Chastity is the resolve to keep a heart pure and on fire for Jesus. It is not just the virtue that protects us from sexual sin. Chastity is the watchman that guards the heart from any passion that would douse or misdirect the love that belongs to the bridegroom himself.

In I Corinthians 6 Paul is dealing with sexual immorality. In giving pastoral instruction, he says something that is, at first, difficult to understand. He says,
‘Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ? Shall I then take the members of Christ and make them members of a prostitute? Never! Or do you not know that he who is joined to a prostitute becomes one body with her? For, as it is written, ‘The two will become one flesh.’ But he who is joined to the Lord becomes one spirit with him’ (vs. 15-17).
Now what is strange about this teaching is that Paul seems to suggest that the spirit of a Christian is wedded to the spirit of Christ. The problem of prostitution is not just that it violates a command of God or that it infringes upon the covenant of a human marriage. The depth of the sin is nothing other than infidelity against Christ himself.
Read More
Related Posts:

I believe a majority of those in most PCA presbyteries are opposed to Revoice and all that it represents.  The failure of Overtures 23 and 37 was not a vote for Revoice Theology. Those who denigrate the PCA with this line of thinking are ignorant of the PCA and her presbyterian procedures. I believe that anyone identifying as a celibate homosexual (SSA) would be rejected for ordination in most PCA presbyteries today.

As someone who voted against the Proposed Changes to the Book of Church Order (contrary to my Presbytery which voted heavily in favor of the changes), I would venture to suggest some reasons why the proposed changes failed to gain the necessary votes by presbyteries.
First, I believe a majority of those in most PCA presbyteries are opposed to Revoice and all that it represents.  The failure of Overtures 23 and 37 was not a vote for Revoice Theology. Those who denigrate the PCA with this line of thinking are ignorant of the PCA and her presbyterian procedures. I believe that anyone identifying as a celibate homosexual (SSA) would be rejected for ordination in most PCA presbyteries today.
Secondly, I believe that the battle is not over, but just beginning.  Numerous new overtures will come before the 49th General Assembly this year in Birmingham, Alabama.  Expect in the next few years a new look in regard to the membership of permanent committees and agencies.  Also, expect at least one overture to change the structure of the Standing Judicial Committee (SJC). The losing side has been knocked down, but this will only arouse their enthusiasm to recapture the PCA. They now know how the opposition (NP) works, and they are much wiser in regard to how to fight.
So why did the proposed changes fail?  Unlike presidential elections in the United States, we do not have access to “exit polls” that give us a clue as to why men voted as they did.  However, by following discussions on the Internet, and by looking at maps, three reasons can be identified.
First, the language of the proposed amendments was confusing.  The proposed amendments were in essence a distilled version of the PCA Study Committee on Human Sexuality.  The authors of the proposed changes tried to capture the nuances in this Study in short statements, but that is nearly an impossible task.  Many presbyters simply voted against the changes because the language was too confusing. The baffling meaning of the placement of commas and the impact of parenthetical statements became a stumbling-block for many voters.
Secondly, if the changes had passed, it would have made no difference.  Even with new language in the BCO, the ultimate decision resides in the courts themselves meeting on any particular day.  Men in the courts will interpret the BCO in accord with their own theological presuppositions.  Greg Johnson is already a teaching elder in the PCA and he will remain as one regardless of any changes in the BCO.
Thirdly, we’ve all seen those maps of recent national presidential elections.  The east coast (from North Carolina northward) and the west coast are blue.  Also, the large cities in the United States are generally blue.  Fly-over America (rural America) is red.   Here is a surprising fact.  If you were to create a map of the PCA presbytery votes, and place it as a template over a similar map of the United States presidential popular vote, then there would be almost a perfect match.
Indeed, the voting demographics of PCA presbyteries tended to follow the voting demographics in the recent elections for the president of the United States.  The connection is uncanny.  Progressive Presbyterian elders on the coastlines and in the big cities tended to vote like progressive politicians, and conservative Presbyterian leaders in fly-over America tended to vote like conservative politicians.
Theology and geography tend to be common bed-fellows. It’s similar to the old North-South geographical division of the Civil War.  The number of new presbyteries is growing, and these new presbyteries are being created in larger cities and outside of the southeast.  Most seminaries that feed the PCA are now much more progressive.  The younger seminary graduates, as the whole, are much more progressive than the older generation, and they tend to gravitate to the coastlines and to the larger cities. This is a third reason for the failure of the BCO changes.  Just look at politics in America, and you will understand what is happening in the PCA.
Conservatives in the PCA should not be discouraged. The battle is not over. They had only weak weapons with which to fight in this round.  They underestimated the power of their opposition. Actually, we still have the numbers to win.  They should remain in the battle long-term for the sake of the PCA and for the sake of our children’s children.  Hopefully they have learned a great deal, and will be ready to fight more wisely at the next General Assembly.
Larry E. Ball is a retired minister in the Presbyterian Church in America and is now a CPA. He lives in Kingsport, Tenn.

The Lord always wanted his people to call the Sabbath a delight and that includes the special privilege of gathering twice on Sunday to enjoy the Lord. Wouldn’t it be great if we could cancel the cancellation of the evening service? If we’re concerned, at all, about the state of Christianity in our day, a great way to reverse our perils might be to reverse our cancellation of evening worship on the Lord’s Day.

We live in a day when those things that stand in the way of the prevailing narrative of the culture are canceled, thrust out from societal recognition. As much as people express concern about cancel culture in the world, perhaps we Christians should repent of our own cancel culture in the church in our cancelling of the second service on the Lord’s Day. As things currently look, this great cancellation in the kingdom of God may never be recovered. We seem to have said good riddance to the evening worship service forever on the very day God set aside for us to anticipate entering our eternal rest.
This cancelation of the evening worship service on the Sabbath is a sad development in America and speaks volumes about our view of corporate worship. In fact, most readers of this article will question that such a complaint has any warrant since most modern Christians are completely unaware that such a practice ever existed. Yet, it shouldn’t go without mentioning that what appears now to be completely unknown was, at one time in this country, across denominational lines, a mainstream conviction. Churches used to have a morning and evening service on the Sabbath. The rare occurrence would have been to find a church whose doors were closed at six o’clock. How did we get here and what are the consequences of this ginormous cancellation of the evening service in Christ’s church?
A Canceled Sabbath?
The value of the evening worship service is bound up with one’s view of the Sabbath. When God commanded Israel to keep the Sabbath, he intended for Israel to call the whole day a delight, resting from their evil works, and trusting in the Lord’s provision to care for them in the wilderness. Patterning the very creation of the world, God called Israel cease from their work done in six-days to rest on the entire seventh day. Part and parcel to Sabbath observance was the corporate gathering of the people for worship.
In the only psalm specifically designated as a “Song for the Sabbath,” Psalm 92, we have described the delight of Sabbath worship. Israel would gather together at the tabernacle for worship, recognizing the pattern established in the law for the morning and evening sacrifice, and they would celebrate God’s “steadfast love in the morning, and his faithfulness by night (Ps. 92:1-2).” It’s not a mere coincidence that Psalm 92 references worship on the Sabbath as belonging to morning and evening.
The great purpose of the Sabbath was to worship the Lord in the beauty of his holiness, providing a great opportunity for the people to be instructed in God’s holy Word and gospel. As Abraham was said to have the gospel preached to him, so too, the Sabbath provided for the people the greatest means to hear about Jesus—his sacrifice, his righteousness, and how to live by faith in the promise. It also provided a way for the people to express gratitude to their God through praise and prayer, growing together in holiness as a separate people. The Sabbath was the best way for Israel to honor the call of Deut. 6, that their children would be diligently instructed in the Lord’s love and will, both in the morning, “when they rise” and at nightfall, “when they lie down.”
Another great purpose of the Sabbath was to enjoy the communion of the saints. On the Sabbath, the people are taught how to love their neighbor, learning each other’s needs, praying for the needy, and giving offerings for the poor.
Read More