Queer Nation Is No Nation At All
Written by Carl R. Trueman |
Monday, June 13, 2022
For a flag to be a powerful, sacred symbol of unity and purpose, it has to symbolize a real common sense of unity—a unified moral vision around which individuals can rally as part of a larger imagined community. That the Pride flag already has so many variations reveals the lack of unity that has always marked the LGBTQ+ movement when the cameras were not rolling. This disunity has only become more obvious with the advent of intersectionality and the triumph of queerness and transgenderism.
Flags typically serve as rallying points for unity. They point to something a culture considers sacred. The Stars and Stripes was, for many generations, precisely such a rallying point in America. The fact that flag burning, while protected by the Constitution, was deemed by both its opponents and proponents to be remarkably serious, speaks to this: One cannot desecrate that which is not considered sacred.
This is just one reason why it is interesting that the American Embassy to the Vatican is flying the rainbow flag for Pride month. Commentators have pointed out the obvious intent to cause offense to the Catholic Church. But the embassy’s decision also sends a message to the American people: Another flag has government endorsement. The message of “inclusion” that it represents signals to those Americans who might dissent from the LGBTQ+ movement that in these interesting times their membership in the republic for which the real national flag stands is more a matter of tolerance than full-blooded affirmation.
The problems with LGBTQ+ inclusion are, of course, manifold. First, there is the logical problem that any movement deploying the rhetoric of inclusion has to face: If everyone is included and nobody is excluded, then the movement is meaningless. Thus, the language of “inclusion” here is really a code word for precisely the opposite: It actually means exclusion and the delegitimizing of any person or group that dissents from what the movement’s movers and shakers deem to be acceptable opinion. Acceptable thought will typically tend toward a view of reality that regards such dissenters as mentally deficient, sub-human, or simply evil.
Second, the emphasis on inclusion must inevitably default to queerness. It is interesting how the word “queer” and its cognates is beginning to supplant the old taxonomy of “gay,” “lesbian,” and even “bisexual” in common LGBTQ+ parlance. The reason speaks to the central incoherence of the movement. Gay men and lesbian women have identities predicated upon a sex binary rooted in biology. That is rather “transphobic,” to use the psychologized terminology typically used to discredit any pushback on the transgender movement. Indeed, in the wonderful world of intersectional mythology, white gay men and white lesbian women rank little higher in the political hierarchy than their straight counterparts.
In fact, the LGBTQ+ movement has always been a marriage of political convenience. Prior to the AIDS crisis of the 1980s, lesbian women generally regarded gay men with deep suspicion, as those who enjoyed male privilege and whose sexual desires and experiences differed in fundamental ways from those of females.
-
The Cosmic Treason of Adam
Written by S. M. White |
Monday, November 29, 2021
Our hope of eternal life is secured. Heaven is secured by Christ, whom Paul calls the last Adam (1Cor 15:24). By His obedience and sacrifice, Christ has secured eternal life and the heavenly rest that Adam failed to secure. This is good news for all who rest their faith on Him.I think one of the hardest sells for us Christians to make to unbelieving world is the fall of all mankind in Adam as our representative. Why, over simply eating a fruit from a tree was there such a fall, such a curse?
I actually agree that if it was just a simple touching of a tree or a little bite of fruit, it seems excessive. But if we look at the biblical text it was far more than that. It was a complete betrayal of God, and an agreement with the deceiving enemy. It was a failure to do what he should do and a taking and doing what he should not do.
To understand the scope of the sin we need look no further than the biblical text itself, but not just at the text of the event itself, but the greater context of the environment, situation and duty Adam had in the garden that shows this was much more than an issue of intemperance. Which is exactly the point that John Calvin makes:
We must, therefore, look deeper than sensual intemperance. The prohibition to touch the Tree of Knowledge of good and evil was a trial of obedience (obedientiae examen), that Adam, by observing it, might prove his willing submission to the command of God (Institutes,2.1.4)
Calvin points out that Adam’s situation was that he was undergoing a “trial”. It was a “trial of obedience”. We know that in Romans 5, Paul tells us that Adam was a type of the one to come (Christ) -Romans 5:14.
We can understand a lot more about how this was a trial by looking at a the testing that Jesus went through in the wilderness in Matthew 4. Immediately at the start of Jesus ministry he is led by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil. How this parallels with Adams’ temptation is not a coincidence, but this is actually at the heart of Christ’s mission on earth. Christ is the promised Seed of the woman, and this battle with Satan is exactly what Christ came to succeed at where Adam failed.
We may note that Christ came into a fallen world, into a harsh wilderness instead of a safe garden, and with intense suffering and hunger instead of a full stomach. He endures, he succeeds, and does what Adam should have done. He faced the tempter three times! Each time, Christ obeyed God. Instead of agreeing with the tempter, Christ vindicated God, and sent the serpent way! This is what Adam should have done.
If we look earlier in Genesis we see that in Genesis 1:27-30 that God made Adam in His own image, and gave him dominion over everything. Adam was God’s great creation, created above the rest of the creation on earth and given dominion over it. He had a job to do.
God also put the Tree of Life in the garden along with establishing the Sabbath rest. These are signs relating to eternal life, a rest or competition of the probationary trial and entry into consummation.
We see the environment of the trial of obedience starting with Genesis 2:15, which most of our English translations don’t do a good job of translating the word “keep it” in relation to the garden.
The Hebrew word “shamar” there is actually better translated to “guard”. It’s used that way in Genesis 3:24 describing the action of the cherubim with the flaming sword that turned every way to “shamar” (guard) the way to the tree of life. Adam should have guarded the garden from the invading serpent.
Read More -
That I May Dwell in Their Midst—Exodus 26
In becoming flesh, the Word also dwelt among us. Dwelt is the verb form of the Greek word for tabernacle (skene). Thus, we could say: And the Word became flesh and tabernacled among us. The tabernacle was a glimpse of heaven on earth, but Jesus is heaven come down to earth and living among us.
We always keep Genesis 1-3 closely at hand because, through those chapters, we are able to make sense of intermingled wonders and sorrows both around us and within us. The whole process of creation in Genesis 1 builds toward the LORD’s creation of mankind, male and female, in His image and after His likeness. Even their task upon the earth would reflect God’s creative work. For just as God formed the formless and filled the void, He commanded mankind to fill the earth with more of God’s image and subdue the earth and have dominion over its creatures.
Chapter 2 then describes God’s creation of garden in Eden, which we rightly call paradise. Yahweh filled the garden with all kinds of fruit trees for food for the first man and woman. It also held the tree of life, which was in the midst of the garden, and rivers flowed out from the garden into the rest of the world that Adam was tasked with subduing. Yet most importantly, the garden was the place where Yahweh would walk, where His presence could be found.
Yet in Genesis 3, Adam and Eve defile the paradise that God provided for them by eating the only fruit in the garden that the LORD forbid them to eat. Not content with reflecting God’s nature, they desired to become gods themselves, and through their rebellion, they were cast out of the garden and brought sin’s curse upon the world that they were given to rule. Barred from the tree of life, Adam, Eve, and all of their children now die and return to the dust from which God made them.
Again, all of this resonates so deeply with us because, as Tolkien rightly said, “We all long for [Eden], and we are constantly glimpsing it: our whole nature at its best and least corrupted, its gentlest and most humane, is still oaked with a sense of ‘exile.’” Marvelously, the rest of the Bible is focused upon how God is restoring and repairing what our own sin has broken and marred.
The Tent of Meeting
As we noted last week, Yahweh’s instructions for building the tabernacle began with the most important furnishing, the ark of the testimony, which represented the very presence of God and would be the place upon which the sacrifice of atonement would be made. It then moved outward to describe the table for the bread of the Presence and the golden lampstand. These three items represented the primary furnishing within the only two rooms of the tabernacle: the Holy Place and the Most Holy Place. Continuing the outward movement of the description, the instructions in our present chapter now focus upon the tabernacle itself. Let us first begin by actual instructions given in this chapter, then we will consider the theological significance of the tabernacle as a whole.
Although our eyes may gloss over as we begin to read these instructions, we would do well to remember two things. First, these instructions are not quite as detailed as we might have imagined. In looking at artistic illustrations of the tabernacle, you will quickly find that no two are exactly the same. That is because only the overall details are instructed, while Oholiab and Bezalel (who were the craftsmen in whom God put His Spirit to construct everything) evidently had a measure of artistic freedom.
However, secondly, the instructions that were given do not reveal an overly elaborate and visually stunning tent. Certainly, it was richly furnished and beautifully made, yet it would have been remarkably simple compared to the pagan temples.
As we said of God’s instructions for building altars, this too should shape our understanding of worship as a whole. There is a measure of individual freedom, so long as God’s instructions are carefully followed, yet the overall tenor of worship ought to be simple, beautiful, and obedient.
Moreover, you shall make the tabernacle with ten curtains of fine twined linen and blue and purple and scarlet yarns; you shall make them with cherubim skillfully worked into them. The length of each curtain shall be twenty-eight cubits, and the breadth of each curtain four cubits; all the curtains shall be the same size. Five curtains shall be coupled to one another, and the other five curtains shall be coupled to one another. And you shall make loops of blue on the edge of the outermost curtain in the first set. Likewise you shall make loops on the edge of the outermost curtain in the second set. Fifty loops you shall make on the one curtain, and fifty loops you shall make on the edge of the curtain that is in the second set; the loops shall be opposite one another. And you shall make fifty clasps of gold, and couple the curtains one to the other with the clasps, so that the tabernacle may be a single whole.
Verses 1-6 describe the inner curtains of the tabernacle. They were to be made of linen with blue, purple, and scarlet yarn, which were colors that invoked royalty. They were also to have cherubim skillfully worked into them. Thus, from the inside, the priest would be surrounded by cherubim as a reminder that he has entered the tent of God’s earthly presence.
About the size of these curtains, Douglas Stuart writes:
All joined up, the curtain mass that formed the tabernacle roof and sides measured forty-two by sixty feet. Some of this was draped to form side walls and the back wall, so the actual floor space of the tabernacle was forty-five feet by fifteen feet (six hundred and seventy-five square feet). As later described, this floor space was divided in a two-thirds and one-third split into two rooms, the holy place (two-thirds of the floor space, or thirty feet by fifteen feet) and the most holy place (one-third of the floor space, or fifteen feet by fifteen feet). (584-585)
Verses 7-14 then describe the outer curtains.
You shall also make curtains of goats’ hair for a tent over the tabernacle; eleven curtains shall you make. The length of each curtain shall be thirty cubits, and the breadth of each curtain four cubits. The eleven curtains shall be the same size. You shall couple five curtains by themselves, and six curtains by themselves, and the sixth curtain you shall double over at the front of the tent. You shall make fifty loops on the edge of the curtain that is outermost in one set, and fifty loops on the edge of the curtain that is outermost in the second set.
You shall make fifty clasps of bronze, and put the clasps into the loops, and couple the tent together that it may be a single whole. And the part that remains of the curtains of the tent, the half curtain that remains, shall hang over the back of the tabernacle. And the extra that remains in the length of the curtains, the cubit on the one side, and the cubit on the other side, shall hang over the sides of the tabernacle, on this side and that side, to cover it. And you shall make for the tent a covering of tanned rams’ skins and a covering of goatskins on top.
The first set was made from goats’ hair, and the second set were made from animal skins. The curtains of goats’ hair were slightly larger than the linen curtains in order cover them completely as a protective layer. As verse 14 says, there were actually two outer curtains, one of rams’ skin and the other of goatskin (or more likely dugong or dolphin skin). These two layers of leather would protect the tabernacle from the elements.
You shall make upright frames for the tabernacle of acacia wood. [16] Ten cubits shall be the length of a frame, and a cubit and a half the breadth of each frame. [17] There shall be two tenons in each frame, for fitting together. So shall you do for all the frames of the tabernacle. [18] You shall make the frames for the tabernacle: twenty frames for the south side; [19] and forty bases of silver you shall make under the twenty frames, two bases under one frame for its two tenons, and two bases under the next frame for its two tenons; [20] and for the second side of the tabernacle, on the north side twenty frames, [21] and their forty bases of silver, two bases under one frame, and two bases under the next frame. [22] And for the rear of the tabernacle westward you shall make six frames. [23] And you shall make two frames for corners of the tabernacle in the rear; [24] they shall be separate beneath, but joined at the top, at the first ring. Thus shall it be with both of them; they shall form the two corners. [25] And there shall be eight frames, with their bases of silver, sixteen bases; two bases under one frame, and two bases under another frame.
[26] “You shall make bars of acacia wood, five for the frames of the one side of the tabernacle, [27] and five bars for the frames of the other side of the tabernacle, and five bars for the frames of the side of the tabernacle at the rear westward. [28] The middle bar, halfway up the frames, shall run from end to end. [29] You shall overlay the frames with gold and shall make their rings of gold for holders for the bars, and you shall overlay the bars with gold.
Read More
Related Posts: -
“Children of God?”
What is the state of those who have not received the Spirit of adoption, those who have not received Christ? They are, as we were, “by nature children of wrath” (Ephesians 2:3). “Sons of disobedience” (Ephesians 2:2) upon which the wrath of God will be poured out (Ephesians 5:6). Those not of Christ are “sons of the evil one” (Matthew 13:38). Their father is the devil (John 8:44). We are not all children of God, and the state of those who are not adopted as such is frightening and lamentable.
Recently, Pope Francis gave an interview with the Associated Press that garnered headlines around the world.1 He asserted that, while homosexuality is a sin, it is not a crime and should not be prosecuted as such. Some folks were happy that Francis said homosexuality was not a crime but unhappy that he said it was a sin. Others were happy he called it a sin and had various reactions to whether it is a crime. I was bothered by a part of the interview that I have not heard comments regarding. It was a “throw away” line that seemed so normal that no one seems to dispute it. But I dispute it, the Christian faith disputes it, and I want us to remember to dispute it when we hear it parroted as a given. Francis said, “We are all children of God, and God loves us as we are and for the strength that each of us fights for our dignity.” Not so.
We are all created by God. We are all made in his image. We all have our common human dignity because we have our source in God. But we are not all his children. It is to the saints called by God in Rome that St. Paul writes, “For you did not receive the spirit of slavery to fall back into fear, but you have received the Spirit of adoption as sons, by whom we cry, “Abba! Father!” (Romans 8:15). God’s children are such by adoption, by agency of the Holy Spirit working in our time and space to bring about the necessary change in our status. It is to those who believed in Christ’s name and received him that St. John says, “He gave the right to become children of God” (1John 1:12). Being God’s children is no inherent right of ours; it is given by grace to those who believe and receive Christ.
What is the state of those who have not received the Spirit of adoption, those who have not received Christ? They are, as we were, “by nature children of wrath” (Ephesians 2:3). “Sons of disobedience” (Ephesians 2:2) upon which the wrath of God will be poured out (Ephesians 5:6). Those not of Christ are “sons of the evil one” (Matthew 13:38). Their father is the devil (John 8:44).
Read More
Related Posts:
