“In what ways do men show leadership that encourages you as women?” That was my question to some sisters I interviewed a number of weeks ago. This post picks up where the second one left off, enumerating and reflecting on their responses.
Previously…
1. Initiating Substantial Discussions
2. Making Firm Decisions
3. Owning Up to the Consequences of Our Decisions
4. Correcting When Needed
5. Encouraging Lady-like Behavior
6. Being Consistent
7. Taking Leadership Roles in Ministry
Our sisters would love to see us take leadership roles in ministry. In fact, some would say it's discouraging if only women are working. They feel there’s something missing. That should be both encouraging and challenging for us men. It reminds us that, under God’s wise plan for manhood and womanhood, we really do have something unique to contribute as men.
At the same time, men who own up to their God-assigned roles in the church also protect sisters from two temptations: being prideful about their greater devotion to the ministry, and looking down on men (which will subtly but effectively lead them to despise God’s plan for manhood and womanhood).
8. Being Patient & Concerned
What about when a sister is behaving poorly (for whatever reason), what can guys do that’s helpful. Each of the women I asked gave different answers. Guys, we’re on our own here. Just kidding. The general idea was that they appreciate it when we are patient and show genuine concern for them. Try to find out what’s really bugging them, if you can.
And here’s a special tip from the ladies: start with a kind gesture like food or coffee. Even candy would be better than nothing! (A sister tried this on me once by buying me ice cream before confronting me about something. I appreciated the gesture, but it had less effect on me as it seems to have on them!) But in the absence of any and all comfort items, said one sister, just create an encouraging environment. Ask, listen, and try to remember what they say.
9. Discipling Others
Lastly, it encourages our sisters to see guys leading younger guys in discipleship. It’s great to be consistent in leadership. But it’s even better to develop leadership in others.
Conclusion
Let me end this series with something from Albert Mohler’s book, Conviction to Lead:
The Believers are driven by deep and passionate beliefs. They are heavily invested in knowledge, and they are passionate about truth. They devote themselves to learning truth, teaching truth, and defending truth. They define themselves in terms of what they believe, and they are ready to give their lives for these beliefs.
The problem is, many of them are not ready to lead. They have never thought much about leadership and are afraid that thinking too much about it will turn them into mere pragmatists, which they know they shouldn’t be. They know a great deal and believe a great deal, but they lack the basic equipment for leadership. As one proverbial deacon said of his pastor, “Oh, he knows a lot, but he can’t lead a decent two-car funeral procession.”
Brothers, may this encourage us to grow in our leadership. Not only would it please God, but it would make our sisters in Christ very happy!
“In what ways do men show
leadership that encourages you as women?” That was my question to a
group of sisters I interviewed a number of weeks ago. This post picks
up where the first one left off, enumerating and reflecting upon
their responses.
3. Owning Up to the Consequences of Our Decisions
As important as it is for men to be decisive, it won’t mean a
thing it we don’t own up to the consequences of our decisions. Even
the best of us make mistakes, and when we do, our sisters will gladly
stand behind us as long as they know we won’t run away or blame
someone else. They’ll joyfully support a leader—as flawed as he
may be—who’s willing to bear the cost of leadership.
4. Correcting When Needed
Another uncomfortable side to leadership that we need to take on
(and that women appreciate us taking on) is the responsibility to
correct, them when needed. Of course, this presupposes that we
ourselves welcome correction.
One of the ladies I interviewed recounted a good example of this.
A man in a group she was part of corrected one of the women. He was
very firm yet gentle. He didn’t shoot accusations at her, but began
by asking her questions. “I felt her defensiveness,” recalled the
sister, “but he pointed her to God's Word.” The man’s demeanor
and words also showed that he was motivated, not by pride, but by
genuine concern for the woman.
5. Encouraging Lady-like Behavior
The sisters I interviewed also appreciate it when brothers
encourage them to act like ladies. On one hand, that includes
reminding them to be composed when they’re being noisy and unruly.
On the other hand, it also involves showing our care for them by
helping even with even menial tasks.
So men, help them with their bags. Open doors for them. Be
concerned for their safety. If that sounds like servanthood, that’s
because it is. None of that is beneath a true servant-leader (Php.
2:5-11).
6. Being Consistent
Biblical leadership doesn’t come naturally. Most men don’t
even want to lead. When they do, it’s often short-lived.
But the sisters have words of reassurance for those of us who
really are trying to grow into our God-given roles as men: the effort
is appreciated. Even the small things we do are important to them.
They’re not looking for perfection. What they are looking
for is a pattern. The key is consistency. And the proof of
consistency is when we keep leading even when leadership is least
gratifying. Men, let’s be reminded that
without consistency, they
have no reason to trust us (1
Tim. 3:6, 10; cf. 1 Ki. 20:11).
More in the third and final post in this mini-series...
Leadership is a privilege and responsibility that all men have from God. Many won't hold positions of public leadership, but they're still called to lead in the private sphere (Eph. 5:23)
Some time ago, I asked some of the young, single women of Higher Rock (heretofore referred to as 'the sisters') to enumerate ways that men lead that encourages them. Below are some of their responses. (I'll include the rest in a later post.)
1. Initiating Substantial Discussions
The guys and gals are enjoying dinner together. The conversation is light and full of laughter. It could go that way all evening, but many young women (and sensible young men) would really appreciate something more substantial, and it would be great if one of the guys steered the conversation in that direction. This might involve talking about last Sunday's preaching, or sharing news about the ministries of the church, or swapping prayer concerns.
When men deliberately do this, they show that they're intellectually mature enough to think about such things. When they do it in a skillful and engaging way, they also show that they're socially mature enough to do so.
When men do this, it also gives women the opportunity to fulfill their own roles in supporting godly leadership.
2. Making Firm Decisions
According to the sisters, it's encouraging when men make firm decisions. These include things ranging from ministry decisions to where to eat. We should be able to think clearly, make good decisions, and not be easily swayed by others.
Mind you, "decisive" doesn't mean "stubborn". What's the difference? The decisive man is considerate of other people's concerns, and shows that he really has understood and valued them. His attitude is completely compatible with Christ's model of servant-leadership.
What if, after all this, the sisters still disagree with the decision? Then it would help, they say, if he explains his reasons. One sister explains,
Though it's not required for leaders to always explain their decisions—and yes, it's valid that sometimes the obedience needs to be immediate and calls for trust on our part—but there's something to be said for communicating to us [women], and not just having a master and servant relationship. Rather, if you [men] want us to know how to support you even in ways you didn't articulate or think of, it benefits a lot to communicate your reasons and thinking. For me knowing how you reason and what factors were weightier to you not just builds trust but it also helps me know you and anticipate what's important and therefore even more quickly take cues and support [your] leadership. One can't assume that just because you're being asked about your reasons that it is equal to being scrutinized or assessed but rather we want to know how you thought about it and have a better grasp of your priority and goals so that we might come alongside and not just be utusan but actually be able to help think and support. We each can't read the other [person]'s mind. Of course, us asking about your thoughts shouldn't be conditional to our willingness to support. That has to be clear on our part.
On the rare occasion that the two sides still can’t come to an understanding, according to the sisters, it’s enough to be reassured by the man’s character, his track record. This should remind us that it’s crucial for men to establish a pattern of sound reason that is firmly grounded by Scripture and upheld by prayer.
It's great to be back after a long hiatus! One of the things that loaded up my schedule was preparing to speak to my church's youth about homosexuality. That's what I'm sharing in this post.
It was an hour-and-a-half message, which I subdivided into five segments, as follows:
I hope you'll be as encouraged listening to these, as I was preparing them.
1. INTRODUCTION
We can’t ignore the LGBT issue. The question isn’t whether we will respond, but whether our response will be biblical or unbiblical.
Christian groups have adopted very different stands on this. But what is the right response? As we think about the answer to that, there are two things that we need to be concerned about.
Our first concern is the truth. Homosexuality is part of much larger issues, like sin, purity, and God’s glory. We want to avoid isolating homosexuality from these bigger concerns
Our second concern is the heart – our hearts. God wants us to glorify Him in how we think, how we talk, and how we act. We need to love LGBTs and faithfully share the gospel with them.
This is our goal: to have a biblical attitude toward homosexuality and LGBTs.
The LGBT movement has ballooned in our generation. We should be concerned, but not too much. The church has been in similar situations before.
LGBT IN ANCIENT CIVILIZATIONS
Homosexuality and similar blurring of the sexes isn’t new or recent. It was practiced during Abraham’s time, about 2,000 B.C., in the Shang Dynasty (16th-11th century B.C.), by the ancient Greeks and Romans, in New Testament Times, and even in Pre-Hispanic Philippines! So, we shouldn’t be surprised that it’s an issue today.
But why is the LGBT movement of today is so aggressive and hostile toward biblical Christianity?
LGBT IN THE WAKE OF MORAL RELATIVISM
During the Enlightenment Period in Europe (17th-18th centuries), many great scientists like Galileo, Kepler, and Newton pursued science from a Christian worldview. But others wanted to use science as a weapon against God, the Bible and the institutional Church. They claimed that reason and science could explain everything, so people didn’t need God or the Bible.
Of course, if human reason is the standard for morality, then morality is just human beings finding reasons to do what they want. This is the essence of moral relativism.
Fast forward to the present day, and we see that moral relativism has taken over Europe and America, and it’s becoming more and more prevalent here in the Philippines. More and more, people are embracing the lie that you can create your own truth.
One of the reasons that the LGBT movement has become very strong in recent decades is that society has lost the ability to look at homosexuality and say, “that’s wrong.”
In fact, people have devoted a lot of money and expertise to explain homosexuality in purely naturalistic terms.
WHAT ARE THE CULTURAL ELITES SAYING ABOUT HOMOSEXUALITY TODAY?
“Homosexuality is GENETIC.” In 1995, Time Magazine published an article entitled, “Search for a Gay Gene”, about scientists’ search for genetic causes for homosexuality. These studies, however, far from proved that homosexuality was predetermined by one's DNA.
“Homosexuality is caused by the environment.” Others have focused on how a person’s environment can influence homosexual behavior. But these studies often don’t distinguish between causation and indirect relation. To put it simply, they misinterpret the data, or make the data say more than it actually says.
Despite the limitations of these studies, they've have been sensationalized by the mass media, so that nowadays, people just assume that science has “proven” that homosexuality is completely natural, and therefore ok. This has allowed the movement to grow rapidly, even in the Philippines.
In light of all these developments, we as Bible-believing Christians might be tempted to worry. But homosexuality and cultural support for homosexuality aren’t new. The Church has faced this before. The reason we don’t know that is because for a long time, Christianity was the biggest moral influence on modern civilization. We’ve gotten used to that, but things are changing back to the way things were before Christianity became dominant. We have to be ready: ready to obey God on this matter; ready to accept whatever consequence society may impose on us; and ready to do it all, not out of hate, but out of love: love for God, love for the truth, and love for people who need Christ just as much as we do.
Does the Bible really say that homosexuality is a sin?
Some professing Christians would answer that question with a resounding No! They claim that the common proof-texts against homosexuality are either misinterpreted or mistranslated because of prejudice. This is the revisionist view. Are they right?
GENESIS 19 – SODOM AND GOMORRHA
Revisionist View: Sin of gang rape. This is not a universal condemnation of gay sex, but a bad form of gay sex. Sin of inhospitality.
Biblical Response: Sodom was condemned for a whole bunch of sins, not just homosexuality. But homosexuality was definitely included in that list. (Compare Ez. 16:50 and Lev. 18:22)
DAVID AND JONATHAN
Revisionist View: David and Jonathan were lovers. (2 Sam. 1:26; 1 Sam. 18:1,4; 20:41)
Biblical Response: We read these texts with hyper-sexualized lenses. Cf. Jacob's soul was “knit to” Benjamin his son = favoritism, not sexual (Gen 44:30). David and Jonathan not said to lie together. And if you know David's life, his issue was women.
JESUS’ TESTIMONY
Revisionist View: Jesus never said anything about homosexuality!
Biblical Response: Jesus came to correct false teaching, so if the traditional view of homosexuality was wrong, He would have addressed it when we spoke about sexuality. Rather, He affirmed the traditional view. (Mark 10:6-9)
“ARSENOKOITAI” - 1 Corinthians 6:9-10; 1 Tim 1:9-10
Revisionist View: Arsenokoitai appears for the first time in NT, so we have to figure out what it means. Therefore, it refers to sexual and economic exploitation (pedophilia).
Traditional View: Paul didn't pull this word out of nowhere. He pulled a word from the LXX of Lev 20:13 where we find arsen and koite, right beside each other. There's no other place where these two words occur together, beside each other. Any Hellenistic Jewish convert who came across this word would have recognized the reference. Moreover, if Paul had wanted to refer to pedophilia, there was a specific word for it: paiderastes.
In conclusion, the Bible does say that homosexuality is a sin in God’s eyes.
Isn’t homosexuality natural to homosexuals? How can it be wrong to be yourself?
The answer to that is simple: we’re all sinful and God calls all of us to be completely changed. Everyone – heterosexual or homosexual – is a sinner, and more specifically, sexually impure. We are sinful by nature, and that's why we need a new nature. Without that new nature, we’re spiritually dead – we’re cut off from God who is the source of all spiritual life. (John 3:3; Eph. 2:1-6; 2 Cor. 5:17)
Many believe that whatever is natural is good. But the Bible says that we live in a world that has been distorted by sin. So nature is a bad standard for deciding what’s good or bad. The only truly reliable standard we have is God’s Word. And it tells us to reject our sinful nature, to seek God’s forgiveness through Jesus Christ, and to be transformed into new creatures.
4. How Can I Minister to Those Who Struggle with Homosexual Desires?
RESOLVE TO DO IT! ... or you probably never will.
PROVIDE A SAFE ENVIRONMENT. We have a natural tendency to excuse the sins that we struggle with, even while we condemn sins that we don’t see in ourselves. But let’s be humbled over our own brokenness. Let’s be consistent in addressing all kinds of sins.
FOCUS ON RELATIONSHIP WITH CHRIST. We have to clearly and consistently communicate that God’s first concern for people struggling with homosexual desire isn’t that they become heterosexual. His first concern for them is that they have a living relationship with Him through Jesus Christ, so that they surrender all of their lives to Him, including their sexuality.
SET REALISTIC EXPECTATIONS. On the one hand, let him know that he’s not struggling alone. We all struggle. It’s just that most people struggle with heterosexual impurity, while a few struggle with homosexual impurity. But we’re all in this together (1 Cor. 10:13). On the other hand, don’t give false promises, like “Read the Bible, pray more and your homosexuality will go away.”
ENCOURAGE SAME-SEX FRIENDSHIPS WITH MATURE BELIEVERS. This will help the person see and experience for themselves God’s beautiful plan for same-sex relationships.
Should Christians support LGBT “rights”? Before answering that question, there’s a more basic question that needs to be addressed. As Christians, what is our place in society?
We're called to be salt & light. (Mat. 5:13-16)
We're called to serve society. (Eph. 4:28)
We're called to love our neighbors... even our enemies. (Mat. 22:39; Mat. 5:43)
We should be particularly concerned for the poor and helpless. (Luke 14:12-14)
We're called to submit to the government. (Rom. 13:1)
In light of these points, I think we can rephrase our question this way: Is it loving to support pro-LGBT laws?
The simple answer is NO, because we must “Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them” (Eph. 5:11). To support any law that supports homosexuality is to support homosexuality itself.
Another reason we shouldn’t support pro-LGBT laws is that they would do more harm than good. Let's look at the pending Anti-Discrimination Bill (ADB), for example.
THE ANTI-DISCRIMINATION LAW
At first glance, the Anti-Discrimination Bill (ADB) sounds good. According to him, it’s about equality for all. He talks about LGBTs as if they’re victims of society. But the evidence doesn’t support that. Just look around you. Are LGBTs under attack in our country? Just the opposite, actually. If, by and large, LGBTs aren’t being victimized in our society, why would we need the ADB?
In fact, the ADB in its current form would do more harm than good, because it would suppress freedom of speech and religion. We see this in the way the bill defines "discrimination". The danger has already been realized in other countries that have passed their own versions of the ADB (ex. Canada, England, US).
SAME-SEX MARRIAGE
We can't support this bill for many reasons.
It will require government to redefine, not only marriage, but sexuality and family as well. That’s more than an administrative adjustment. That’s a social revolution, right there.
For government to approve such changes in the law would mean that it supports the LGBT lifestyle, which has proven to be extremely harmful to people. The damage it has caused to people’s health and social relationships is staggering.
The typical pro-LGBT argument is, “We’re not hurting anyone, so just let us do what we want.” But they are hurting people, just not in an obvious way. To redefine sexuality, marriage, and family is to attack the institutions that have made civilization possible. It is also to deprive children of the stability provided by a household with a real father and a real mother.
And which sector of society will be affected the most? It will be the poor -- the ones who can least afford to play around, who don't have social and economic safety nets. If we destroy the institutions of marriage and the family, we can only guess how much harm it will cause to the poorest and most vulnerable members of our society.
We as Christians should be very clear on where we stand with regard to the LGBT rights movement. We stand against it, not because we hate LGBTs, but because we love them and we love our neighbors.
Several weeks ago, a friend brought a legal case to my attention, and I think that it’s something evangelicals ought to be informed about. Because the topic is quite technical, this article is longer than my typical posts, but I would encourage you to read through it carefully, because it really is significant. And if you’d like to contribute your thoughts, or provide me with further leads relevant to the pro-LGBT agenda in the Philippines, I invite you to leave a comment.
In November 2002, Rommel Silverio petioned the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Manila to have his first name and sex changed in official documents. His basis: he is “anatomically male but feels, thinks and acts as a female” and has always identified himself with girls since childhood.
Prior to his petition, he had consulted with several doctors in the United States,2 and received psychological examination, hormone treatment, and
breast augmentation. Finally, he underwent sex reassignment surgery
in Bangkok, Thailand.
Upon the filing of his petition with the RTC, Silverio was even engaged to be married to a certain Richard P. Edel.
The court ruled in favor of Silverio. It gave the following reasons:
It was “more in consonance with the principles of justice and equity…. Petitioner’s misfortune to be trapped in a man’s body... should not be in any way taken against him”;
Likewise, “no harm, injury [or] prejudice will be caused to anybody or the community”; and
There was no reason presented to the court to deny the petition.
The RTC’s decision was problematic, however, and in August 2003, the Republic of the Philippines filed for reconsideration to the Court of Appeals (CA).
In February 2006, the CA overturned the RTC’s decision, stating, “There is no law allowing the change of either name or sex in the certificate of birth on the ground of sex reassignment through surgery.”
Silverio then appealed to the Supreme Court (SC), which responded to each point raised by the RTC.
First, to the RTC’s reference to “principles of justice and equity”, the SC replied, “Petitioner believes that having acquired the physical features of a female, he became entitled to the civil registry changes sought. We disagree.” With regard to change of name, “The State has an interest in the names borne by individuals and entities for purposes of identification. A change of name is a privilege, not a right.” The State allows for change of name in situations where a citizen “will be prejudiced by the use” of his name. Silverio, however, failed to demonstrate this.
Third, the SC took an entirely different posture toward the law than did the RTC. The RTC essentially took the stance that the court should grant the petition because there was "no reason to deny it". The SC, however, recognized that the RTC was acting beyond the authority of the Judiciary. The SC mildly chastised the lower court by stating something that even higher-grade students should know: “The duty of the courts is to apply or interpret the law, not to make or amend it.”
In short, the SC ruled that “The petition lacks merit.”
A Modest Victory
The outcome of the Silverio Case is certainly something that Filipino evangelicals should be relieved and thankful for, especially since this set a precedent for deciding future cases. But we also need to recognize that this modest victory was in 2007, and was clearly not the end of our struggle against the movement for LGBT “rights”.
Some concluding statements of the SC ruling make this clear. For example, it pointed out that the fatal flaw in Silverio’s petition was that “there is no such special law in the Philippines governing sex reassignment and its effects.” It also recognized the possibility, however, of the Legislature passing such laws in the future.
What can Christians take away from this?
First, let’s remember that our Lord’s purpose is not to create a Christian civilization, but to build His church (Matthew 16:18). He will accomplish this, not through government policies or a cultural movement, but through the faithful proclamation of the gospel (Galatians 6:14; 1 Corinthians 15:3). So, while we should stay informed of what’s happening in our government and the culture at large, the most important thing by far is for us to treasure the gospel of salvation by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone, to the glory of God alone, on the basis of Scripture alone.
Second, let’s repent of any hint of self-righteousness and lovelessness we may have toward LGBTs. The Bible declares that there is only one difference between sinners who are under God’s wrath and saints who are forgiven, adopted, and born again. That difference is the free, unmerited grace of God. And having received such grace and such love from God, we are then called to invite others to receive the same, and to do it in a way that reflects God’s heart.
Third, when the opportunity comes up, we can gently correct some of the common assumptions of our pro-LGBT neighbors.
Assumption: It’s my right to choose my own gender/sex.
Answer: You and I are privileged to live in a country with freedom of religion and freedom of speech, so we’re free to believe what we want. But as far as legal status is concerned, our laws have established that a person’s sex is determined at birth, based on genitalia, and can’t be changed.
Assumption: Allowing for homosexual marriage isn’t going to harm anyone.
Answer: I think that it will harm society, but in ways that we don’t see right away. For example, it will require a massive renovation of our legal system in relation to marriage, family, and women’s rights. LGBTs actually comprise only a very small minority (about three percent). I don't think the other ninety-seven percent should have to bear the financial cost and practical complications that will result. (At this point, it might help if we could present evidence of the consequences of endorsing the LGBT lifestyle.)
Conclusion
Filipino evangelicals should take note of the Silverio Case because it helps us to better understand the relation between the law and LGBT "rights" in our country. It also serves as an example of how the pro-LGBT agenda tries to make headway by increments. It will appeal for concessions that seem small and relatively harmless, but actually have massive implications for government and society. So let's stay informed while persevering in the Lord's work.
2 Why the U.S.? Probably because the American Psychiatric Association, the American Psychological Association, and other relevant bodies, now support the LGBT rights movement.
August has been a very interesting month as far as news and the Briefing are concerned. You'll notice there are more than the usual amount of articles in this volume, and from a wide range of topics.
Here are some of the most salient points in these articles:
The pro-LGBT movement has argued for the complete separation of gender from biological sex. Now, in light of the recently concluded Olympics, they're even beginning deny the biological distinction between male and female. This shows that the pro-LGBT ideology has become so radical that it is now willing to deny one of the most obvious facts of everyday human existence.
The success of the Moral Revolution is leading to escalating discrimination against Christians and Christian Institutions for holding to historic,Christian convictions. As things are going now, it might not be long before historic Christian Institutions (such as schools and hospitals) will be forced to either waive all support from the government or give in to its demands regarding issues like LGBT rights and abortion.
We may not be feeling the direct effects of these developments in the Philippines (yet), but let's not kid ourselves. The political and cultural elites here aren't far behind their Western counterparts. And as the elites go, usually, so goes the culture.
The purpose of the Best of the Briefing series is to help you stay updated on important
realities confronting modern Christians -- LGBT rights, Christianity & politics, secular materialism, abortion, Roman Catholicism, and the like. The articles included in these volumes say particularly important things in particularly helpful ways (in my opinion, at least). I hope that you find them useful.
If you prefer the audio podcast to the transcripted articles, you can find them arranged by date on Mohler's website.
If you're a Logos user, you'll be glad to know that the documents are in .docx format, which you can use to create a personal book in your Logos library.
Below is the list of articles included in this volume.
Business
The gender revolution arrives at the clothing store—but it's still organized male-female (August 22, 201)
The power of consumers: After dim sales report, Target announces new bathroom initiative (August 23, 2016)
Family & Education
Pending SB 1146 would mean the end of comprehensive Christian education in California (August 3, 2016)
Schools that refuse federal aid or request Title IX exemption blacklisted by secular left (August 3, 2016)
Good news for Christian higher education in California as lawmaker drops proposal—for now (August 11, 2016)
The "Good Parent" vs. the "Get-Real Parent": Deep moral insight for parents from an unexpected source (August 24, 2016)
Politics & Society
The fall of Roger Ailes can serve warning for Christians to avoid a media echo chamber (August 4, 2016)
When liberal policies outpace liberal preferences: San Francisco liberals don't want affordable housing (August 9, 2016)
Obama administration's transgender bathroom guidelines blocked by federal judge — for now (August 23, 2016)
From the French Revolution to 'burkini' bans: France's radical commitment to secularism (August 29, 2016)
Religion
Transgender deity in the Old Testament? Nonsense from a rabbi in The New York Times (August 15, 2016)
Science & Medicine
Will our brave new world include human-animal chimeras? NIH proposal erases ethical lines (August 8, 2016)
The misplaced trust of Scientism and the dangers of Neil deGrasse Tyson's "Rationalia" (August 8, 2016)
American College of Pediatricians: gender dysphoria debate is primarily about worldview, not science (August 11, 2016)
The moral behind the medical stat: 1 in 5 babies born in Indiana are addicted to drugs (August 17, 2016)
Sports
The NBA, creator of the WNBA, spurns North Carolina for codifying gender distinction (August 4, 2016)
The transgender revolution hits the Olympics … but not consistently (August 10, 2016)
No such thing as a "male body"? Transgenderism and the eclipse of biological sex (August 11, 2016)
I've been immersing myself in research on the LGBT issue, particularly with regards to anti-discrimination laws and same-sex marriage. There's so much more reading to do, but already my brain feels like pudding.
Before I call it a night and shift to more pleasant labors, I just want to share this partial timeline that I've put together regarding the advance of the LGBT agenda in the Philippines. It's definitely not light or happy reading, but we need to inform ourselves because we cannot be ignorant or silent on this issue.
1968
The Metropolitan Community Church (MCC), a non-denominational Protestant church, is founded in the United States. It is " the world’s first church group with a primary, positive ministry to gays, lesbians, bisexual, and transgender persons."
1987
July 6 - The Family Code of the Philippines is passed. Article 1 states, "Marriage is a special contract of permanent union between a man and a woman entered into in accordance with law for the establishment of conjugal and family life. It is the foundation of the family and an inviolable social institution whose nature, consequences, and incidents are governed by law and not subject to stipulation, except that marriage settlements may fix the property relations during the marriage within the limits provided by this Code."
LAGABLAB helps craft the first version of the Anti-Discrimination Bill, seeks to offer special civil protections for LGBTs. The ADB is then submitted to Congress by Miriam Defensor-Santiago and Akbayan Representative Etta Rosales. The bill faces stiff opposition and lacks a strong base of supportive legislators.
2001
LAGABLAB, Amnesty International Pilipinas and the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission (IGLHRC) and other supportive organizations launch the Stop Discrimination Now Campaign to support the passage of the bill.
2006
September 13 - MCC, which has been limited first to Manila, then to Makati, begins establishing Bible studies and support groups in Quezon City.Eventually, MCC's Rev. Ceejay Agbayani would have his ordination repealed and form his own church, the LGBTS Christian Church.
September 23- Jennifer Cagandahan officially becomes "Jeff" and is recognized as legally male, by virtue of the Supreme Court's upholding the decision of the local court of Siniloan., Laguna.
2009
The Inclusive Bible is published. The TIB is the first "egalitarian" translation of the Bible, replacing male pronouns and claiming to present the same ancient truths in "new and non-sexist ways".
2011
ABS-CBN releases "Nasaan Ka, Elisa," the first teleserye to explore LGBT themes. This is followed by "Huwag Ka Lang Mawawala" (2013), and "Till I Met You" (2016). GMA Network follows suit with "My Husband's Lover" (2013), "The Rich Man's Daughter" (2015), and "Destiny Rose" (2015).
2012
The Queen James Bible is published. The description reads, "The Queen James Bible is based on The King James Bible, edited to prevent homophobic misinterpretation."
2013
March 25 – The Quezon City Pride Council is launched. It is created by official order of Mayor Herbert Bautista in order to oversee the integration of all city programs and projects for the LGBT community. The Council is composed of notable individuals that promotes and advocates LGBT rights from different industry and profession. Also part of the Council are members of the Local Government sectors.
June 28 - The Inquirer reports that the country ranked as the 10th most gay-friendly in a global survey covering 39 countries, in which only 17 had majorities accepting homosexuality. Titled "The Global Divide on Homosexuality," the survey conducted by the Pew Research Center shows that 73 percent of adult Filipinos agreed with the statement that "homosexuality should be accepted by society," up by nine percentage points from 64 percent in 2002.
However, the results are downplayed by Jonas Bagas, executive director of the TLF Share Collective, who said, "I think that the study only reflects the perceived acceptance of the LGBT community based on the high visibility of gay entertainers. It’s acceptance [that is] contingent on how you fit the acceptable stereotype—the gay entertainer, the creative, talented bakla, the lesbian security guard."
Nov. 27 - Dec. 3 - InQCity Independent Pride Film Festival. One promotional blurb said this: "Headed by the Father of Pinoy Queer Cinema himself, Director Cris Pablo promises everyone a list of most sought after films for the family and for LGBT."
2014
June 21 - Rev. Agbayani leads a mass gay wedding in QC.
August 7-10 - The National Conference and Meeting on Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity and Expression (SOGIE) is held in Butuan City.
October - The QC Council passes the "Gender Fair" City Ordinance. It prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation, gender identity and expression (Sogie) in the city. Bishop Emerson Beriones of the Orthodox Church says, "This is not the first in the Philippines, but the most comprehensive, the deepest, in protecting LGBT rights."
December 9-16 - Quezon City International Pink Film Festival held. It was the largest international film festival that features films that highlight the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) community.
December 13 - The first gay pride march in QC was held, in commemoration of the 20th anniversary of the first pride march in the Philippines. The event was organized by the QCPC and attended by about 4,000 members and supporters of the LGBT community.
According to council member Jeffklein Glodove, “QCPC defines
equality in all aspect of life. Equality in the workplace, social
services, and delivery of goods without any discrimination regardless of
gender identity and sexual orientation."
2015
June - Rev. Ceejay Agbayani Jr. leads a mass gay wedding in Project 8, Quezon City. CNN Philippines reports that Agbayani has presided over 600 LGBT weddings since 2006, and that he issues a certificate of marriage to each married couple.
2016
February - Congressman Manny Pacquiao expresses his stance against same-sex marriage. He is misquoted as saying that homosexuals are "worse than animals". LGBT celebrities (Vice Ganda, Aiza Sigeura, Boy Abunda) use this opportunity to demean those who are against the legalization of same-sex marriage. Pacquiao feels compelled to issue an apology for his choice of words, though he maintains his convictions.
April-June - The QCPC conducts an HIV/AIDS Seminar and Orientation in every baranggay of QC.
June 25 - Freedom in Christ Ministries rallies at the Metro Manila Pride March to ask for forgiveness on behalf of Christians and the church.
August 15 - Philippines AirAsia announces that it is open to transgender applicants for all vacant positions. According to Philippines AirAsia Chair Marianne B. Hontiveros,“The success of AirAsia is largely driven and inspired by people who dare to make a difference. In the weeks and months ahead, expect exciting times, significant changes and improvements from Philippines AirAsia as we are set to expand our operations, increase our fleet, launch new international flights, and introduce innovations.”
Taken from http://www.wsj.com/articles/nba-pulls-all-star-game-from-charlotte-over-north-carolina-bathroom-law-1469138932
Basketball is a big thing in the Philippines, especially the NBA. I'm not a fan myself, just a casual and occasional spectator. But there was an interesting and important development earlier this month, when the NBA decided to pull its all-star game from Charlotte in North Carolina, due to the state's bathroom law.
No, that wasn't a typo.
If you haven't been following the unfolding of the moral revolution in the U.S. in recent years, you might be wondering, What in the world does the NBA have to do with bathrooms? And what's a "bathroom law"?!
In order to understand what's going on here, we need to take a quick peek at the big picture.
The Moral Revolution in the U.S.
There has been a strong, well-funded, politically powerful, and hugely successful movement in the U.S. to reject all vestiges of Christian influence in the government and other public institutions. This is part of the secularization of their society. In a totally secular state, religion would have absolutely no place in the public square, because it would be dismissed as an entirely private thing. Europe has led the way in this, and America has been heading down that path at frantic speed.
Part of the moral revolution is the promotion of the LGBTQA+ agenda (lesbian-gay-bisexual-transgender-queer-androgenous-???), which is forcing American society to reinvent itself in order to accommodate the demands of a very small minority of its citizens (about 3%). Here are some examples of what's been happening.
In April 2014, the U.S. Department of Education issued a statement that LGBT students would be protected from "discrimination" under Title IX of the Education Ammendments of 1972. It is a federal civil rights law that prohibits discrimination on
the basis of sex in all educational institutions that receive federal funding.
In March this year, big business firmly took a side when it formed the Business Coalition for the Equality Act -- a group of about 60 companies including Apple, Microsoft, Nike, Google, Amazon, Best Buy, Pepsi, Coke, Accenture, and Facebook -- which seeks additional federal protection for LGBTs.
House Bill 2
One of the recent developments in the moral revolution has to do with public bathrooms. The proponents of the LGBT agenda are now determined to outlaw the traditional assignment of bathrooms as being for either "males" or "females".
Of course, they failed to consider how difficult it would be for, say, 18 girls to use the ladies' locker room in a New York recreation center after they saw a bearded man in the changing room.
To protect its citizens from such situations, the government of North Carolina issued in May this year law called "House Bill 2". HB2 requires people to use the public bathroom that accords with the sex they were assigned at birth.
Immediately, the Department of Justice warned North Carolina that its "discriminatory" law violated the civil rights of LGBTs and could mean the loss of millions of dollars in federal funds.
The NBA's Boycott
The NBA has recently made clear that it supports the LGBT agenda and opposes HB2. As early as April, NBA Commissioner Adam Silver called the legislation "problematic". Consequently, it decided to boycott and humiliate North Carolina by canceling its all-star game in the state's largest city. The league issued this statement,
While we recognize that the NBA cannot choose
the law in every city, state, and country in which we do business, we do
not believe we can successfully host our All-Star festivities in
Charlotte in the climate created by HB2.
The move is estimated to have cost the state $100,000,000 in potential revenue, a significant loss for any state. This is a clear signal to all those who oppose the pro-LGBT agenda: "Surrender unconditionally, or suffer the consequences."
What's more, the NBA is actually being inconsistent with its own sex and gender policies. Tami Fitzgerald, the Executive Director of the NC Values Commission, issued this critique:
The League has decided that advancing a political agenda that embraces
allowing grown men into the bathrooms and showers of young girls is more
important than protecting the privacy and safety of their fans. ...
20 years ago this year, the NBA recognized the innate biological
differences between men and women and created the WNBA to provide
opportunities for women to play a sport they love with other women.
Today, the NBA denies these
biological differences and seeks to force women to compromise their
privacy and safety in the stadiums in which their leagues play.
This is hypocrisy at its worse and
yet another example of the bullying and deceitful tactics opponents of
privacy and freedom are making.
The NBA should be ashamed of
itself for using North Carolina--particularly its young girls--as a
political pawn for an out-of-touch agenda that compromises both dignity
interests and privacy rights. The NBA issued guidance last year that
teams and leagues must invest more in family-friendly sponsorships and
activation campaigns to make their events more family-friendly.
And let's remember that all this fuss has come about because of the insane demands of the moral revolution to turn its society upside-down so that 3% of its population wouldn't feel bad when 18 teenage girls can't use the women's changing room for fear of running into a bearded man.
How Should Christians Respond?
Evangelicals can't condone the stance that the NBA has taken against religious freedom in favor of LGBT “rights”. But what would that mean, in practical terms? I don't think there's any one response that all Christians, everywhere, should take. Since the Bible doesn't address this situation directly, it's up to us to inform ourselves and decide according to conscience.
CNN Philippines reported the failed attempt to promote a movie that purportedly talks about this theme.
A young girl named Dalisay lives in a small town and falls in love for the first time with a woman. The older woman, Nida, owns a sari-sari store in their town. Nida teaches Dalisay about love, relationships, and how the rythm of nature affects the human soul. Italian producer and director of photography, Lorenzo Galanti, who is in Manila to launch Dalisay, wants to veer away from the gay movie tag. He calls is a 'genderless love story.'
Galanti, for his part, was disappointed that there were no takers for his movie in the Philippines.
"It seems that genderless love is a topic that many peoples doesn't (sic) like to talk about.... The standard market doesn't want to dare. But it's not daring. It's to be updated."
Here is a perfect example of the man-centered, relativistic perspective on gender that is prevalent in the West. Gender is just a human invention, and if so, then love really has nothing to do with gender. It shows just how far removed Western society now is from God's design for romantic, sexual love. They don't agree that is should be confined to marriage. Nor do they agree that it should be between a man and a woman. And now they don't even agree that gender has any significance whatsoever. And, as Galanti reminds us, there are more and more people who think that to support this vision of human society is not daring. It's simply to be updated. And, in Galanti's mind, this is to be sexually and morally dalisay ("pure").
A Case of "Genderless Love"?
Lest we think that this kind of thinking is far from home, let's turn to a related story, this time involving a Filipino celebrity couple.
Joey Mead, a Filipino-Iranian model and host of Asia's Next Top Model, would heartily agree with Galanti, I think. And so would her husband, Ian King -- or, as he now likes to identify himself, the transgender woman, Angelina King.
The couple has been receiving praise from netizens, friends and family members on social media. For example, Twitter user, dude_its_jayv wrote, "Life is too short not to be who you are!" James Deakin from Topgear tweeted, "Gotta say, I'm proud of how people are taking this. There's hope. #LoveWins indeed." In a separate post, he also wrote, "Hey, if you ain't hurting anyone and it makes you happy, it's all the same to me. Good luck, Ian/Angie."
That last post is probably the most common pro-LGBTQ argument being circulated by pop culture and mass media today. There's too much one could say, so I'll limit myself to two points.
First, "be true to yourself" may sound nice, but most of the people who approve of it don't actually believe it. I'm sure they wouldn't support those who recently launched attacks in Turkey, Bangladesh, Yemen, Iraq, and most recently, Saudi Arabia, or the man who killed over 40 people in a gay bar and night club in Orlando earlier this month. But these jihadists could just as easily have claimed that they were being true to themselves and their faith!
Second, and in connection to the first point, advocates of moral relativism understand that it's impossible to be endlessly relativistic, without any moral standards whatsoever. So, the common qualification is it's fine to do what you want "if you ain't hurting anyone". The problem with that standard is it's completely subjective and arbitrary. Those who deny universal moral standards forfeit their right to speak out against moral atrocities because that would require, you guessed it, a universal moral standard. So when they condemn anyone for evil acts, on any basis other than their mere personal opinion, they do so without any intellectual integrity.
Meanwhile, Christians must continue to call sexually immoral people to repent and believe in Christ, not because we (as we're often accused) like to impose our beliefs on others, but because we too, were just as separated from God as they are, but were saved by God's undeserved grace. Now, we have the privilege and responsibility to point people to that same grace. But that grace must be received through faith, saving faith includes repentance, and a person can't repent unless he/she knows that he/she has actually sinned.
1. Initiating Substantial Discussions 
