutional constraints on presidential power, as he now prepares to run the country via unconstitutional executive orders.
• His complete rejection of any genuine fiscal discipline, seeking to be granted unlimited authority to add to the nation’s debt as much as he chooses, bypassing Congress. Both this power play and the one mentioned just above it are the fruit of his overall Marxist and anti-colonial mindset, both of which see the United States as an oppressor and its Constitution as an outdated document no longer applicable to the socialist vision of the future.

For these and many other reasons I could list, I would not in any way want my presence on a stage with the president to be misinterpreted as a show of support. I can pray for the nation quite well privately; I don’t have to be the public face of blessing on the next four years of antichristian rhetoric and action.

As I said earlier, I know there are those who will disagree with my conclusion, but I have to abide by my conscience before God, and to accept the invitation Louie Giglio originally accepted would be, at least for me, a public renunciation of my most deeply held beliefs. In good conscience, I could never do it.

Christians are going to be faced with many more decisions like these. How are we going to respond? Will we stand firm on what we know to be true? As long as we are always willing to share the truth with anyone who is open to it, and as long as we conduct ourselves in the proper spirit, I believe God will honor our strong stand.