I agree.
The horse series is often presented as proof of Evolution. The number of toes in foreleg and hind leg supposedly decreased as the horse evolved, and the size supposedly increased from a small doglike horse to a large modern horse. Yet three-toed horses have been found with one-toed horses, showing they lived at the same time. And there are tiny living Fallabella horses only 17 inches ( 43 centimeters) tall.
What should be the attitude of the church toward homosexuals and homosexuality?
For the Bible-believing Christian, there can be no doubt that homosexuality is a grievous sin in the sight of God. The awful catalogue in the first chapter of Romans of the sins practiced by the ancient pagan world began with this sin:
For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another: men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet.
–Romans 1:26,27 (KJV)
The term “sodomy,” named after the inhabitants of Sodom whose homosexual perversions caused God to rain fire and brimstone on their city in the days of Abraham (Genesis 19:4,5,12,24), has for thousands of years been synonymous with this unique form of ungodliness. That it is basically a sin of rebellion against God is evident from the above passage in Romans.
The “cause” for which God “gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonor their own bodies between themselves” was that they had decided to “worship and serve creation more than the Creator” (Romans 1:24-25 - KJV).
Because such behavior is essentially animalistic, rather than human, sodomites are actually called “dogs” in the Bible. Note the strong prohibition in the Old Testament theocracy established under Moses.
There shall be no whore of the daughters of Israel, nor a sodomite of the sons of Israel. Thou shalt not bring the hire of a whore, or the price of a dog, into the house of the Lord thy God for any vow: for even both these are an abomination unto the Lord thy God.
–Deuteronomy 23:17,18 (KJV)
We can be sure that, if these practices were abominations to God then, He has not changed His opinion about them today.
The same terminology appears in the description of the holy city in the last chapter of the Bible.
Blessed are they that do His commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city. For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.
–Revelation 22:14-15 (KJV)
Thus, sodomites—like sorcerers, whoremongers (same word as “fornicators”), murderers, idolaters and lovers of lies—should undoubtedly also be excluded from church fellowship. If such a person, professing to be a Christian, persists in his sin, he should be put out of the church, like the one who had committed fornication with his stepmother (I Corinthians 5:1).
Now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner, with such an one no not to eat— Therefore, put away from yourselves that wicked person.
–I Corinthians 5:11, 13 (KJV)
Homosexuality, like all other types of fornication, has no place in the family of God. Regardless of what modern promoters of “gay liberation” might wish to believe, sexual perversions are not inherited genetically but rather are learned behaviors and willful sins. Like alcoholism and other such sins of the flesh, they may become very difficult to give up for those who have been enslaved by them, but God is able to give deliverance to any who sincerely desire true freedom and salvation.
To “straight” Christians in the church, however, the familiar old admonition to “hate the sin, but love the sinner” surely applies in such cases. Homosexuals, long accustomed to being looked upon with disgust by most people, are understandably anxious for acceptance by society. Nevertheless, they must not be encouraged to continue in their wickedness, for it may well cost them their eternal souls. Instead, they need to be “loved into the kingdom,” being delivered first of all from their rebellion against God, then to Christ for salvation and cleansing.
Notice Paul's testimony concerning the very real possibility of such deliverance:
Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, —shall inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.
–I Corinthians 6:9-11 (KJV)
When there is true repentance and the sin is forsaken, then such a person should be lovingly received into the fellowship of believers (or back into that fellowship, if previously excommunicated), like any other repentant and believing sinner. This is the example given in the case of the incestuous Corinthian:
Sufficient to such a man is this punishment, which was inflicted of many. So that contrariwise ye ought rather to forgive him, and comfort him, lest perhaps such a one should be swallowed up with overmuch sorrow. Wherefore I beseech you that you would confirm your love toward him.
–II Corinthians 2:6-8 (KJV)
In spite of great pressure today from humanists and other liberals to get homosexuality recognized as an acceptable—if not even preferable—life style, the Bible makes it plain that it is really unnatural and animalistic wickedness that must be rejected by true Christians.
At the same time, we cannot forget that Christ died for their sins, as well as ours. They are still objects of His sacrificial love, and we should seek earnestly to bring them to Him for cleansing and deliverance.
“Why did God make some people ugly and others good looking? It’s not fair. I find myself looking in the mirror and wondering why I have to be so ugly and have such an ugly body when all my friends are pretty and have nice bodies. Why was God unfair to me like this?
—Erin”
Thank you for your honesty, Erin. I know a lot of teenagers feel the same way you do. You are obviously angry at God because you believe that He has cheated you by not giving you a better face and body.
And because you’ve been honest and direct with me, let me be honest with you—God doesn’t deal with us unfairly. He deals with us only in love. If He dealt with fairness we would never be born. Instead, He would judge us for all the sins He know we will commit. The fact you are alive and healthy means God has been gracious with you.
I am aware the question in this article’s title presupposes a change of some sort is necessary. My presupposition is grounded in the authority of God’s Word. Secondary to that—I am a Christian and a former homosexual.
Having now used that inadequate and puzzling term former homosexual, let me try to decipher the lingo and properly answer the question.
Moving the fridge
A story will help. A man glances out his home window and sees his neighbor. The neighbor has his pick-up truck backed to his side door, both the storm and main doors are propped open and a refrigerator blocks the doorway. Obviously the fridge is being moved and help is needed, so the friendly onlooker rushes to help his red-faced neighbor.
“Need a hand with that refrigerator, Fred?” asks Steven as he throws himself into the task. “Sure do! This thing weighs more than I thought!”
Fred and Steven throw their muscular arms around the appliance. With sweat rolling down their faces, they grunt and strain as the fridge moves a quarter of an inch then stops. They reposition their arms. The fridge barely sways even though both men are winded. After wrestling with the stubborn refrigerator for a full ten minutes, Steven gasps “Fred, I don’t believe we’re ever going to get this thing in the house.” “In the house!” exclaims Fred, “I’m trying to get it in the truck!”
The point is apparent—without a clear and focused understating of what direction the homosexual needs to go, he will progress no further than the refrigerator.
What needs to change?
An illustration will help. Imagine a very thin lady seated at a dinner table. She fidgets with her food, spoons it from one side of her plate to the other, eats little if anything, then excuses herself from the table.
“How can a visibly gaunt woman eat so little or not at all?”, we ask. Our observation could lead us to two premises—either she dislikes food or she is not hungry. If we accept the first premise—that she dislikes food—our sympathetic approach might include a variety of recommendations.
We inquire about the type of food she does like—maybe fast food, Mexican or Chinese. If not perhaps the immaculate look of a seven-course meal appeals to her appetite. Perchance she prefers her food prepared a certain way—broiled versus fried, rare versus well done. If none of these recommendations help, she could have sitophobia—a fear of food.
Let’s now assume the second premise—that she is not hungry. If this suspicion is true she may be suffering from a malfunctioning metabolism. We make a doctor’s appointment for her. The physician suspects a thyroid condition and orders blood work. And it’s possible she has hypogeusia—a diminished sense of taste.
But as persistent as we’ve been, all approaches make little difference in this lady’s eating habits, or lack thereof. She eats very little and infrequently! Our methods have been genuine, compassionate, and justifiable. We have devoted considerable time in our quest to correct the dilemma, but to no avail.
The puzzle comes together
However, if we learn this woman is anorexic, our approach changes dramatically and immediately. We realize our initial assumptions and strategies are ludicrous and laughable because they do not bear on the primary issue—a distorted self image.
When this self-starved lady looks in the mirror she sees an obese lady looking back and no amount of persuasion will convince her otherwise.
When this primary issue is addressed, her food intake as well as the frequency of her eating increases. But take note—her increased eating is a byproduct of confronting the main issue—a distorted self-image. And I use the term image not only from a clinical perspective but a biblical one. Genesis 1:26-27 reads,
“And God said, ‘Let us make man in our image, after our likeness’, So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.” (Emphasis added)
Now the analogy
How does this illustration apply to the homosexual condition? Just as it is absurd for the anorexic’s family and friends to focus on trying to make her eat, so it is absurd for churches to try and make the homosexual heterosexual.
Society in general and churches in particular mistakenly believe freedom from homosexuality is marrying, having 2.3 children and a dog in the back yard. A 2001 secular study on the possibility of change shows the depth of this ingrained “doctrine.” Dr Robert Spitzer, a Columbia University professor interviewed men and women who said they used to be homosexual; I was one of many he questioned. As beneficial as his study was and as much as I appreciate the visibility it gave to change, his study measured heterosexual function of the former homosexual—again missing the real issue.
“But” you ask, “don’t homosexuals need to become heterosexuals?” No! Scripture never states nor implies all people must be heterosexual; it does say explicitly, however, that we are to avoid all forms of sexual immorality, which includes homosexuality. With that in mind have we not at times given the impression that homosexuals must “convert” to heterosexuality? Jesus did not say “Go and make [heterosexuals]”; He said “go and make disciples.”
The opposite of homosexuality is holiness
“But” you ask, “isn’t heterosexuality the opposite of homosexuality?” No! The opposite of homosexuality is holiness!
As I wrote earlier, the term former homosexual is inadequate if not inappropriate. We mistakenly think a person who has found freedom from same-sex attractions is now heterosexual. The former homosexual man or woman may now experience heterosexual feelings, but heterosexuality should never be his nor the churches’ goal. Heterosexuality is in many cases, but not all, a byproduct of the homosexual’s dealing with the primary issues—a distorted self-image and faulty thinking—both of which Satan uses to “gain control.”
Singleness is not a sin, immorality is
The church will do well to remember that singleness is not a sin, immorality is.
What all this means is that most of churches’ advice to the homosexual misses the mark entirely!
Advice well-meant, but wrong
Telling an adult gay son “you just need to date more; you haven’t met the right girl” is senseless. Suggesting your lesbian friend “marry, settle down and everything will work out” is imprudent. Many gay men and women have married, thinking marriage will “heal” them and in most cases the consequences have been disastrous.
Some, hopefully not Christians, suggest a gay man “find a woman who can make you a man.” While I’ve never heard a Christian give such advice, I did have a twenty-seven year old gay man share the following with me. He said he was fifteen when his “Christian” father learned of his homosexual struggle. To “help” his son the father bought him a subscription to Playboy magazine. That’s equivalent to serving roast duck to the anorexic.
God does not heal one form of immorality with another form of immorality! How effective is a machine gun against a tidal wave?
“For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms” (Eph. 6:12).
One married struggler told me his well-meaning pastor recommended he have more sex with his wife. Although the Bible does command conjugal rights (I Cor. 7:3-4), the pastor’s advice bypassed the real issue.
Another pastor prayed with an unusually handsome and struggling man, then told him “I’ve got a really nice girl in the church I want you to meet.”
A Christian friend who knows my testimony, met my wife Lisa and said “I can see why you left homosexuality; your wife is beautiful.” While he is correct that Lisa is beautiful, his statement, like so many, represents a global ignorance on the subject. If attractive women were the remedy for male homosexuality, there would be no gay men.
Many gay men ask me how to cultivate a romantic/sexual attraction to women. I tell them that is not the issue; the issue is a distorted/broken image. (I have often thought how devious our adversary is. He not only confuses men and women regarding their sexual identity, he also confuses them and the church as to what healing really is, thus compounding the problem.)
By dealing with the primary issue, gay men begin to see themselves as masculine and lesbians begin to see themselves as feminine; the same-sex attractions diminish and in many cases opposite-sex attractions occur.
Not a means to an end
During my own journey out of homosexuality I made a significant discovery—Jesus Christ is not a means to an end. He is the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End. I did not go to Christ to get something else, namely heterosexuality. I went to Christ to get HIM!
When we learn this truth, we will witness prison doors falling off their hinges and chains disintegrating.
The issue of homosexual behavior has had a lot of publicity of late. Homosexuals say that the slaves have been freed and women have been liberated, so gay rights are long overdue. Society does seem to be moving in that direction. Many homosexuals are “coming out” and openly declaring their homosexuality. In many parts of the western world, homosexual couples receive the same recognition as heterosexual couples with regard to social security benefits. Some church leaders are giving their blessing to homosexual relationships, homosexual church members and even homosexual ministers.
Many homosexuals’ claim that
They are made that way.
Homosexuality is of no harm to the participants or to anyone else.
If it feels right to those involved, it is nobody else’s business.
Homosexual relationships and heterosexual relationships are equally valid. (Some even claim that the Bible condones homosexual relationships.)
Made that way?
Since other groups who have been discriminated against (such as women, blacks and the disabled) have been given equal opportunity, homosexuals claim that they, too, should be liberated. However, as one Christian expert has said
“Gender, race and impairment all relate to what a person is, whereas homosexuality relates to what a person does.”1
In contrast, homosexuals claim that scientific studies have shown that there is a biological basis for homosexuality.
Three main studies are cited by “gay rights” activists in support of their argument2Hamer’s X-chromosome research,3 LeVay’s study of the hypothalamus,4 and Bailey and Pillard’s study of identical twins who were homosexuals.5
In all three cases, the researchers had a vested interest in obtaining a certain outcome because they were homosexuals themselves. More importantly, their studies did not stand up to scientific scrutiny by other researchers. Also, “the media typically do not explain the methodological flaws in these studies, and they typically oversimplify the results.”6 There is no reliable evidence to date that homosexual behavior is determined by a person’s genes.
To the extent that biological or social factors may contribute to a person’s bent toward homosexual behavior, this does not excuse it. Some people have a strong bent towards stealing or abuse of alcohol, but they still choose to engage or not engage in this behavior and the law rightly holds them accountable.
The final report of the Baptist Union of Western Australia (BUWA) Task Force on Human Sexuality states “that a person becomes a homosexual ultimately by choosing to be involved in same-sex activity— This is in contrast to innate characteristics such as gender and ethnicity.”7 The report affirms that “the Bible is clear that sin involves choice, and it unequivocally condemns homosexual behavior as sin.”7
The foundational teaching on marriage and sexual issues is found in Genesis chapters 1 and 2. When Jesus was questioned about marriage, He referred to these 2 chapters (Matthew 19:1-12; Mark 10:1-12). Genesis teaches us that “male and female He created them” (Genesis 1:27). We were created to a plan, male and female complementing each other. That is, God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve, nor Madam and Eve.
Genesis also teaches that God instituted and designed marriage between a man and a woman (Genesis 2:18-25). There are a number of reasons why He did so.
The complementary structure of the male and female anatomy is obviously designed for the normal husband-wife relationships. Clearly, design in human biology supports heterosexuality and contradicts homosexuality.
The combination of male and female enables man (and the animals) to produce and nurture offspring as commanded in Genesis 1:28 “Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth.” This command is repeated to Noah after the Flood (Genesis 8:15-17).
But procreation is not the only reason God made humans as sexual beings. The BUWA report affirms “that sexual intimacy between husband and wife is good, and is intended by God for bonding, pleasure and procreation.”7
Thirdly, God gave man and woman complementary roles in order to strengthen the family unit. Woman was to be the helper that man needed (Genesis 2:18). However, the woman’s role as the helpmate is certainly not an inferior one. The enterprising, God-fearing woman in Proverbs 31:10-31 is an inspiring role model.
No harm?
Andrew Lansdown points out that “homosexual activity is notoriously disease-prone. In addition to diseases associated with heterosexual promiscuity, homosexual actions facilitate the transmission of anal herpes, hepatitis B, intestinal parasites, Kaposi’s Sarcoma and AIDS.”1 Research on the life expectancy of a group of homosexual men in Canada in the early 1990s indicated that they could expect 8-21 years less lifespan than other men.8
Effect on others
Secular psychologists assure us that “children raised in lesbian and gay households are similar to children raised in heterosexual households on characteristics such as intelligence, development, moral judgments, self-concepts, social competence and gender identity.”6 The humanists have, however, forgotten one important ingredient.
“Train up a child in the way he should go, and when he is old he will not depart from it” (Proverbs 22:6).
You cannot faithfully teach God’s Word to your children while living a lifestyle specifically condemned by God’s Word. All Christians are sinners forgiven by God’s grace, but living in a homosexual relationship constitutes habitual, unrepented sin.
Nobody else’s business?
Gay activists claim that homosexual activity is nobody’s business other than those involved in the relationship. However, this is not true. God, our Designer and Creator, has authority over all aspects of our lives. He makes the rules, and He quite specifically forbids homosexual behavior.
“You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination” (Leviticus 18:22; see also Leviticus 20:13).
Disobedience of such a clear command indicates rejection of God’s authority.
Some people argue that the Old Testament law (including Leviticus 18 and 20) was superseded with the coming of Christ. However, we should at least consider as binding those aspects of the law that are renewed in the New Testament. The teaching of Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 was certainly reaffirmed in the New Testament.
Equally valid?
Some people claim that homosexual behavior was only condemned in the Bible because it was associated with idolatry (e.g., 1 Kings 14:24). However, it is clearly condemned apart from idolatry as well (e.g,. Leviticus 18:22). It is described in Scripture as an unnatural, immoral perversion.
“For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another—” (Romans 1:26-27).
The Greek word arsenokoitai used in 1 Timothy 1:10 literally means “men who sleep with men.” It is the same Greek word used for “homosexual offender” in 1 Corinthians 6:9, variously translated as “abusers of themselves with mankind” (KJV), homosexuals (NASB) or homosexual offender (NIV).
Some people claim that the sin involved in Sodom was rejecting hospitality customs or selfishness rather than homosexual behavior. Certainly, the outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah was great and their reported sin was grievous to God (Genesis 18:20). God sent angels to Sodom and—
“Now before they lay down, the men of the city, the men of Sodom, both old and young, all the people from every quarter, surrounded the house. And they called to Lot and said to him, Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us that we may have sex with them” (Genesis 19:4-5).
“While it is true that the Hebrew word yadha does not necessarily mean ‘to have sex with,’ nonetheless in the context of Sodom and Gommorah, it clearly had this meaning. —It means ‘to know sexually’ in this very chapter when Lot refers to his two daughters not having “known” a man (19:8).”9 You would not offer virgins to appease a mob if their sin was lack of hospitality, but only if their desire was sexual.
Although Ezekiel 16:49 condemns Sodom for its selfishness with regard to poverty, etc., this does not contradict its condemnation for homosexual practices. “The very next verse of Ezekiel (verse 50) calls their sin an ‘abomination.’ This is the same Hebrew word used to describe homosexual sins in Leviticus 18:22.”10
It is also used in Scripture to describe such things like the practice of offering children to Moloch, but never such things as mere selfishness or lack of hospitality. Even in legal parlance, the word used to refer to one aspect of homosexual practice is ‘sodomy.’
Another argument is that Jonathon and David were homosexuals as “Jonathan loved David” (1 Sam. 18:3), that Jonathan stripped in David’s presence (18:4), [and] that they kissed each other (20:41).11
However, “David’s love for Jonathan was not sexual (erotic) but a friendship (philic) love. And Jonathan did not strip himself of all his clothes, but only of his armor and royal robe (1 Sam. 18:4).”12 Also, a kiss was a normal greeting in that day, such as when Judas kissed Jesus. In several cultures today, men normally greet each other with a kiss, too. Further, David’s love for his wives, especially Bathsheba (2 Samuel 11), clearly reveals his heterosexual orientation.
Isaiah 56:3 states that eunuchs will not be excluded from God’s presence (“my temple”), but practicing homosexuals are not eunuchs. Eunuchs have no sexual relations at all.
Other Scriptural arguments for homosexuality can similarly be easily refuted. It is clear that heterosexual marriage is the only form of marriage sanctioned in the Bible and that homosexual practice is always condemned.
[See: What does the Bible say about same sex marriages? Answer]
Punishment
The Bible not only describes homosexual behavior as detestable, but it also calls for the punishment of those involved (Leviticus 20:13). Their unrepentant attitude caused God to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 19:24-25).
Just as homosexual conduct has been punished in the past, so it will also be punished by God in the future.
“—Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Corinthians 6:9-10).
Hope
However, there is hope for the homosexual. God forgives and cleanses a person who repents and turns from their sin, including the sin of homosexual behavior (1 Corinthians 6:11). As well as forgiveness, God’s grace brings with it the power to live a life that is pleasing to God (Romans 6:6-7). If repentance and reform are genuine, prior homosexual actions should not be a bar to church membership or ministry, as all Christians are reformed sinners.
“Liberal” churches espouse tolerance of homosexual behavior in the name of “love.” They plug for the acceptance of homosexual conduct as normal, “because they can’t help it.” They are not only wrong about the latter, but they are actually not being at all loving towards homosexuals, because, contrary to the Bible, they reduce the homosexual person to the level of an animal, driven by instinct. In removing moral responsibility from the person, they dehumanize them, whereas the Bible says we are made in the image of God (Genesis 1:26-27), with the power of moral choice.
Furthermore, the gospel proclaims liberation from the bondage of sin, including homosexual sin, whereas the “liberals” tell the homosexual that they cannot help it, and they can’t help them either, so they will accept them as they are! However, many a person has been gloriously rescued from the bondage of homosexual sin (and other sin) by the power of the Holy Spirit, but only Bible-believing Christians can offer such hope.
Conclusion
As with all moral issues, our beliefs about our origin determine our attitude. If we believe that we arose from slime by a combination of random chance events and the struggle for survival, it is understandable to say that there is no higher authority, and we can make our own rules. However, if there is a loving God who planned us and gave commands for us to follow, then we must do so. God has set forth His standards in the Bible, beginning with the foundational teaching in the book of Genesis.
One huge difference between this man and every other man and woman, or boy and girl, is that Jesus is sinless. We humans are full of sin. We sin every day. Jesus never did anything wrong, not even once. No matter what temptations came to him, he refused to sin. He has always remained pure and perfect.
Isn’t it amazing to think about?! Our Creator walked among us. Like us, our Almighty God smelled the flowers and touched the animals that he had created. He loved boys and girls.
As a man, God experienced the same temptations that we feel (Hebrews 2:18). He suffered the same kind of physical pains that we suffer with. He also experienced emotional pain. He even wept about the city of Jerusalem (John 11:35). He was ignored, unappreciated, unloved, misunderstood, and even despised—even though he did nothing wrong, and always loved everyone (1 Peter 2:23). Not only is Jesus Christ the greatest man that ever lived; he is our Creator. He deserved all glory and honor!
His body really did die. The Roman soldiers made sure of that. They were experts at killing people.
Jesus Christ's physical body was 100-percent human, not just part human. Our bodies can die, and so could his. When we die, our physical body dies, but our soul and spirit remain. They are eternal; they never die. The same is true of Jesus Christ. His physical body died, but his inner self is eternal and did not die.
Is Jesus alive today?
Yes, he is. Thousands of people saw him alive again. The Bible is very clear; Jesus Christ's physical body is no longer dead. He is alive today. The Bible records 11 times when people saw him.
How can this be?
Jesus is more than a man. Although he is 100-percent human, he is also 100% God, the Creator of the universe. He is all-powerful. Although evil men killed his physical body, he easily had the power to restore life to his body again.
When his body came alive, he walked out of his tomb, completely healthy and strong.
As you can imagine, when this happened in the darkness, it really frightened the Roman soldiers who were guarding his tomb to keep people away. They were surprised and terrified! It was suddenly very obvious that Jesus was not merely a man. He is God, with power over life and death.
The people of Jerusalem certainly should have known this already. Jesus had proved it many times before. He raised many people from the dead. One was a young girl. Another was a man who had been dead and buried for days.
Here's something else that is wonderful. Did you know that the moment that Jesus Christ's physical body died, he brought many dead people to life in the city of Jerusalem? It's true! The people were alive and healthy again. Many people saw them in the streets and homes of that great city (Matthew 27:52-53), and were so glad to see them again. These were not ghosts (there are no such things). These were living, breathing people, seen by many. They had been dead, some perhaps for years, and now they were alive because of Jesus’ great power![1]
What will happen when someone you love dies, or when you die?
Here is a fact that is even more amazing! Everyone who dies and is a true follower of Jesus Christ will experience this same, awesome, life-giving power. Jesus will eventually give them their body back again—alive, heathy and strong—a glorious body. Won’t that be wonderful! Millions and perhaps billions of people will be made alive again. Mothers and fathers, brothers and sisters, grandparents—every person that is a true follower of Jesus will be alive again—forever.
For all of us who are Christians, death is not permanent. When our loved ones in Christ die, we can know for certain that we will see them alive again.
You can be one of those people! If you haven't already done so. Admit that you are a sinner that has broken the Law and deserves punishment and is lost without him. Accept his free gift of salvation and life. Become a faithful follower of Jesus Christ, the Lord and Giver of Life.
Personally, I think kids should avoid this show. It's not all bad, really. There are some good things to say about it: good vs. evil, etc. But the problem grows as the episodes progress. There are lesbian characters, homosexuals, transvestites and other gender-benders. The Sailor Scouts are usually wearing skirts that would reveal private body parts, if they actually had any.
Another problem that is typical of programming like this that attracts children, regardless of whether it was intended to or not: children will look up Sailor Moon on the Internet and find a Pandora's box of filth. Fans of the show submit “fanfics” or stories about the cartoon characters. They often include grotesquely graphic lesbian scenes between the cartoon characters.
I'm sorry I was ever ignorant enough to believe that a show that appears to be made for children is actually suitable for children. I'm also sorry that I believed that having an internet filter on my computer would filter out this kind of filth. It doesn't always. Better to not let your kids get hung up on the show.
One of the problems I have with “Lilo and Stitch”] is Disney’s definition of “family.” I do empathize with two orphaned sisters, but this is a typical Disney backstory. We see it over and over again—the absence of parents. We also see the family redefined to include an adopted genetically engineered alien and a cute boyfriend. It is the slick political blending of “It takes a village to raise an alien” and “Leave no alien behind.” Once again pity overpowers our sense of reason and we miss the long-term implications of cloning as a solution for adoptive parents.
We, also, miss current campaign to redefine family as any collection of individuals that love each other. My final problem is in the area of imitative behavior. I watched Lilo in her frustration fight with a girl and then bite her on the arm. The next day I was in Wal-mart and observed a girl bite her brother on the arm after calling him one of the names reinforced in this film “stupid head.” The mother was in horror and asked her daughter where she learned such inappropriate behavior. She replied that she saw Lilo do it when yesterday when Grandma took them to the movies. This is only one of many scenes with behavior that is unacceptable. Our children deserve better role models. All I can say is “be careful little eyes what you see.” I strongly recommend parents to skip this one.
—Douglas Downs
A careful viewer would have noticed the unmasked attempt by Disney to promote their non-traditional “family” unit—what’s next, gay parents? In my opinion that child would have been better off in an adopted family than in this dysfunctional setting where the sister leaves her home alone with pots cooking on the stove. Also, the child (Lilo, who appears to be only about 8), had disgusting pictures hanging on her bedroom wall—half-dressed obese people in various positions including a rear-view of a large bottom, clad only in panties! Her language toward her sister and even a comment to the teenage boy about how her sister likes his (slang for rear end) is just simply inappropriate. Would you want your 8 year old daughter talking like that? My advice to Christian parents who truly care about keeping the crud out of.
My Ratings: [Very Offensive / 1½]
—Eileen, age 45
The problem is, witchcraft is not fantasy; it is a sinful reality in our world.
For older kids, this might be ok. But for our 4 year old we saw some episodes we did not feel comfortable having our child watch. Arthur (the program) tends to occasionally get on a soapbox on current issues. One episode I saw made those not in favor of "Harry Potter" type books look like fools: as if we were back in the day of book burnings and witch hunting. As one who firmly believes Potter's teachings are not in line with Scriptural principles, it comes as a slap in the face. I don't want my child being
Negative—I loved the first movie of Balto (part 1), but this one was WAY off! My brother got this film for Easter last year and we watched it together and I was very shocked to find out how saturated in New-Age Philosophy and mysticism it was! This was definitely NOT like the first Balto. I felt uncomfortable watching it and left to go read a book in my room. We should have sold it. I don’t recommend this movie to anyone, especially kids. I was disappointed and appalled!
My Ratings: [Very Offensive / 3]
—Syntarsus, age 19
CHANGING BELIEFS and VALUES
Barbara Whitehorse started seeking answers after her son asked a typical question: “Mom, can I get Pokémon cards? A lot of my friends from church have them.” Much as she wanted Matthew to have fun with his friends, she gave a loving refusal. Matthew’s tutor had already warned her that the Pokémon craze could stir interest in other kinds of occult role-playing games such as Dungeons and Dragons. At the time, she wondered if the tutor had just over-reacted to some harmless entertainment. After all, the cute little Pokémon creatures looked nothing like the dark demonic creatures of D&D. But when she learned that a local Christian school had banned them because of their link to the occult, she changed her mind. Later, during a recent party for Matthew, Barbara heard two of the boys discussing their little pocket monsters. One said, “I’ll just use my psychic powers.” Already, the world of fantasy had colored his real world. So when some of the kids wanted to watch the afternoon Pokémon cartoon on television, Barb again had to say “no.” It’s not easy to be parents these days.
Cecile DiNozzi would agree. Back in 1995, her son’s elementary school had found a new, exciting way to teach math. The Pound Ridge Elementary school was using Magic: the Gathering, the role-playing game called which, like Dungeons and Dragons, has built a cult following among people of all ages across the country. Mrs. DiNozzi refused to let her son participate in the “Magic club.” But a classmate gave him one of the magic cards, which he showed his mother. It was called “Soul exchange” and pictured spirits rising from graves. Like all the other cards in this ghastly game, it offered a morbid instruction: “Sacrifice a white creature.”
“What does “summon” mean?” he asked his mother after school one day.
“Summon? Why do you ask?”
He told her that during recess on the playground the children would “summon” the forces on the cards they collect by raising sticks into the air and saying, “Spirits enter me.” They call it “being possessed.”
Strange as it may sound to American ears, demonic possession is no longer confined to distant lands. Today, government schools from coast to coast are teaching students the skills once reserved for the tribal witchdoctor or shaman in distant lands. Children everywhere are learning the pagan formulas for invoking “angelic” or demonic spirits through multicultural education, popular books, movies, and television. It’s not surprising that deadly explosions of untamed violence suddenly erupt from “normal” teens across our land.
Occult role-playing games teach the same dangerous lessons. They also add a sense of personal power and authority through personal identification with godlike superheroes. Though the demonic realm hasn’t changed, today’s technology, media, and multicultural climate makes it easier to access, and harder than ever to resist its appeal.
Negative—My husband and I just returned from seeing this movie and we were very disturbed by it. I am surprised that no other Christian review Web site has mentioned the fact that the transformers that help win the battle are dragons. Really— dragons are the righteous ones, the symbol of Satan, (as per the Bible). That should be enough of a red flag, but wait it gets worse. We find out that the reason the opposing alien is hunting Prime is because his creator is upset with his creation due to the transformers not following his rules and Prime is to be returned to his creator.
What were the ceratopians really like?
Some dinosaurs, like the Triceratops, had bony spikes on their heads. Others had spikes on their backs and elsewhere. If basic types of horns and spikes like these were originally created by God, then we know something about their purpose. They were not meant for fighting other dinosaurs.
The head horns may have been used for getting food by lifting thick foliage. They could be used for poking, rooting or turning plants. Dinosaurs like the Triceratops had very strong jaws and replaceable teeth. Using their extremely strong jaw muscles, they could slice through very tough plants--even good-sized branches and roots. Dinosaurs like this could even have chewed on tree trunks.
Some insects have horns similar to those of dinosaurs. It is interesting that scientists used to think that the big, sharp horns of some great horned beetles were meant for stabbing other beetles. Actually, the horns are mostly used to pry or lift.
Do not see this movie. Like Harry Potter it is meant to appeal to kids and will only lead them astray using clever marketing techniques and product tie-ins. Furthermore, I find it unhealthy for our kids to go on thinking God created other planets and that they are alien robots inhabiting them. Once your kids see this movie they are going to want to play with Transformer toys, Legos, and all other sorts of toys that enable them to build robots like they saw in the movie. They will fantasize about other worlds that are not in the Biblical account of creation and believe that robots are created with life in the same way God made man. Our youth cannot help but be corrupted by such robot fantasies and it encourages them to grow up worshipping manmade technologies like robots. Obviously this has clear implications for other man-made creations, like stem cell research. We should not mess with Creation or with the story of it. If you want your kids to worship robotic life then take them to this movie. If you want them to know that God made man on the sixth day and stopped there—he didn’t make another planet filled with evil robots—then avoid this movie at all costs. Don’t be 'Decepticon'-ed by this movie.
It is said that Mussolini (the Italian dictator), once stood on a pinnacle and cried, "God, if you are there, strike me dead!" When God didn't immediately bow to his dictates, Mussolini then concluded that there was no God. However, his prayer was answered some time later.
Coupled with all the biblical, geological, and anthropological evidence for noah's flood, one is justified in regarding the Genesis account of the animals dispersing from a central point as perfectly reasonable. Not only that, but the biblical model provides an excellent framework for the scientific study of these questions.
[On Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows]
My daughter recently brought a borrowed copy of this movie home from school, and, as usual, I reviewed it before letting her watch it, and I must say I was disgusted. Having never heard of this movie before, I didn’t know what to expect. Black magic! Witchcraft flaunted, as if it were to be encouraged for children. The characters who were supposed to be the heroes were as satanic and as far from Christ as the villains.
For example the teenage girl Hermione used Satanic incantations against her innocent (and I assume Christian) parents, so she could leave home and run away with two boys. The small portion of wedding that we did see showed no sign of being a genuine wedding, in the eyes of The Lord, and when characters ate, no one said Grace or a Blessing of thanks! Further more, bewitched jewelery showed two of the children having sex!
My outrage at this film does not end here, but I do not have the will to list every transgression against Christ! I did not see the point of the film, at all; the story made no sense to me, characters came and went with no explanation as to who they were. There was no mention of God’s Heavenly Glory or The Saviour! As I’m sure you could imagine, I did not let my daughter see this filth, and I roundly scolded her for bringing into my home.
[Re: the movie 300]
I lived in Europe in the 80’s and was aghast at what the public felt was OK in films produced there. We have now descended to that low of a level where relativism reigns in the place of God in our hearts. I ask myself the question, 'would Jesus go see this movie?' and the answer is an emphatic no. Barb has said it beautifully, read her review. Do you go to a restaurant trash can to pick out the “good” stuff left in it and discount what else you have to wade through and then give a high rating to the contents of the can? Will you allow your children or worse, do you teach them to judge what they participate in based on whether other children or the culture are doing worse? Based on that relativism, it is OK to be hooked on cough medicine because others are addicted to heroin. I only reason I did not leave the theater at the first sex scene is to be able to review it. At points I did close my eyes and start conjugating verbs in Japanese it was that offensive. I agree with Barb, the film would not have been harmed at all if the sex and extreme violence were left out. I doubt I will ever go see an R movie again.
My Ratings: Extremely Offensive / 3
—Bob MacLean, age 58
I have seen “The Simpsons” on Fox before, so I went against better judgment and saw this film. The movie making quality was average. It contained the usual slapstick humor and quick witted joke the Simpson’s are known for. After watching it I felt the conviction of the Holy Spirit to repent. This film violated so many spiritual principles I don’t even know where to start. —The Bible tells us in Psalm 101 3-4 that “I will refuse to look at anything vile and vulgar” and to “reject perverse ideas and stay away from every evil.” When I need moral direction, I will read the Bible— if I’m in the mood to backslide or violate God’s principles I will watch “The Simpsons”.
My Ratings: Extremely Offensive / 3½
—Orrin K. Richards, age 29
[Kingdom of Heaven film review]
Who started the Crusades? If you think Christians, I would disagree. One man Urban pope II, started the Crusades. As a Christian, I do not have any of the same beliefs as Catholicism— I do not relate myself as a Christian to the Crusades. This movie never explained who started the crusades and why. If they mentioned the Pope started the crusades this would be an anti-Catholicism film. Instead of the truth, it made it sound as if the Christians started the Crusades. Very biased and makes me sick. If one would read the Koran, they would see a lot of scripture that is insane. The Muslims do not pray to the same god as my God. I do not believe in some things the Koran teaches.
I can go on and on giving history lessons. I know it was very brief and someone can easily disagree with me, but the fact is a Pope started the Crusades.
[Watchmen film review]
This movie was disgusting. After the movie ended, my husband and I, by God's kind and gentle conviction, repented. We are now forgiven, by God's mercy. The sex content was repulsive and on “Archie,” blasphemous. There is nothing of, pre-marital and/or extra-marital sex, about which to praise God.
This movie also endorsed the evil lies about peace on earth without Jesus, Who is Peace. The Bible is very clear, without Jesus, there can be no peace. He is also Truth. The Anti-christ, is one who will attempt to bring peace on earth without Truth. We all know Who will win eternally and who will lose forever.
We both had to avert our eyes in numerous scenes. The violence and the graphic crime scene (of the little girl), was just deliberate shock. Thank God, I didn't see any of it.
This movie is not for any Christian to see. It is beyond the boundary of food sacrificed to idols. It is filth to eat and drink and filthy rags into which we dress ourselves.
To create any kind of upward, complex organization in a closed system requires outside energy and outside information. Evolutionists maintain that the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics does not prevent Evolution on Earth, since this planet receives outside energy from the Sun. Thus, they suggest that the Sun's energy helped create the life of our beautiful planet. However, is the simple addition of energy all that is needed to accomplish this great feat?
Compare a living plant with a dead one. Can the simple addition of energy make a completely dead plant live?
A dead plant contains the same basic structures as a living plant. It once used the Sun's energy to temporarily increase its order and grow and produce stems, leaves, roots, and flowers - all beginning from a single seed.
If there is actually a powerful Evolutionary force at work in the universe, and if the open system of Earth makes all the difference, why does the Sun's energy not make a truly dead plant become alive again (assuming a sufficient supply of water, light, and the like)?
What actually happens when a dead plant receives energy from the Sun? The internal organization in the plant decreases; it tends to decay and break apart into its simplest components. The heat of the Sun only speeds the disorganization process.
[regarding Avatar]
Negative - This in 3D is incredible greatest eye experience in moves ever. But the crowd's don't comprehend the point of this move is the destruction of what truth. Gaia Worship is what at the heart of this move. Gaia Worship the modern vision of Pagan Religion and the Green movement,Global warming all related to each other. Avatar's planet Pandora is always called mother their God. Also, Liberal overtones like the military bad. Also they have the military calling the Avatar peoples as terrorist which is another liberal way of saying in the real world the military calls good people terrorist. The move used the term shock and awe and we know that term related to President Bush. Those that don't understand the truth of scripture lack knownledge to see truth and a lie.
My Ratings: Moral rating: Extremely Offensive / Moviemaking quality: 5
—Dan, age 50 (USA)
[Disney/Pixar's A Bug's Life]
There was something's in the movie that makes this movie, one that won't end up in my video collection. The first thing is the praying mantis is first seen meditating yoga style. Not something I won't to teach my kids. Second is when the praying mantis is performing his act he says he is using his psyche to pick someone for his trick and I wonder where he is suppose to be getting his power from to complete the trick if he is using his psyche for the first part. It only takes a brief look at Acts 16:16-18 to discover the source of psychic powers. His performance is new age to the fullest. No new age is getting in my house. Also you might want to look at all the phrases your kids will learn from this film. Phrases: “Shut up,” “You parasite,” “”Poo poo heads,” “Ingrates,” “Who ordered the poo poo platter?,” “You fight like a girl,” “Stupid,” “Loser,” “Screw up,” “Turn your butt off,” “Idiot,” “You moron,” and “You piece of dirt.”
—Sam McNear, age 28
[Disney/Pixar's A Bug's Life]
There is a lot of violence in this movie—so much fighting and verbal abuse. My 5 year old was frightened many times by the grasshopper's and I was bored after ½ hour. There always has to be a homosexual and religious theme in every Disney movie—hense the “Praying” Mantis and the ladybug who “gets in touch with his feminine side.” Disney is still trying to woe our children away from the Lord—do we care? Then let's continue to boycott on Disney.
—Ronni, age 36
My Husband and I took our 13 and 16 yr. old boys to see [Titanic] as a family outing before Christmas. We were shocked and disapointed that there was frontal nudity and blatant sex in this movie. Not to mention the porno drawings, foul language and the glorification of immorality that was throughout this movie. I am so sorry that we didn't walk out of this movie. I apologized to my boys that I took them to this movie and I certainly asked God for forgiveness for taking my boys to see pornography wrapped in such a pretty package. My question would be what part of pornography and immorality would Jesus say is tolerable for anyone at ANYage to see? How can we as Christians comfortably see this movie, ignore the sin and recommend it for others to see because of the lovely story and the great special effects? I am concerned that our standard of purity is so low. How can we call ourselves God's Children, when we live like the world and have no conscience toward sin if it is wrapped up so pretty. What would Jesus do or say?
Most people treat things like vampirism as fantasy and as make believe. The truth is that for many people vampirism is very real. I lead a ministry that seeks to help people who have been involved in witchcraft, occult, satanism, vampirism and other forms of darkness to find freedom. We don't go looking for people to tell them they need to be free. They come to us, desperate to find freedom from something that started as a curiosity.
I've dealt with 4 people who actually were intimately involved with literal vampires. All of them were either ended up in lock down mental institutions or one was in a federal prison. Here in the western world, we downplay the reality of what Jesus dealt with on a daily basis, which is the reality of evil spirits. Jesus cast out evil spirits and trained his followers to do so. Vampirism is not specifically mentioned in the bible but anyone who is willing to search will find the occult origins and can see that their is nothing Christian about vampirism. It is not fantasy for a lot more young people than you would realize. Kids become fascinated by something while reading the books then dabble in what they are fascinated by.
Parents don't be fooled. Your kids are trying the stuff they are reading a whole lot more than you realize. I know, they end up confiding in me.
—Richard Mull, age 44 (USA)
For those whom are Christians and are looking for a movie that does not contain language that you do not want to bring into your home you may want to reconsider “Wall-E”. These are the following words that I found in the movie: by golly, darn it all, and get the heck out of here—these three were all spoken during a prerecorded message by a human. Blasted ship and stupid wheel were spoken by the captain of the ship.
Personally I prefer not to have movies especially for my small child that are a slang curse.
Gosh, gad, golly, gee, and goodness are a few of the words that also mean God. Depending on the way the words are being used in the movie you will have to decide your comfort level with the movie and also if you would like your child repeating those words.
[From a review of the movie Happy Feet]
Many of you while reading this review might believe that I am being paranoid or over zealous, however, please know that I am not. “Happy Feet” launches a scathing attack against fundamentalists in every fashion, and they take no prisoners, nor do they hide their intentions. The opening scene of this movie is nothing less than the crazy penguins worshiping the great penguin in the sky, except when we see his image, the penguin god has his arms stretched in a crucifix type fashion. Thus setting the tone for the rest of the movie. In the film’s defense, the movie does not really step up the jabs, slams and punishment of Christians until about half way into the movie, then the punches just keep coming, one after another after another.
Here are a few examples of how they slam Christianity:
1. The great penguin in the sky sets the tone with a Christ-like cross.
2. The man who everyone goes to for wisdom is supposed to be a prophet who speaks to the almighty (except we realize he is a fraud).
3. The leader of the penguins is a pastor-like figure who literally speaks hell and condemnation.
4. The entire subplot is how Christians are unaccepting of anything different than them, and how we will not allow someone into our church who has an alternative lifestyle. The character in the movie who the leadership of the fold is harshly against, is the penguin with Happy Feet. He dances instead of sings, therefore they look the other way every time he is around. There is even one point where they say to him “Repent and Turn” and then they kick him out of the fold for his evil ways. Yes, this is a HUGE pro-homosexual agenda and is not accidental.
5. About 16 other reference to how bad Christians area: Continues mocking, jokes and jabs. There are way too many to list in my review.
[Re: Disney/Pixar's The Incredibles]
I disagreed with the lying from the husband, the lady (almost a main character) who dresses enticingly (I know people who’ve been delivered from pornography and adultery who I hope don’t see this movie for the sake of them and the generational sin that could tempt their children). I totally disagreed with the “darn you!” in the parents' argument—power in our words—kids repeating this?! I disagreed with the “flexible” sexual innuendo, the suicide attempt (later having to explain this to a child?) and tell me why the baby had to turn into a firebaby then a devilbaby? It was ugly and made my spirit feel uncomfortable. I don’t know why it was rated PG, but I am glad it wasn’t rated G. There is a lot of violence for small kids and would probably cause my nieces and nephew to have nightmares.
My Ratings: [Very Offensive/5]
[Disney's The Little Mermaid]
I recently re-watched it and was absolutely appalled. To start with, the whole thing is based on Greek mythology, with Ariel's father King Triton based on Triton, a Greek god. Why should any Christian child watch a movie with a 'good' character who is based on a demonic being?
[A review of Lilo and Stitch]
First of all from the movie previews I thought this would be a movie about a loveable little alien. I was immediately caught off guard by the way the movie started a mad scientist playing God creates a diabolical Misfit, experiment 626 or 6(66) deliberately pronounced six two six. From a christian perspective this immediately put me on High alert. Six two six, soul purpose is to destroy. Sounds like the AntiChrist to me. I am extremely offended by anyone altering or the cloning of cells and the reference to 6(66) appalls me. The movie is almost appears to me a forefront to the actual appearance of the antichrist and through its deceptive analogy. Leads us the viewers that something created to be devious can turn out to be good and That modify the gene pool is okay. I believe that these people who write and produce these movies are in league with the devil and are subtly trying to change the way we are influenced and think.
My Ratings: [Very Offensive / 4]
—Ted, age 37
I do not personally recommend “The Princess and the Frog.” Practicing any sort of occultic magic is directly against God and is labeled as an abomination throughout Scripture. This movie displays that voodoo magicians hold all the power of both good and evil. A PG rating would have been more appropriate; I strongly advise that younger, undiscerning children not be allowed to see it. For older children, however, “The Princess and the Frog” might serve as an platform for parents to discuss with their children the real existence of occult practices and how to identify them.
[Re: Pokemon]
Now on to the bad, and this is very serious. First and foremost is that the theory of Evolution is promoted heavily on the show. The basic tenet of evolution is promoted: that all life evolves to become bigger and better.
This movie [Horton Hears a Who] was a major, and very insulting, slap to all Christians and dedicated homeschool parents being villainized in a cartoon which Hollywood seems to think by serving it up on this platter, down plays their insults. This and “Happy Feet” are absolute shining examples of liberal Hollywood using us to propagate our babies...
Moral rating: Very Offensive
Moviemaking quality: 4
There is no other book, ancient or modern, like [the bible]. The vague, and usually erroneous, prophecies of people like Jeanne Dixon, Nostradamus, Edgar Cayce, and others like them are not in the same category at all, and neither are other religious books such as the Koran, the Confucian Analects, and similar religious writings. Only the Bible manifests this remarkable prophetic evidence, and it does so on such a tremendous scale as to render completely absurd any explanation other than divine revelation.
Critic's Claim #4: The idea of a virgin birth is BIBLICALLY UNCONVINCING
Some critics cite the fact that the Apostle Paul is silent on the subject of the Virgin Birth, and the fact that Mary's virginity is never mentioned in the Gospel According to John, as evidence that Jesus was never born of a virgin.
But [...] both Paul and John were alive and quite familiar with the Gospel accounts written by Matthew and Dr. Luke (a physician!)—and yet never either questioned or refuted it.