Tag: Culture

Confused about Gender Confusion

~ Evan Lenow

Last week the Associated Press released the following Tweets announcing a major change to Facebook profiles:

The accompanying story describes that Facebook has introduced 50 terms for people to use in order to customize their gender. Now all you have to do is edit your personal information, select gender, and type away until you find a term that fits. Fifty different choices can certainly make you confused about gender confusion.

Now let me contrast that with something that happened to me today. I went by an early voting location in order to cast my vote in the Texas primary. Having recently moved within the county, I asked the poll worker for the form I would need to update my voter registration address. He handed me a simple yellow card with about half a dozen pieces of information to fill out. One of them was gender. There were two choices: male or female.

If Facebook is setting the trajectory for the future of gender identification, the elections commission has a long way to go. In fact, every government agency will have to update their forms and documents.

But this is a bigger issue than simply voter registration. As we have seen, the push to redefine gender apart from biology has come to the forefront in schools in California as they now must allow students to use whatever restroom or locker room they want based on gender self-identification. Imagine the little girl who finds herself in a restroom with a boy who claims to be a girl today but changes his mind tomorrow. What about the recent announcement that a 17-year-old senior boy will be playing girls’ softball this spring. Self-identifying as a female despite the biological evidence otherwise will allow this much larger male to play a sport with and against physically smaller girls.

There is no wonder that our culture is confused about gender confusion. There is no objective standard in gender self-identification. Facebook may not make the laws, but don’t surprised if in years to come you go to fill out a government form like I did today and you find many more choices in the gender section than I did today.

Thankfully, the Bible is clear on gender. There is no need for confusion regarding God’s Word. In Genesis 1:27, we read, “God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.” God’s intent from the beginning is two genders inextricably linked to biology. No questions. No confusion.

Good Reading: Is Anything Lewd (for Christians) Anymore?

~ Evan Lenow

Waylan Owens, dean of the Terry School for Church and Family Ministries at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, has written an intriguing post about the use of the term “lewd.” His post asks why this word is not used and whether it should return to our vocabulary in light of some recent events in pop culture.

Here is an excerpt:

In all the hubbub over Katy Perry’s ritual dance and Jay-Z’s and Beyonce’s sex show, and in all of the Christian commentary, I noticed a word was missing.  In fact, I have noticed that this word is seldom used at all in such cases, like Janet Jackson’s Super Bowl wickedness with Justin Timberlake, even though it seems to be the most appropriate word for it all.  In fact, I do not hear the word used even by Christian pastors to describe anything that goes on in American culture.

The word, of course, is “lewd.”  According to the online Merriam-Webster, the first definition for the word is “evil, wicked,” but that definition is now obsolete.  In fact, that definition has been obsolete at least since 1975, according to my “old” Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary.  That is a shame because a strong case can be made that anything we would call “lewd” would be called evil and wicked in the Bible.

The second definition is “sexually unchaste or licentious.”  Licentious means “lacking legal or moral restraints; especially: disregarding sexual restraints.”  That would fit the Grammys, and it would fit much of what is on television and in the movies these days.  I doubt that even the actors on-stage, doing the lewd things, would disagree that what they were doing was “sexually unchaste and licentious.”  The point of their music is and the point of the show was to disregard sexual restraints.

So, if we, Christians, do not use the word “lewd” to describe aspects of our culture, is that because we do not think these aspects are lewd?  Have we adopted a better word?  I am not sure just what that word would be.  Concupiscent?  Lascivious?  Lecherous?  Wanton?  Obscene?

The entire post is worth your time, and I encourage you to read it. In fact, you should probably bookmark Waylan’s blog at http://waylanandbetsyowens.com/.

Radical Reformation and Religious Liberty

~ Evan Lenow

Today I had the privilege of speaking in chapel at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary for our annual Radical Reformation Day chapel. Dr. Patterson had asked me to speak on the issue of religious liberty. You can watch or listen to the entire message here, but I also want to provide you with some highlights.

Historically, the Anabaptists fought for religious liberty all the way to the point of death. They believed that the church and state should not be wed in a way that the state enforces doctrinal purity by punishing those who believe or promote false doctrine. The Anabaptists believed that the state’s role was limited to protecting peace and order in society. Since the state could not coerce beliefs, then the Anabaptists also believed that conversion cam on the basis of persuasion through the Word of God rather than at the point of the sword. Finally, the Anabaptists taught the free exercise of religion in that heathens and heretics were to be allowed to continue in their unbelief. No one had the right to coerce them to change.

There is much more to discuss, but this gives you the historical highlights. I hope you enjoy the message as much as I enjoyed preparing and delivering it.

Radical Reformation and Religious Liberty

New Video Resource: Homosexuality and the Church

~ Evan Lenow ~ 10 Comments

I have recently been a part of a number of conversations about why the church seems to focus so much on the sin of homosexuality right now. That is a very valid question in light of all the other sins we see listed in Scripture. However, I believe one of the main reasons this has become a focus of the church is due to the fact that the homosexual lifestyle has been promoted so strongly in the culture. In some respects, we are simply responding to the most evident pressure point in our culture. While homosexuality is certainly not the only–or greatest–sin addressed in the Bible, it seems to be the one that comes with the most cultural approval today.

For that reason, I am thankful to Dr. John Mark Caton and his staff at Cottonwood Creek Baptist Church in Allen, TX, for producing this video resource addressing homosexuality and the church. I had the privilege of sitting down with Dr. Caton and participating in this interview back in October, and it is now available on YouTube. I pray you find it useful.

Will All the Ducks Fly Away?

~ Evan Lenow ~ 5 Comments

“God, Family, Ducks…in that order.” So reads the Twitter profile of Jase Robertson, one of the stars of A&E’s “Duck Dynasty” reality show. It looks like that saying is about to be tested. A&E has suspended Phil Robertson, father of Jase, Willie, and Jep Robertson and founder of Duck Commander, for his recent comments about homosexuality in an interview published in GQ.

A&E released the following statement:

We are extremely disappointed to have read Phil Robertson’s comments in GQ, which are based on his own personal beliefs and are not reflected in the series Duck Dynasty. His personal views in no way reflect those of A+E Networks, who have always been strong supporters and champions of the LGBT community. The network has placed Phil under hiatus from filming indefinitely.

Apart from the irony that Phil Robertson was doing an interview with GQ, the substance of his comments was not really surprising. In the interview Phil calls himself a “Bible-thumper,” and the author describes this commitment to the Bible by saying that Phil “thumps that Bible hard enough to ring the bell at a county-fair test of strength.”

The controversial statements that have led to his suspension from the blockbuster show revolve around the issue of homosexuality. The interviewer asked, “What, in your mind, is sinful?” Phil responded:

Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there. Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men. Don’t be deceived. Neither the adulterers, the idolaters, the male prostitutes, the homosexual offenders, the greedy, the drunkards, the slanderers, the swindlers—they won’t inherit the kingdom of God. Don’t deceive yourself. It’s not right.

In a further discussion of homosexuality, Phil makes a somewhat crude biological case against homosexuality and concludes by saying, “But hey, sin: It’s not logical, my man. It’s just not logical.”

So now both sides have spoken. Phil spoke his mind on homosexuality and other issues, and A&E has spoken by indefinitely suspending Phil from future filming.

What should Phil and his family do now?

For the Robertson family, this will be a test of their family creed. From the beginning of the show, they have committed to “three no-compromises” of “faith, betrayal of family members, and duck season.” The first two are now on the line for the Robertsons. The patriarch of the family has essentially been fired from the show for expressing his religious views. The rest of the men, including Duck Commander president Willie Robertson (one of Phil’s sons), are about to have their allegiance to family tested. Do they go on without Phil or stand by him?

When asked about the sons’ views on morality, the youngest son, Jep Robertson, replied, “We’re not quite as outspoken as my dad, but I’m definitely in line. If somebody asks, I tell ’em what the Bible says.” It’s now time to see if the Robertson family sticks together through thick and thin.

What’s the right decision for the Robertsons? I think they only have one option—walk out on the show. Sure, the show could go on without Phil, but the family couldn’t. Either Phil is a part of the show or no one is on the show. That is the only option.

Perhaps Phil was being more prophetic than he realized when he told the interviewer that the show would not last forever. He said, “Let’s face it. Three, four, five years, we’re out of here. You know what I’m saying? It’s a TV show. This thing ain’t gonna last forever. No way.” This may be the end of “Duck Dynasty,” but it would solidify a family who is committed to no compromise on faith and betrayal of family.

_________________________

Drew Magary, “What the Duck?” GQ, January 2014. (*Warning: This article contains profanity, not from Phil Robertson or any other members of the family but from the interviewer.)

A. J. Marechal, “‘Duck Dynasty’ Star Phil Robertson Fired Following Anti-Gay Remarks,” Variety, December 18, 2013.