Love Thy Neighbor

Before embarking on this topic, I & my church want those who read this blog in general & this article in particular to understand a few things. 

1. The default soteriological position of this blog, & the local church under whose auspices I write, is Calvinism, specifically the sort of Calvinism commonly called Evangelical Calvinism.  

2. I myself & the members of Philadelphia Apostolic Presbyterian Church in Winston-Salem, North Carolina all subscribe, in good faith, to the Westminster Confession of Faith of 1646/47, & where we scruple with it, we do so on the basis of the Old & Testament taken individually & together, as the Inerrant & Infallible Universal Rule of Faith for individuals, ecclesiastical communities, & moral, civil governments.  

3. We reject Dominionism while affirming Biblical Theonomy, on the basis that the former errs by, more often than not, by, in word & in deed, affirming that only believers in general & Christians in particular are fit to serve as Governors of the People & Rulers of the Created Order.  Theonomy, correctly understood, avoids that idea in particular & has, in my & my session & church’s personal opinion, been much maligned on the basis that a great many people have been taught some bad theology & even worse ethics, & the truth of the matter is that the Bible, upon closer examination, doesn’t teach some of things people think it does, & the power of Liturgical Philosophy (Bad Theology & Ethics that has taken on a life of its own & been elevated to confessional or quasi-confessional status in the minds & hearts of the People) looms large. 

4. In practice, what does this mean?  It means that I myself, & the church I serve, reject Situational Ethics, Spiritual Abuse, & the use of the Bible & the Christian Religion (and other Faith Traditions & Liturgical Philosophies) as bludgeons by which both marginalized & non-marginalized people are abused & weapons that have at times set people at odds with one another, which has, at this juncture in Redemptive History, resulted in American Evangelical Christianity’s grand slide into philosophical, moral, & theological declension, demonstrating that a great many Christians in the US & abroad are increasingly showing signs of needing massive reform or else face the winepress of the wrath of God just as the Scriptures (that many Christians both in & out of the pews say they believe) teach. 

5. Yes, but what exactly does that mean?  It means that instead of digging our feet further & further into the earth as if we are held there in cement galoshes, we should re-examine ourselves, our beliefs, our teaching, our politics, & our daily practices in light of the Holy Bible correctly exegeted, exposited, understood, & applied, using the Grammatical - Historical Method of interpreting & understanding the Bible, & we should then live accordingly.

6. Do you have any practical examples in mind? Yes, both I myself & our church do have a few in mind.  

7. How about a concrete example? Sure, no problem…

We reject the continual appeal to Situational Ethics being deployed by the gatekeepers of the Republican Party & American Conservatives as well as men like Michael Brown of the Coalition of Conscience & his Fire School of Ministry & John MacArthur & many others, who have been engaged in a Situational Ethics Project relative to the treatment of LGBTQ people in the United States for quite some time now.

If the Christian community paracleted the LGBTQ community more, Target and Bud Light wouldn’t be as strident with respect to what they are doing. For example, we should ask ourselves why, in the age in which gay people can legally marry, it is still legal in some states to discriminate against people with respect to sexual orientation relative to employment, housing, and public accommodation. 

We should remember that Christians have a checkered history with respect to these issues.  In the 80’s, Tom, Carol, Ted, and Alice were swinging while Jerry Falwell pointed fingers at gay men with respect to HIV/AIDS.   In the 90’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” was controversial while Christians were openly lying about the efficacy of latex condoms and instituting purity culture and abstinence only sex education programs that excluded gay people from discussions except to send the message that that sort of behavior kills and is otherwise unacceptable. 

In the 2000’s the BSA decided to allow openly gay students into its ranks.  Christians in the churches, while saying that gays need Jesus and that the BSA chapters they sponsored were part of their outreach ministries, cut ties with the BSA and decided to do their own thing in order to exclude gays, thus sending the message “No Jesus for you!” to gays.  That happened concurrently with the standing in line at Chick Fil’A to oppose the gay agenda.   Did anyone who bought Combo 1 for Christ buy one for their gay friend?  

About a decade ago in ATL, a group of local mean girls banded together and falsely accused the ATL Eagle of allowing drug sales on premises and turning their speakers onto the neighborhood illegally.   A paddy wagon appeared on a week night and violated the rights of staff & patrons alike in a raid of the bar that turned up no evidence whatsoever of the Women’s Temperance Union’s allegations. 

In NC, when the GOP took over the General Assembly, they decided not to honor a gentlemen’s agreement between the General Assembly & LGBT lobbyists in which they had agreed that, in exchange for continued funding of NC’s AIDS Drug Assistance Program, they would do their best to keep the marriage issue out of NC.  After saber rattling by some Republican legislators who wanted to severely curtail or end ADAP, the LGBTQ community retaliated, and that act went all the way to SCOTUS, and now gay marriage is legal.  In short, in NC, Conservative Ideologues helped build the monster they feared (Rev. 17).  

TN, in recent history, targeted drag queens in the public square and censured African-American legislators in the State House for being agitators while cutting the Nashville Metro area government in half for brazenly political reasons - and all of this while their legislature was reliving another cycle of sexual harassment by one or more legislators.  

In FL it is now forbidden to allow matters touching on these issues into an American or British literature class for high school juniors and seniors — unless reading material that touches on these issues is mandatory.  In addition, if an employer uses Matthew 5:41 as the basis for a continuing education module that touches on race relations and an employee feels guilty, that is now an actionable offense, regardless of whether or not CRT is involved. 

We live in the age of dutiful culture warriors whose first impulse with respect to Target and now Chick Fil-A and the production staff of Chosen is to take up arms instead of repenting for their role in continuing the cycle of mutual oppression.  Their response is to point fingers and take up arms instead of paracleting their enemies.

Matthew 5:41 - 48 was written as a confutation of the Sanhedrin and Zealots who were the dutiful culture warriors of their day.  The Sanhedrin was teaching the people that loving your neighbor was a cover for hating your enemies.  The Zealots acted accordingly.  

According to Matthew 5:41, if the jackbooted Roman soldier compels (or otherwise requests) you to walk a mile, you will walk two.   If the soldier (African-American couple) compels (or otherwise requests) you to walk a mile (not redline them), you will walk a mile (not redline them) and walk a second (show them a home, sell to them if they financially qualify). This applies to all civil rights legislation.  

According to God, a business owner does not have a religious right to do as he/she/they desire.  You can’t deny service to your enemies, even if your enemy is a Roman soldier.   That was true in Exodus too: If you meet your enemy’s ox or his donkey going astray, you shall bring it back to him. 5If you see the donkey of one who hates you lying down under its burden, you shall refrain from leaving him with it; you shall rescue it with him. (Exodus 23: 4 - 5).

However, as soon as you point out that this applies to LGBTQ people, these people cry foul.   They say that refusing to bake the cake, to take just one example, is a matter of religious liberty.  

The idea that baking the cake is an act that somehow infringes upon the religious liberty of the baker is driven by the axiom that doing so is an invidious act of collaboration with Evangelicals’ sociopolitical/cultural enemies.  Matthew 5:41 addresses that position by commanding that the baker serve the couple by baking the cake.  Further, by virtue of this axiom being used as a means to refuse service to LGBTQ people, this refusal - which admits to being religious or quasi-religious in nature - amounts to spiritual abuse, and it is an act of religious or quasi-religious bigotry, and that was the proximate sin of Sodom & Gomorrah in the Bible. 

In Situational Ethics, the morals police justifies their actions by evaluation of their & others activities &/or motives via examination of the context, eg the circumstances, in which the deed in question was or will be performed.   How does this play out? 

If David Baker asks you if he should bake the cake (and in some cases now refuse to use the slur “Alphabet people”) men like Brown & MacArthur reply with Situational Ethics.  Their  answer is “No,” based on the fact that the homosexual couple is obviously in sin & the cake proves it, and, to read Dr. Brown & others when they write about it, the transgender person is presumptively unregenerate. Ergo, paracleting them is enabling them & collaborating with the Encroaching Homosexual Menace.

Their reasoning process basically involves them & their supporters determining the moral blameworthiness or praiseworthiness of the baker’s refusal to bake &/or refuse to use the term “Alphabet people,” by way of their evaluation of the circumstances of the act in question - either brazenly or tacitly based on the moral status & agenda of the gay couple and /or trans person - not by way of the the baker’s motives.  

God does not condemn & commend our thoughts, words, & deeds based on the identity of our clients / customers & the meaning of a product we sell &/or serve.   If God condemned & commended that way, then that would result in a species of works righteousness, on the basis that it is possible to disobey & offend God & obey & commend God regardless of the motives that underwrite our thoughts, words, & deeds.  By way of contrast, James 1:14-15 says that we form & follow desires that lead us into sin, condemnation, & death.   In other words, God looks at the heart, not the outward appearance (1 Samuel 16:7).  

These men reflexively default to Situational Ethics, in which each business transaction or personal encounter is unique, & therefore whether or not you will comply with Matthew 5:22 or 5:41 depends on David’s evaluation of the identity (& moral status) of the objects of David’s moral response not David’s actual motives. 

It’s a flow chart for Brown & MacArthur - If a cisgender person, especially one who is also the sort of Christian of whom they approve, do not insult. If a transgender person, Mt. 5:22 doesn’t apply.  If a heterosexual couple, serve them, or at least consider doing so.  If homosexual, Matthew 5:41 does not apply.   

Most recently, Dr. MacArthur’s ministry showed their true colors when Alistair Begg dared suggest that Grandma should attend the wedding instead of boycotting it. Within days of his statement’s broadcast on the Christian Post & elsewhere, Dr. Begg was publicly sanctioned for having the courage to think biblically.   

That was as overt an act of spiritual abuse on the order of sanctioning a Baptist or Presbyterian minister for aiding and abetting MLK & others during the American Civil Rights Movement of the 1950’s & 60’s.  It is well past time that somebody who speaks fluent Inerrant Bible & Westminster Confession Presbyterian or Reformed/Sovereign Grace Baptist to stand up & accuse these men & others who go down this road correctly in the manner James R. White & Turretinfan went after Ergun Caner a few years ago while I myself took a long vacation away from Triablogue.  

In God’s Law, according to the Sermon on the Mount, there’s a single universal standard - if someone asks for bread do not give them a snake (Mt. 7:7 - 11). Do not “Raca,” trans people (Mt. 5:22).  Form & follow a set of motives that loves the gay couple enough to bake the cake.  If you perceive of them as unbelievers &/or enemies in general, paraclete them, for in so doing you will heap coals of fire on their heads (Proverbs 25:21 - 22). 

Matthew 5:41 was written as a confutation of the Sanhedrin and Zealots who were the dutiful culture warriors of their day.  The Sanhedrin was teaching the people that loving your neighbor was a cover for hating your enemies.  The Zealots acted accordingly.  If you agree with the villains in the story, you are wrong.

God bless us all; may He have mercy on our souls, & “Go & sin no more.”