Fundamentally Mistaken

"9 Arguments From the Bible Fundamentalists Should Have to Make" is an article that ran in The Huffington Post. It was written by Derek Penwell, "an author, editor, speaker, and activist. He is the senior minister of Douglass Boulevard Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) in Louisville, Kentucky and a lecturer at the University of Louisville in Religious Studies and Humanities. He has a Ph.D. in humanities from the University of Louisville," and it shows. The Disciples of Christ are an exceedingly liberal group that, believe it or not, were one time a part of the Restoration Movement. They not only broke away from that; they have largely broken away from what the Scriptures teach on both moral and doctrinal issues. Penwell's article was called to attention by a reader of Spiritual Perspectives. It needs a reply made to it.

Before Penwell gets to the nine points, he meanders everywhere, but mostly he expresses his disdain for conservatives (translate, those who actually believe the Bible). He tries to make it seem as though everything is a matter of opinion and mocks the concept of truth by insisting that those who disagree with him insist that they "occupy the side of truth on every issue." Why is such a claim "alarming"? Should we take a position and say, "I am not on the side of truth this time"? Or how about averring, "This time I don't really know where I stand, whether my position is true or false, but, hey, follow me anyway"?

As with most people who disagree with the plain teaching of the Bible, Penwell does not hesitate to call names, referring to fundamentalists as "self-righteous," although he allows that both sides can be guilty of such thinking. He claims that the "real war on religion is being waged by those on the Right…." Really? Is it not instead the case that at long last, Christians are finally fighting back when attacked? Yet, like Ahab accusing Elijah of being the trouble-maker, so he accuses us of waging war (yes, the comparison was intentional). So that no one misunderstands his words or his intentions, following is what Penwell wrote:

If, for example, one holds that LGBTQ people should be embraced and welcomed as full participants into the life and ministry of the church, the popular assumption among some is that one makes such moves in spite of rather than because of one's reading of scripture [sic]. I have been asked on more than one occasion why I don't "just quit pretending to be a Christian," since I "obviously don't believe the Bible."

LGBT (or GLBT), according to Wikipedia, stands for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender. What about the Q? The same source says it stands for Queer or Questioning one's sexual identity. And if anyone refuses to accept Penwell's position, he is obviously prejudiced. So there!

Apparently, Penwell cannot conceive of someone reading the Bible to find out and apply what it says. Just because he has an agenda when he reads it does not mean that all others do. No, LGBTQs cannot be "welcomed as full participants into the life and ministry of the church" any more than those who are professional gamblers or those living in adultery. Perhaps Penwell has forgotten that the message of both John and Jesus was, "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand" (Matt. 3:2; 4:17). Does he honestly think that John or Jesus would have baptized those who remained in their sins and refused to repent?

When God told Abram He was going to destroy Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, and Zeboiim, it was not because He was prejudiced. Nor did He say, "What a great place for an LGBTQ community! I think I'll show them that I love and accept them." News flash! He rained down fire and brimstone upon them. It is no wonder that people tell Mr. Penwell that he doesn't believe the Bible. He doesn't! There is no theological divide on this issue (with any legitimacy). Homosexuality is sin, impure and simple. To misunderstand Genesis 18-19, one would need a Ph.D. Anyone can read the simple language used in these chapters and comprehend the meaning—along with all the other passages that denounce the sin.

When God says, "You shall surely die," and Satan says, "You shall not surely die," who is right? When God condemns homosexuality and Penwell embraces those who practice the sin, who is right? People do not have to be Jeopardy contestants to figure that out. Denying what the Scriptures teach has always been the strategy of the devil. With respect to this topic, Penwell says: "I'd like to see a biblical rationalization of the assertion that same-gender marriage is a more urgent danger to the institution of marriage than the pervasiveness of heterosexual divorce."

Homosexuality Versus Divorce

Divorce is permitted to the individual whose mate commits adultery and will not repent of it. Obviously many divorces are for other reasons, none of which authorize a person to marry again. It is true that no-fault divorce has affected society negatively for several decades. Is homosexual marriage a more urgent danger? Yes. Both involve ignoring the will of God, and both involve ignoring God's definitions of marriage and Scriptural divorce. Whereas qualified heterosexual couples may marry with God's blessing, homosexual couples never can. In other words, some heterosexual couples do not have the right to marry, but no homosexual couples do. Also, if one can change the gender of marriage participants to have two males or two females, then one can also alter the number of participants to include three, four, or more. The redefining of marriage will also add to the divorce problem.

Bullying?

A second of the nine questions that fundamentalists should have to answer is: Why do they "stand idly by while LGBTQ kids endure the dehumanizing and often deadly effects of bullying—all the while protesting that the real issue isn't the violence suffered by" children? Is he implying that the kids of LGBTQ "parents" are bullied and treated violently? If that is what is meant, there can be no defense. The children had no say in the matter, and they do not deserve to be bullied or treated with violence. No one does.

Muslim Brothers and Sisters?

A third request is for someone to provide "the biblical case that 'loving' our Muslim sisters and brothers can be accomplished by continually treating them as potential terrorists." First, Muslims are not our brothers and sisters. In order for someone to be a brother or sister, he or she must believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, that He is Divine, equal with the Father (Phil. 2:5-8). Muslims deny and reject the Deity of Christ. They will credit Him with being a prophet, but they reject His very nature and being. Muhammad calls those who believe what the Bible teaches about Jesus liars who shall endure eternal fire. Penwell might tell us if He believes Jesus is God; if he does not, the Muslims may be his brothers and sisters.

Second, we should treat others with love and kindness. However, anyone who has ever read the Qur'an knows that every Muslim is a potential terrorist! The followers of Muhammad have left death and destruction everywhere they have gone. Does Penwell not know Muslim history? Can he be oblivious to Muslims in this country who have already committed terrorist attacks? Perhaps he can point to a predominant Muslim country that encourages Christians to meet for worship or conduct Bible studies. Story after story exists of those who have been threatened with deportation for daring to discuss Jesus. How about if Penwell discusses the love and kindness that Muslim nations have for Christians?

Flag and Faith

Penwell wants to know how Christians can, using the Bible, defend the notion "that our ultimate loyalties to flag and faith are interchangeable." Well, they are not. A Christian's loyalty is to Christ. What was stated in the first century remains true: "We ought to obey God rather than men." When the nation we love departs from the precepts of God, our loyalty remains with Jesus. Having clarified the matter, surely no one would misconstrue some additional comments of explanation. Our flag is a symbol, recognized worldwide as one of freedom. Political freedom is not entirely divorced from spiritual freedom (John 8:31-32). Many Christians honor and prize both. They are in a sense related but never interchangeable. Why does Penwell seem to have such hostility toward both? Most of us are grateful for what we have.

Some of the issues raised are only barely related to Christian principles, if at all. Arms stockpiling is one of those; it's a political rather than a spiritual issue; so is a nation's health care system. Jesus's health care system was to heal people. Christians do not have that ability; so we do the best we can otherwise.

Race Problems

Penwell wants to know how we can justify ignoring "African Americans whose lives are negatively affected by disproportionate rates of poverty, incarceration, unemployment, under-resourced educational opportunities, and police violence." Christians believe that all can be one in Christ Jesus (Gal. 3:26-29). Why would we be in favor of anything prejudicial against any race? If Penwell has some solutions to propose, we are all interested. But why is he blaming Christians for whatever problems exist? We all want social problems to be solved, but not many of us are governors, mayors, or in positions of authority. Many Christians for decades have encouraged home schooling, private schools, and school choice, where African Americans and others could have better schools. Perhaps Penwell can tell us who has opposed school choice for decades.

Illegal Aliens

Another demand is a Scriptural justification for failing to treat undocumented workers with hospitality. Does he really not see this point? How about if, when sitting down to dinner, two teenage boys said, "We are part of your family now." Most fathers would say, "But you are not my children." "Sure, we are undocumented, but we moved in this afternoon and mowed your lawn. We expect you to send us to college and provide our health care." It is not a question of hospitality; it is a question of violating the law. Illegal aliens do not have a right to be in America. Did Jesus ever encourage anyone to break the law? To take what was not theirs? He taught people to give up their rights—not insist on those they do not possess. To reduce this problem to one of hospitality is absurd.

Economic Fairness

Jesus did not come to "level the playing field" economically for this world. He said, "Take heed, and beware of covetousness, for a man's life consists not in the abundance of the things he possesses" (Luke 12:15-21). Our economy is a political issue—not a spiritual one. Jesus encouraged people to give and to be generous; He never told governments to take away people's wealth in order to re-distribute it. That was Karl Marx, and the world has seen how well that ideology has worked!

Penwell comes across as a bitter socialist who thinks that Christians are the source of the world's problems. He is as wrong politically as he is spiritually. And he seems to assume that Christians do not want to solve problems. We do, but Christian principles have largely been untried. And concerning those he refers to as "fundamentalists," he is clearly fundamentally mistaken.