Blog Archives
Spiritual Gifts (Charismata)
Introduction
George Marsh asks a four-fold question regarding spiritual gifts: (a) what are these spiritual gifts? (b) How does one receive them? (c) Are they for all believers or some (especially the gift of speaking in tongues)? (d) How can one identify his or her gift?
What are the Various Spiritual Gifts?
Altogether the Epistles makes mention of twenty one (21) spiritual gifts. In no particular order here they are:
Prophet, Prophetess or Prophecy (Rom 12:6; 1 Cor 12:10; 12:28, 29; 13: 2, 8; 14:1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 22; Eph 4:11)
Whether predictive or non-predictive, the goal of a prophetic utterance as outlined in 1 Cor 14 is primarily to instruct, strengthen, encourage, and to comfort the congregation (vv. 3, 31). Furthermore the utterance is subject to evaluation (v. 29). If predictive, failure of the utterance to come to fruition renders the utterer fake (Deut 18:22).
Evangelist (Eph 4:11)
If you have ever wondered what the portrait of an Evangelist looks like, look at Philip, one of the seven deacons in the Book of Acts and to whose name is tied to the label “Evangelist (Acts 21:8). He not only engaged the masses with his proclamation of the good news, but initiated evangelistic conversation one-on-one (Acts 8).
Pastor (Eph 4:11)
The word for Pastor in the Greek is literally a “shepherd.” In other words what a shepherd is to sheep, a pastor is to his flock. Like a shepherd the pastor displays care, offers guidance (cf. John 10:3), extends protection/security (cf., Matt 9:36), puts his life on the line for his sheep (John 10:11).
Service (Rom 12:7)
The word for service is a variation of the word “deacon.” As is well known deacons in the book of Acts offered, not received, services. They were players, not spectators, when it came to serving the church. The gift of service therefore has to do with being a participant in the process of meeting the needs of the saints/church (cf. 1 Cor 16:15; 2 Cor 9:1, 13).
Teaching (Rom 12:7)
Prophets speak the words which God reveals to them while teachers engage in the passing on of the truth of the gospel which is already the revealed truth.
Encouraging
The encourager comes in handy in challenging, low moments, in times of distress and affliction. The goal of encouragement is to inspire and to uplift. (Rom 12:8, cf. Acts 14:22; 15:32; 16:40; 20:1, 2; 1 Cor 14:31; 2 Cor 7:13; Eph 6:22; Col 2:2; 4:8; 1 Thes 2:12; 3:2, 7; 4:18; 5:11, 14; 2 Thes 2:17; 2 Tim 4:2; Titus 1:9; 2:6, 15; Heb 3:13; 10:25; 1 Pet 5:12)
Contributing to the Needs of Others
This has to do with a person sharing of what he or she owns with a needy party (Rom 12:8). This kind of sharing is mentioned at least three other times in the New Testament. The person with two tunics is urged to share with one without (Luke 3:11). As evident that the old sinful self has been shed off as a result of spiritual conversions, a thief-turned-believer is challenged to instead earn a living and share the fruit of his/her labor with those in need (Eph 4:28).
Helping Others
The single reference of the noun translated in our English Bible as “helping others” limits our discussion on this gift (1 Cor 12:28).
Leadership
This gift has in mind those who preside over, manager over, make administrative decisions over the affairs of the church (Rom 12:8, cf 1 Thes 5:12; 1 Tim 3:4, 5, 12; 5:17).
Administration
As is the case with the gift of “helping others,” the single reference of the noun translated in our English Bible as “administration” limits our discussion on this gift (1 Cor 12:28).
Showing Mercy
Most likely the gift denotes all sorts of works of mercy. This may include taking care of the sick or disadvantaged (Rom 12:8).
Celibacy
In the context of 1 Cor 7 where Paul is discussing sexual fulfillment and abstinence, it may be that the gift here should be best understood not so much as singleness but continence, i.e., the ability to refrain from sexual intercourse.
Message of Wisdom and Knowledge
These entail insights granted to the mind. They are revelatory in the sense that they include matters granted in some way or another by direct revelation (1 Cor 12:28). Granted, on this side of the Canon, the revelations must be subject to biblical scrutiny as is the case with prophetic utterance.
Faith, Healing (1 Cor 12:9), Miraculous powers (1 Cor 12:10)
We are here talking about a high degree of faith in God produced by the Holy Spirit, the effects of which manifested themselves in healings in one and in mighty works in another.
Distinguishing Between Spirits (1 Cor 12:10)
This refers to the ability to identify the source of the prophetic utterance. The ability may also include interpretation and the weighing of the prophetic content.
Speaking in different tongues and Interpretation of tongues (1 Cor 12:10f)
According to 1 Cor 14 tongues are God-directed (not audience-directed), incomprehensible to the listening ear, strictly for the edification of the speaker. For this reason, they require interpretation if they are to benefit the audience.
Apostles (1 Cor 12:28, 29; Eph 4:11)
How Can one Identify His/Her Gift
Even those who propose the use of questionnaires as a way of determining spiritual gifts are quick to point out that the questionnaires simply confirm an awareness of one’s spiritual gift. The awareness comes about through inner conviction and the testimony of outside observers.
Tithing: Is it Applicable to the Church Today?
Introduction
This posting has been prompted by the question of one of our readers? Mary asks:
”I was told by some people that they can’t pay tithe because it is not mentioned in the New Testament, i.e., it is part of the Old Testament Law and not meant for “grace” people like us. I can’t remember seeing it myself in the N.T.Is that the case? If so how do you respond to that?
First of all Mary, tithing is mentioned in the New Testament. Even then the question of its applicability still holds since in all the instances that tithing is mentioned in both Testaments it appears to be a Jewish/Old Testament practice that may therefore not carry forward to the church today.
In answering the question we will first of all define tithing, then look at how it is discussed in both the New and the Old Testaments, and finally determine whether the scarce mention of tithing in the New Testament implies that the practice is irrelevant today.
Definition of “Tithe”
That the term tithe translates to tenth or ten percent makes sense if we are aware that, according to the Merrian-Webster’s dictionary, the word tithe is traceable to the old English word teogotha which means tenth. Furthermore both the Hebrew (maasar) and Greek (dekate) words that are rendered tithe by our English Bible carry within them the word ten. The term for ten is deka in Greek and asar in Hebrew.
The meaning of tithe aside, how is tithe or tithing discussed in both the Old and New Testaments?
Tithing in the Old Testament
Mention of Incidences of tithing
a) Gen 14:20
A war involving Sodom, the adopted home of Lot, results in the capture of Lot among others. When word about Lot’s capture reaches his uncle Abram, Abram mobilizes an operation dubbed “rescue Lot.” With the mission accomplished, Abram returns home and is met by Melchisedek. It is during this encounter that Abram offers a tithe.
b) Gen 28:20-22
Jacob working under the instruction of his mother Rebekkah succeeds in stealing the blessings that rightly belonged to Esau. Isaac is deceived into granting deathbed blessings to Jacob instead of Esau. When Esau discovers his loss, he vows revenge. Naturally Jacob, the target of the vendetta, opts to flee to Laban’s den in Haran. Since Haran was a distance away, Jacob stopped to catch some sleep. While asleep, he experiences a dream. He wakes up and utters a vow: he will tithe a tenth form what God gives to him.
Divine Regulations concerning tithe or tithing
(a) Lev 27:30-32: The tithe belongs to the Lord
(b) Num 18:21: The tithes are meant for the Levites in exchange for their temple service
(c) Deut 12:6; 14:28: Tithes are to be brought to God’s dwelling place
The Practice of Tithing Falls by the Wayside and then is Revived
(a) 2 Chron 31
At the end of 2 Chron 28 we are told that King Ahaz suspended all temple operations by shutting the temple down. When Hezekiah ascended the throne, he reversed all these. He re-consecrated the temple and its staff in 29:3-19. He calls for the observation of the Passover in chap. 30. What else does he reinstall? Tithing (2 Chron 31:11)
(b) Neh 10:37; 13:12
Chapter 10 is an Ezra-led declaration of the people’s commitment to live by the law. Part of the commitment is the reinstatement of tithing.
Withholding the tithes equated with robbery; bringing the tithe tied to abundant blessings
Mal 3:8-11: “Will a man rob God? Yet you rob me. “But you ask, ‘How do we rob you?’ “In tithes and offerings. You are under a curse — the whole nation of you — because you are robbing me. Bring the whole tithe into the storehouse, that there may be food in my house. Test me in this,” says the LORD Almighty, “and see if I will not throw open the floodgates of heaven and pour out so much blessing that you will not have room enough for it. I will prevent pests from devouring your crops, and the vines in your fields will not cast their fruit,” says the LORD Almighty.
Tithing in the New Testament
Mention of an Incident of tithing
Luke 18:12: The Pharisee stood up and prayed about himself: ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other men — robbers, evildoers, adulterers — or even like this tax collector. I fast twice a week and give a tenth of all I get.’
Jesus does not fault the Pharisees and teachers of Law for Practicing Tithing
What he faults them for is their neglect of justice and the love of God (cf. Matt 23:23)
Is Tithing Applicable Today
Even though tithing is mentioned only a handful of times in the New Testament, does it mean that it is therefore no longer applicable today?
First of all, there is no evidence that the Scriptures prohibit the continuation of the practice. Jesus made mention of the practice without condemning or rendering it abolete. At the same time, it ought to give us pause that, beyond the three references in the Gospels, the word tithe or tithing is never again mentioned in the New Testament. References to tithing during the church age appear not in the New Testament but later on in the writings of the church fathers (e.g., Constitution of the Holy Apostles [325AD]:“wherefore you ought to love the bishop as your father, and fear him as your king and honor him …giving to him your … tithes) or in decrees by church councils (e.g., the council of Trent [1550]: “The payment of tithes is due to God, and they who refuse to pay them or hinder those who give them usurp the property of another…they who either withhold or hinder them shall be excommunicated..”)
Secondly, even though tithing is never again mentioned in the New Testament after the Gospels, the principle of tithing in the sense of the people of God catering for the needs and upkeep of the minister is cited over and over again in the Epistles and is certainly relevant and applicable today. First Corinthians 9: 13-14 is one such citation: Don’t you know that those who work in the temple get their food from the temple, and those who serve at the altar share in what is offered on the altar? In the same way, the Lord has commanded that those who preach the gospel should receive their living from the gospel.
Thirdly, the emphasis in the Epistles when it comes to supplying the needs of the minister is not on percentage seeing that the word tithe or tithing is never mentioned there. The emphasis is on individual-motivated, generous, cheerful, voluntary giving (1 Cor 9:7).
Dowry (or bridewealth) and the Bible
The Practice of Paying Dowry in Ancient Babylon, Ancient Egypt, the Bible. and within the Afric(Keny)an Context
In Ancient Babylon
(a) Law of Ur-Nammu (2112-2095 B.C)
–#12
If a prospective son-in-law entered the house of his prospective father-in-law, but his father-in-law later gave his daughter to another man, he (the father-in-law) shall return to him two-fold the amount of bridal presents he had brought
(b) Law of Eshnunna (2000 B.C)
–#17
Should the son of a man bring bride-money to the house of the his father-in-law–if one of the two deceases, the money shall revert to its owner
(c) Code of Hammurabi (1728-1686 B.C)
–# 137
If a seignior has made up his mind to divorce a lay priestess, who bore him
children, or a hierodule who provided him with chiildren, they shall return
her dowry to that woman and also give her half of the field, orchard and goods that she may rear her children…
–#138
If a seignoir wishes to divorce his wife who did not bear him children, he shall five her money to the full amount of her marriage-price and he shall also make good to her the dowry which she brought from her father’s house and then he may divorce her
–#159
If a seignior. who had the betrothal-gift brought to the house of his prospective father-in-law and paid the marriage-price, has then fallen in love with another woman and has said to his prospective father-in-law, “I will not marry your daughter,” the father of the daughter shall keep whatever was brought to him
–#162
If, when a seignior acquired a wife, she bore him children and that woman has then gone to her fate, her father may not lay claim to her dowry, since her dowry belongs to her children
In Ancient Egypt
A Marriage Contract of a former slave as revealed in Aramaic Papyrus 15 from Elephantine (dated 441 B.C.)
–Date of the Contract
In Tishri, which is the 6th day of the month of Epiph of Artaxerxes the King
–Identification of Contracting Parties
Askor, son of TSHR, builder of the king said to Makhsir the Aramean of Syene of the detachment of Warizath, saying “I have come to your house to take to myself your daughter (Mipthtahiah) for wifehood (or as a wife)
–Formal agreement of marriage and payment of dowry and possession brought in by the bride
She is my wife and I am her husband from this day and for ever, I give to you the bride-price of your daughter Miphtahiah , the sum of 5 shekels , royal weight. It has been received by you and your heart is content therewith. I have caused to come up to bring to your daughter Miphtahiah into her hand of the cost of furniture 1 karash 2 shekels of royal weight of the standard of 2R to 10. I have delivered to her into her hand 1 woolen robe, new, striped dyed on both sides, (whose) length was 8 cubits by 5, worth the sum of 2 kerashin 8 shekels royal weight; 1 closely-woven (shawl) new, (whose) length was 8 cubits by 5 ,worththe sum of 8 shekels of royal weight; another woolen robe, finely woven (whose) length was 6 cubits by 4, worth the sum of 7 shekels; 1 mirror of bronze, worth
the sum of shekel 2R; 1 tray of bronze, worth the sum of 1 shekel 2R; 2 cups of bronze worth the sum of 2 shekels; 1 bowl of bronze, worth the sum of 2R; total money and value of goods being the sum of 6 kerashin 5 shekels 20 halurin (=half shekel) of the standard of 2 R to 10, royal weight I have received, and my heart is content therewith, 1 couch of reeds with 4 supports(?) of stone; 1 pk of slk; 2 ladles, holding (?) 8 h; 1 ms’n knife (?); 1 cosmetic box of ivory, new. …
–Witnesses to contract
Nathan b. Ananiah wrote this deed (or contract) at the direction (literally “according to the mouth”) of Ashor and the witnesses hereto
Penuliah b. Jezaniah. ….iah b. Uriah (?) Menahem b. Zaccur witnesses, Reibel(?) b…..
In the Bible
(a) The Genesis 24 story of Abraham’s chief servant taking a trip in search of a wife for Abraham’s son, Isaac (see especially verse 10 [Then the servant took ten of his master’s camels and left, taking with him all kinds of good things from his master. He set out for Aram Naharaim and made his way to the town of Nahor], 22 [When the camels had finished drinking, the man took out a gold nose ring weighing a beka and two gold bracelets weighing ten shekels], and 53 [Then the servant brought out gold and silver jewelry and articles of clothing and gave them to Rebekah; he also gave costly gifts to her brother and to her mother])
(b) The story of Jacob in Gen 29, especially verse 18 (Jacob was in love with Rachel and said, “I’ll work for you seven years in return for your younger daughter Rachel” ) and 20 (So Jacob served seven years to get Rachel, but they seemed like only a few days to him because of his love for her)
(c) Hamor requests Jacob’s sons for Dinah as a wife for his son Shechem in Gen 34:12 (Make the price for the bride and the gift I am to bring as great as you like, and I’ll pay whatever you ask me. Only give me the girl as my wife.”)
(d) Exod 22: 16, 17 (“If a man seduces a virgin who is not pledged to be married and sleeps with her, he must pay the bride-price, and she shall be his wife. If her father absolutely refuses to give her to him, he must still pay the bride-price for virgins)
(e) Saul sets the bride price for David to marry his daughter Michal in 1 Sam 18:25 (Saul replied, “Say to David, ‘The king wants no other price for the bride than a hundred Philistine foreskins, to take revenge on his enemies.’” Saul’s plan was to have David fall by the hands of the Philistines)
Within the Afric(Keny)an Context
There are four types of marriages recognized by the republic of Kenya:
(a) Hindu marriage
–allows polygamy
(b) Islamic marriage
-allows plural marriages up to 4 wives
(c) customary marriage
—bridewealth (or part of it) would have to be paid
–required ceremonies have to be performed
–the parties involved have to demonstrate capacity to marry, meaning, the man must not be married under the law that governs monogamous marriages; the woman must not be already married to another man; they should have reached puberty, they should be free of diseases like leprosy or syphilis; they should be mentally sound or sane; each must not be within the prohibited degrees of conguinity and affinity; each must give consent to the marriage; and the parents of each must give consent to marriage
(d) civil/English/Christian marriage
–marriage ceremony has to be performed by an authorized person
–the ceremony has to be performed in a place of worship or in a building which is legally registered for such an activity
–there should be witnesses to the ceremony
–the parties involved must give consent to the marriage
–Notice of intention to marry must be published prior to the marriage
–the parties involved have to demonstrate capacity to marry
Of the four, only one requires the payment of dowry, viz., customary marriage.
Implications
Since the payment of dowry is not prohibited by the Scriptures and since it is a requirement in as far as customary marriage is concerned, it is necessary that an individual who chooses customary marriage pay the dowry. Otherwise the Kenyan society will not consider the marriage valid.
The Blessing of Africa: The Bible and African Christianity, by Keith Augustus Burton, InterVarsity Press, 2007
The hallmark of this book is two-fold: (a) its redefinition of what territorially constitutes “biblical Africa” and (b) its identification of Put with sub-Saharan Africa. Capitalizing on the tendency to equate Ham(ites) with Africa(ns) as evidenced by the common misconception that Noah’s curse targeted Ham and thus the Africans, the author proposes that his readers consider the equation of “biblical Africa” with the “land of Ham.” Understood as such, “biblical Africa” would therefore encompass all the territories traditionally associated with the descendants of Ham as reflected in the “Table of Nations.” These regions include Saudi Arabia (associated with Seba, Sabteca, Sabtah, Dedan and Havilah), Yemen (associated with Sheba and Raamah), Iraq (associated with Babylon, Erech, Akkad, Calneh, Assyria), Egypt/Sudan (associated with Misrayim), Ethiopia (associated with with Cush), Libya (associated with the Lehabites, Naphtuhites, Pathrusites), Crete (associated with Caphtorites), Israel/Palestine (associated with Canaan), Lebanon (associated with Sidon, Hivites, Arkites), Turkey (associated with Hittites), Jordan (associated with Amorites), and Syria (associated with Arvadites). In other words, an equation of “biblical Africa” with the “land of Ham” expands the definition of what encompasses Africa and who constitutes an African to include not just the continent of Africa and its dwellers, but parts of the Middle East and their respective citizens.
Having argued for a broader definition of “biblical Africa” (part one, chapters 1-4) and catalogued the Africans in the Bible assuming the broader definition (part two, chapters 5-7), the book takes and maintains to the very end a historical slant during which the following historical topics are discussed: (a) the development of Christianity in biblical Africa (part three, chapters 8-10), (b) the growth of Islam in biblical Africa (part four, chapters 11-12), (c) the impact of European colonialism on biblical Africa (part five. Chapters 13-15) and (d) the place of the Bible in present-day biblical Africa (part six, chapters 16-18).
Even if the reader does not buy into the author’s attempt to promote a broad definition of what geographically constitutes biblical Africa and consequently who composes an African biblically, this book remains a wonderful resource to students of church history and students of the Bible in general.
Euthanasia and the Bible
Introduction
Hebrews 9:27 reads in part: “… it is appointed for mortals to die …” Let me rewrite the passage so it hits home. Let’s strike out “mortals” Let’s jot instead “Nicholas.” “It is appointed for Nicholas to die…” As to the type of death that awaits me, I am not privy. That knowledge belongs only to the gods. What is clear though, is that none of us is exempt from any particular type of death. It could be a “Tim Russert” (of NBC)-like death. You could even find yourself in a “Schiavo”-like situation. A “Russert”-like death sparks no moral issues. A “schiavo”-like situation is another story altogether. Terry’s death was a classic example of Euthanasia
Definition of Euthanasia
The etymological building blocks of the term are: “Eu” (=a Greek adverb that means “well.” “easy,” “good”) and “thanatos” (=meaning “death”). Combining the two terms yields the compound idea of “easy death,” “dying well,” or “death by dignity.”
Types of Euthanasia
Type # 1: Active voluntary Euthanasia (AVE)
(a) Definition
Doctors or others directly end a consenting patient’s suffering through medically administered lethal drugs
(b) Example
(i) The Oregon Death by Dignity Act
First passed by Oreginians in Nov 1994 and activated after an injunction was lifted by the ninth circuit of Appeals on Oct 1997, the Oregon Death by Dignity Act allows a doctor to prescribe pentonarbital or secorbabrbital,both of which are lethal medication to a terminally ill patient of sound mind. The patient then goes ahead and ingests the lethal drugs at a place and time of his or her own choosing. In 2004, 40 physicians wrote a total of 60 prescriptions. Thirty five patients who ingested the drugs died. The range of time from ingestion to death was 5 minutes to 31 hours
(ii) The infamous Kervokian
Sunday night Nov 22, 1998, 60 minutes viewers were treated to a never-before-seen telecast. There in the sight of all was Kervokian administering lethal injection to a consenting Thomas Youk, a victim of amytophic lateral sclerosis or Lou Gehrig’s disease. For that Kervokian was slapped with a second degree murder charge and received a 10-25 yrs sentence. Prior to this particular AVE, Kervokian had played an assistive role in other deaths ranging back to 1990.
–June 4 1990: Janet Adkins,a 54 yr old woman with Alzheimer used a suicide machine that Kervokian himself had deviced. She died inside Kervokians’s 1968 volkwagen
–Oct 23 1991: Kervokian supervised the simultaneous death of two women. One, Marjorie Wanz, 58 yr old with pelvic pain used Kervokians suicide machine. The other, Sherry Miller, 43 yrs old with multiple sclerosis inhaled carbon monoxide through a face mask
–Sept 26th 1992, Lois Hawes,52 yrs old with lung and brain cancer, died from CO poisoning at the home of Kervokian’s assistant
–Kervokian himself may have been present on Nov 26th 1994 during the death by CO poisoning of 72 yr old Margaret Garrish who had arthritis and osteoporosis
(c) Reason
The main reason seems to be the desire to bring about the cessation of suffering
Type # 2: Active Involuntary Euthanasia (AIE)
(a) Definition
A doctor or a non-doctor directly ending a non-consenting patient’s suffering through lethal means
(b) Example
(i) On 30th sept 1949 Carol Paight, a 20yr old Connecticut college student, shot her 52 yr old father while he lay unconscious in a hospital bed after exploratory surgery. She was reported to have said just before the shooting that she had to do something to keep her father from knowing that he had only six painful weeks to live.
(ii) On Feb 15th 1993 Kervokian oversaw the death of Hugh Gale, a 70 yr old man with emphysema and congestive heart failure. Why this would be an example of involuntary euthanasia is because the prosecutors investigating the case were able to prove that Kervokian had altered his written account of Gale’s death by deleting a reference to a request by Gale that the procedure be halted
Type # 3: Passive voluntary Euthanasia (PVE)
(a) Definition
Withholding unwanted or extraordinary treatment as per the patient
(b) Example
(i) Nancy Cruzan
One night in 1983, th car of the 25 yr old slid off an icy Missouri Road. The ensuing crash threw her out of the car and left her breathless and without a pulse. Minutes later, paramedics revived her heartbeat and respiration, but Cruzan never regained consciousness. She spent the next 7 yrs of her life in a permanent vegetative state, able to breath but kept alive by a feeding tube
Her parents wished that her feeding tube be removed. After a court battle and appeals to higher courts, the parents wishes were honored on the strength that she had made prior wishes to die if ever she found herself in that situation
(ii) Terry Schiavo
(iii) Pope Pius XII
In an Oct 24th Feb 1975 speech before an international gathering of anaesthesiologists he announced (1) that patients could refuse extraordinary treatment to prolong their lives without violating Christian teaching (2)that that there was no reason that dying persons should endure unusual pain; physicians, he stated were permitted to use pain relievers even if they shortened a dying patient’s life, though doctors should never administer pain-killing drugs against someone’s will or with the intention of killing a patientpassive euthanasia was permissible,
(iv)Living wills
Advanced directives written by individuals specifying under what conditions treatment would be withheld (state legalized). In 1976 Califonia becamethe first state to recognize the living will; by 1986 all but eleven states had done the same
(c) Reasons
Curtail pain, curtail an unproductive and worthless living
Type # 4: Passive involuntary Euthanasia (PIE)
(a) Definition
Withholding unwanted or extraordinary treatment without the patient’s consent
(b) Examples
(i) Karen Ann Quinlan
Lapsed, at 21 yrs, into an irreversible coma On 14th April 1974 while at a party in suburban New Jersey, possibly because she had been mixing alcohol and the tranquilizer Valium. Taken to hospital, she was hooked up to a respirator and tubes providing her with hydration and nutrition. [she was far from legally dead; she responded to pain and noise and withdrew her limbs when they stroked]. When she persisted in her vegetative state for months, her parents went to court to have her taken off the respirator. They eventually succeeded in March 1976, but Quinlan, even after being detached from a respirator, lived for another nine years until she died of pneumonia in 1985
The court decision stated in part that Karen’s right to privacy may be asserted on her own behalf by her guardian in circumstances when she had never signed a living will nor made her end-of-life wishes known clearly
(ii) Knya Dismuke-Howard
Knya, a terminally ill six-month old infant at the center of a life-support fight died Wednesday May 4th 2005, while still receiving medical treatment. Knya had leukemia that spread to her brain. Doctors at Memorial Hermann Hospital had said continued care would be futile, and a hospital ethic committee decided to remove her from life support, despite objections from her parents
(iii) Texas state law passed in 1999 gives hospitals the authority to remove patients from life support, but requires they give the family 10 days notice to find another facility
(iv) Polls
Polls in the 1960’s showed that from 60-80 percent of American doctors let some of their patients die by withholding or withdrawing treatment
(c) Reasons
Bring pain to an end; futile treatment
Scriptures to bring to bear in evaluating the different types of Euthanasia
Passages Pertaining to murder
–Exod 21:12: Whoever strikes a person mortally shall be put to death
–Ex. 21:20: When a slaveowner strikes a male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies immediately, the owner shall be punished
–Lev 24:17: Anyone who kills a human being shall be put to death
–Num 35:16: But anyone who strikes another with an iron object, and death ensues, is a murderer; the murderer shall be put to death
–Exod 20:13: You shall not murde
–Gen 9:5, 6: For your own lifeblood I will surely require a reckoning: from every animal I will require it and from human beings, each one for the blood of another, I will require a reckoning for human life. Whoever sheds the blood of a human, by a human shall that person’s blood be shed; for in his own image God made humankind.
Passages Pertaining to Suicide
–Judg. 16:30, 31: Then Samson said, “Let me die with the Philistines.” He strained with all his might; and the house fell on the lords and all the people who were in it. So those he killed at his death were more than those he had killed during his life. Then his brothers and all his family came down and took him and brought him up and buried him between Zorah and Eshtaol in the tomb of his father Manoah. He had judged Israel twenty years.
–1Sam. 31:4, 5, 6 Then Saul said to his armor-bearer, “Draw your sword and thrust me through with it, so that these uncircumcised may not come and thrust me through, and make sport of me.” But his armor-bearer was unwilling; for he was terrified. So Saul took his own sword and fell upon it. When his armor-bearer saw that Saul was dead, he also fell upon his sword and died with him. So Saul and his three sons and his armor-bearer and all his men died together on the same day.
–2Sam. 17:14, 23 Absalom and all the men of Israel said, “The counsel of Hushai the Archite is better than the counsel of Ahithophel.” For the LORD had ordained to defeat the good counsel of Ahithophel, so that the LORD might bring ruin on Absalom. When Ahithophel saw that his counsel was not followed, he saddled his donkey and went off home to his own city. He set his house in order, and hanged himself; he died and was buried in the tomb of his father.
–Matt. 27:5: Throwing down the pieces of silver in the temple, he departed; and he went and hanged himself.
–Acts 16:27: When the jailer woke up and saw the prison doors wide open, he drew his sword and was about to kill himself, since he supposed that the prisoners had escaped.
–Acts 16:28, 29: But Paul shouted in a loud voice, “Do not harm yourself, for we are all here.” The jailer called for lights, and rushing in, he fell down trembling before Paul and Silas.
–We are supposed to wait of death, not hasten or even activate it (cf Gen 27:2)
–Elisha had a teminalillness and did not kill himself (2 Kings 13:14)
Passages Pertaining to Assisted (desire for or rejection of assisted) suicide
–Judg. 9:52-57: Abimelech came to the tower, and fought against it, and came near to the entrance of the tower to burn it with fire. But a certain woman threw an upper millstone on Abimelech’s head, and crushed his skull. Immediately he called to the young man who carried his armor and said to him, “Draw your sword and kill me, so people will not say about me, ‘A woman killed him.’” So the young man thrust him through, and he died. When the Israelites saw that Abimelech was dead, they all went home. Thus God repaid Abimelech for the crime he committed against his father in killing his seventy brothers; and God also made all the wickedness of the people of Shechem fall back on their heads, and on them came the curse of Jotham son of Jerubbaal.
–2Sam. 1:9, 10: He said to me, ‘Come, stand over me and kill me; for convulsions have seized me, and yet my life still lingers.’ So I stood over him, and killed him, for I knew that he could not live after he had fallen. I took the crown that was on his head and the armlet that was on his arm, and I have brought them here to my lord.
–1Kings 19:1-4: Ahab told Jezebel all that Elijah had done, and how he had killed all the prophets with the sword. Then Jezebel sent a messenger to Elijah, saying, “So may the gods do to me, and more also, if I do not make your life like the life of one of them by this time tomorrow.” Then he was afraid; he got up and fled for his life, and came to Beer-sheba, which belongs to Judah; he left his servant there. But he himself went a day’s journey into the wilderness, and came and sat down under a solitary broom tree. He asked that he might die: “It is enough; now, O LORD, take away my life, for I am no better than my ancestors.
–Jonah 4: 2-8: But this was very displeasing to Jonah, and he became angry. He prayed to the LORD and said, “O LORD! Is not this what I said while I was still in my own country? That is why I fled to Tarshish at the beginning; for I knew that you are a gracious God and merciful, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love, and ready to relent from punishing. And now, O LORD, please take my life from me, for it is better for me to die than to live.” And the LORD said, “Is it right for you to be angry?” Then Jonah went out of the city and sat down east of the city, and made a booth for himself there. He sat under it in the shade, waiting to see what would become of the city. The LORD God appointed a bush, and made it come up over Jonah, to give shade over his head, to save him from his discomfort; so Jonah was very happy about the bush. But when dawn came up the next day, God appointed a worm that attacked the bush, so that it withered. When the sun rose, God prepared a sultry east wind, and the sun beat down on the head of Jonah so that he was faint and asked that he might die. He said, “It is better for me to die than to live.”
–Job 3:20: “Why is light given to one in misery, and life to the bitter in soul, who long for death, but it does not come, and dig for it more than for hidden treasures.
–Job 2:9-10: Then his wife said to him, “Do you still persist in your integrity? Curse God, and die.” But he said to her, “You speak as any foolish woman would gspeak. Shall we receive the good at the hand of God, and not receive the bad?” In all this Job did not sin with his lips.
Anglican Communion in Crisis: How Episcopal Dissidents and their African Allies are Reshaping Anglicanism, by Miranda K. Hassett, Princeton University Press, 2007
This book is a result of some ten months of fieldwork conducted in Uganda and in the southeastern part of the United States. The research, carried out by the author while she was a graduate and then PhD student at the University of North Carolina, constituted approximately 130 field interviews in addition to critical reading of textual sources dealing with Episcopal Church, Church of Uganda, and Anglican Communion Politics. Those interviewed included a number of African bishops, many parishioners in Uganda and the USA, and Episcopal dissident groups in the United States.
The core argument of the book is this: the increasing involvement of Southern Anglicans in the Episcopal Church and the global significance now widely ascribed to Episcopal Church events results primarily from the cooperative globalizing work of American Conservative. This assertion stands in contrast to the tendency among conservatives and liberals alike to explain the increased global activism of Southern church leaders as part of a long-term global historical shift in the center of gravity of world Christianity to the global South—a theory expounded by scholar of religion Philip Jenkins and widely invoked by observers of the current Anglican scene.
The book is broken up into eight chapters. Chapter one describes the history, character, and current concerns in the Church of Uganda and the Episcopal Church in the United States. Chapter two presents an account of the development of conservative Episcopalians’ globalist discourses and projects, in cooperation with Southern Anglican leaders. The third chapter speaks of the Northern hegemony. Chapter four recounts the ways in which the Lambeth Conference of 1998 was experienced and portrayed as a North/South battle. The fifth chapter begins with a brief account of the founding of the transnational dissident organization Anglican Missions in America (AmiA) and then describes several other globalizing projects that parallel AmiA. Chapter six examines discourses used to explain and justify transnational Anglican relationships, especially images of the churches of the global North and South. Chapter seven addresses the topic of money, power, and influence. The last chapter returns to the North/South conflict and the global-shift thesis, particularly to the ways that Philip Jenkins’s work has been taken up by conservatives in the Episcopal Church as a description and justification of current developments in the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion.
The audience that would be best served by this group are attendees of both the Lambeth 2008 conference and the opposing GAFCON 2008 Jerusalem conference. Those attendees include bishops, Anglican bible students, church leaders and parishioners alike. As regards the goal of the book and whether it has been attained, the research, the interviews conducted, the literature cited, do corroborate the author’s assertion that the new transnational alliances are best understood not as by-products of a global moral shift but as the work of particular people and groups.
Pornography (viewing by men)
1. Definition of pornography
(a) Etymological definition: The term is built out of two root words: (i) “graphos” = writing or description and (ii) “porne”= prostitute or harlot
(b) Practical Definition: Any sexually oriented material designed to arouse the viewer or reader
2. Types of porn
(a) Soft porn. The marks of soft porn are (i) partial nudity and (ii) non-explicit sex
(b) Hard porn: The marks of hard-core porn are (i) total nudity and (ii) overt sex
3. Effects of pornography
(a) On you
(i)Neurological impact: When hit with a pornographic image, sexual stress ensues. The sexual stress causes chemicals to seep into the pituitary gland, releasing a stress hormone known as adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH). Other neurochemicals that are activated include adrenaline and noradrenaline. The net result is that you breath more deeply, the heart beats faster, blood pressure rises, the eye pupil dilates, you salivate more, the penis erects, you can easily ejaculate or, if you choose to, masturbate
(ii) Fuels feelings of lust and the temptation to cheat on your wife by compromising your resistance to lust after a woman or even engage in adultery
(iii) Feelings of shame and guilt
(iv) Desire for secrecy
(v) Sexual addiction
(b) On your marriage:
(i) Starves your wife sexually since you ejaculate elsewhere and experience the sexual dissatisfaction demonstrated in the study by Zilmann and Bryant. The study revealed that, in comparing one’s partner’s responses to the sexual behavior portrayed in pornographic materials, the partner became dissatisfied with the sexual performance and even physical appearance of the other partner
(ii) Dilutes, if not taints, the quality of your marital relationship with you wife since you are essentially engaging in some fashion of extramarital affair
(c) On your Kids:They could themselves become porn-viewers. This prediction is based on the results of a survey that sought to establish who owned the pornographic material when an individual was first exposed
First Exposure Percentage
• Friend’s house 77%
• Father’s pornography 13%
• Self-purchased 1%
• Other (found it) 9%
4. How do we overcome the habit
(a) Be convinced of the reality of its effects. If pornography is not lust or adultery, it certainly lowers you resistance to lust and adultery; it hurts you wife, it can be generational, it taints your testimony.
(b) Maintain a consistent prayer life
(c) Avoid being alone
(d) Meditate on relevant verses: (i) Ps101:3 (I will set before my eyes no vile thing… ) (ii)1 Thes 4:3-5 (It is God’s will that you should be sanctified: that you should avoid sexual immorality; that each of you should learn to control his own body in a way that is holy and honorable, not in passionate lust like the heathen, who do not know God) (iii) Jam 1:14-16 (but each one is tempted when, by his own evil desire, he is dragged away and enticed. Then, after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death. Don’t be deceived, my dear brothers) (iv)1 Cor 10:13 (No temptation has seized you except what is common to man. And God is faithful; he will not let you be tempted beyond what you can bear. But when you are tempted, he will also provide a way out so that you can stand up under it); (v) Job 31:1 (“I made a covenant with my eyes not to look lustfully at a girl); (vi) Phil 4:8 (Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable — if anything is excellent or praiseworthy — think about such things)
Biases Against Dark Skin
Three Types of Biases Against Dark Skin
Bias type 1: Inter-racial bias against dark skin
The race that has been on the receiving end of this particular type of bias has invariably been the African race. By African we mean individuals of African ancestry or lineage whether they be the current inhabitants of the continent, or recent immigrants like us guys or (by African we also mean) those of our brothers and sisters who centuries ago were against their will transplanted from the motherland by the slave traders to far away regions such as the Americas, Haiti, Jamaica, Cuba and yes even Mexico where there exists today the so-called “Afro-Mexicans.”.
The perpetrators of inter-racial bias are of course non-African races such as the Caucasians, the Arabs, the Asians, and the Latinos.
(1) What have been the expressions of inter-racial bias in the past? Have those expressions carried forward to the present? If so how do those expressions look like today?
(a) One expression in the past has been setting up a divide so the African doesn’t rub shoulders with the non-African
Examples of divides in the past include:
(i) The Jim Crow laws of segregation. These laws were operational for a good 100 yrs (between 1880’s and 1960’s).
(ii) Another example of the divide were Color bar policies of the Boers in pre-1994 South Africa, pre-new South Africa
Here is a sampling of some of the segregation laws
–Nurses: No person or corporation shall require any white female nurse to nurse in a hospital in which Negro men are placed
–Buses: All passenger stations operated by any motor transportation company shall have separate waiting rooms or space and separate ticket windows for the white and colored races.
–Education: The schools for white children and the schools for Negro children shall be conducted separately
–Intermarriage: All marriages between a white person and a negro are prohibited
–Telephone Booths: The Corporation Commission is hereby vested with power and authority to require telephone companies…to maintain separate booths for white and colored patrons
Has the segregation of yesteryear carried forward to today? Yes and No
No because:
–The Jim Crow laws are now unlawful. For example The 1954 judgment of the supreme court in the Brown vs Board of Education completely outlawed school segregation.
–The Two races can intermarry if they want to
Having said so we are still forced to answer “yes” to the question: “Has the segregation of yesteryear carried forward?” because the America of today is not yet fully integrated?
How do I know?
–There are white neighbor-hoods and black neighbor-hoods
–The are white churches and black churches
–There are black TV channels (like BET) and there are channels that feature white people for the majority of the time. Listen to a statement made by a teacher in response to a a young afro-mexican’s desire to one day be an actress in her favorite television soap opera called La Madrasta: Juana Iris Reyes Silva, the name of the young afrom-mexican, how are going to ever be an actress in the La Madrasta? There are no black people in the La Madrasta!
(b) Another expression in the past has been infliction of pain– sometimes deadly pain– on people of color
(i) A famous example is slavery. Any of you watched the movie “Roots?” Its been a while since I last watched it; but I still remember the bloody lashings of Kunta Kinte by his master after the failed escape attempt, I still remember the sad agonized faces of families forcefully separated because a member of the family had been sold to a new master their husbands and children
(ii) Another past example of a colored people pained is the Tuskegee scandal in which hundreds of poor black men with syphilis were left untreated so that researchers could observe the course of the disease
(iii) Lynching. Do we know of more current examples of racially-based violence against people of color? You remember the story of James Byrd Jr, Jasper county,Texas, June 1998. Here is the police report: On June 7 1998, at approximately 9 AM, the body of a black male,minus the head and right arm, were discovered on Huffy Creek Road in Jasper County, Texas.” I don’t need to continue.
How about the atrocities currently being committed with impunity by the Janjaweed Arabs against African Sudanese in Darfur.
(c) Another expression of inter-racial bias against dark skin is racial slurs (gestures, depictions, labels)
Examples of racial slurs would be “Nigger”and “Nugu”
How about the label “black.” I don’t know about you. Me, I have a serious problem with the nomenclatures “black” and “white”. First of all we Afros are such a rainbow of colors that to use the label “black” is at best misleading and at worst mischievous. Moreover I am yet to come across an African who is truly black. I am pretty dark-skinned myself. But the last time I ran a color identifying machine on my skin, the results came back “charcoal” not black. If I was black, the machine could have said so. It did not. It labeled me charcoal. Here is my hunch about the terms black and white. They are not really color terms. They are more like value terms with “white” designating clean and pure and “black” designating dirty and evil.
(d) Last expression of inter-racial bias that I would like to mention is of a textual nature
Not many are aware today but this text [(Gen. 9:18 ¶ The sons of Noah who went out of the ark were Shem, Ham, and Japheth. Ham was the father of Canaan. Gen. 9:19 These three were the sons of Noah; and from these the whole earth was peopled. Gen. 9:20 ¶ Noah, a man of the soil, was the first to plant a vineyard. Gen. 9:21 He drank some of the wine and became drunk, and he lay uncovered in his tent. Gen. 9:22 And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brothers outside. Gen. 9:23 Then Shem and Japheth took a garment, laid it on both their shoulders, and walked backward and covered the nakedness of their father; their faces were turned away, and they did not see their father’s nakedness. Gen. 9:24 When Noah awoke from his wine and knew what his youngest son had done to him, Gen. 9:25 he said, “Cursed be Canaan; lowest of slaves shall he be to his brothers.” Gen. 9:26 He also said, “Blessed by the LORD my God be Shem; and let Canaan be his slave. Gen. 9:27 May God make space for Japheth, and let him live in the tents of Shem; and let Canaan be his slave.”)] has been interpreted in the past to suggest that the African’s dark skin is a consequence of Noah’s maledictive utterance “cursed be Canaan.” Listen to the following remarks by Wahb Ibn Munabbih (d. ca. 730), a South Arabian convert to Islam:” Ham the son of Noah was a white man, with a handsome face and fine figure, and the Almighty changed his color and the color of his descendants in response to his father’s curse. He went away, followed by his sons, and they settled by the shore, where God increased and multiplied them. They are the blacks. Their food is fish, and they sharpened their teeth like needles, as the fish stuck to them. Some of his children went to the West (maghrib). Ham begat Cush ibn Ham, Canaan ibn Ham and Fut ibn Ham. Fut settled in India and Sind and their inhabitants are his descendants. Kush and Kanaan’s descendants are the various races of blacks: Nubians, Zanj, Qaran, Zaghawa, Ethiopians, Copts, and Berbers].
Now it is true that we the Africans are descendants of Ham. You remember how the flood wiped out the whole of humanity except for some pairs of animals, Noah, Mrs Noah, and their three sons Shem, Ham, and Japheth. These three sons, according to verse 19 [These three were the sons of Noah; and from these the whole earth was peopled] are responsible for the re-population of the flood following the initial holocaust. Being the progenitors of the post-diluvian generation, every people group in the world today can trace its genesis to one of these three sons. The Jews trace their genesis to Shem via Abraham. The Caucasians trace their genesis to Japheth. We the Africans have Ham as our forefather.
It is also true that Ham, our forefather, performed the despicable act of staring at his father’s nakedness and then choosing to gossip about it rather do the noble thing of covering his dad. However the pericope never states that Ham was cursed. The person who was cursed was Canaan. Look with me at Gen 10: 6 [Gen. 10:6 ¶ The descendants of Ham: Cush, Egypt, Put, and Canaan]. Who was Canaan? One of Ham’s four sons. So the person who was cursed in Gen 9 was not Ham, but Canaan, one of the sons. We African are descendants of Ham through Canaan? No! No! No! We are descendants of Ham through Cush. Being non-Cannanites ourselves we fall outside the scope of the curse and therefore could not be a cursed people.
We stated at the beginning that there are three types bias against dark skin. We’ve covered one already,viz., inter-racial bias against dark skin. Here is the second type
Bias type 2 is intra-racial bias against dark skin
We mentioned earlier that Africa is a rainbow of colors meaning the continent is marked by an array of skin colour—an array ranging from very fair through medium dark to very dark. Well it turns out that this otherwise positive aesthetic attribute of ranging shades of skin color—this otherwise positive attribute turns out to be sore point at which one set of Africans expresses bias against another set. Usually it the fair-skinned people who are the expressers of the prejudice, while the target of the prejudice are their dark-skinned brethren.
How does intra-racial bias express itself?
This particular expression is better illustrated than described. You are driving in the company of someone else. You spot a Sudanese around about park lane. You are not a luo. At least not a light-skinned luo. You point out the location of the Sudanese to your partner and what do you say?”cheki ule mu Sudanese,nimumweusi jo!”
Change of scene. You arrive at church and let’s say you have never met Kiprono. Someone points out Kiprono to you and says “that’s pastor’s boy!” You say “really!” He’s so brown!”
Judge for yourself whether or not the tone with which the Sudanese was described betray a mindset that considers dark skin as abberational and the tone with which Kiprono was described betrays a mindset that places more premium on light skin.
A less mild and more serious expression of intra-racial bias is snobbishness. Sudanese folks have visited us once in a while and its amazing how often they float during the post service fellowship time. We snob them. The question is why? Is it because they are too dark?
The third and last type of bias against dark skin is autobias
Here a dark-skinned individual expressed dissatisfaction with the color of his or her skin and wishes he or she were lighter-skinned. The level of dissatisfaction at times deepens to the point of bleaching the skin or utilizing a chemical like Ambi to lighten the skin color.
To recapitulate there are three types of bias against dark skin: inter-racial, intra-racial and autobias.
In finishing what is the biblical response to bias against dark skin.
First, bias against dark skin is ultimately a slap on God’s face for the simple reason that the object of the bias (viz., the skin) happens to be traceable to God’s creative work. The scriptures trace back to God the formation of not just the kidneys (we are used to reading Ps 139:13 as [For it was you who formed my inward part]; the literal reading though is “for it was you who formed my kidneys.” So the formation of kidneys is traceable to God. Also traceable to God is the formation of bones and sinews bones. Look at the last half of Job 10:11 (Job 10:11 … and knit me together with bones and sinew). More relevantly traceable to God is the formation of (let’s read the first half of Job 10:11 [Job 10:11 You clothed me with skin and flesh…] Church if God is responsible for clothing us with the skin, it is not at all imaginative to conclude that he also clothes us with skin colour—even dark skin colour. So to those who express autobias we say: your dark skin is not an accident. God designed it to be so. So quit trying to change what God has designed. Instead, embrace it. To the practitioners of the other two types of biases we say: If dark skin colour is God’s doing, to express prejudice against His product is a slap on his face.
Second, bias against in-born dark skin betrays a preoccupation with looks in a away that the Scriptures don’t. The Bible, for sure, makes references to looks. Thanks to the Bible we know Sarah was good looking, so was Rebekkah and Abigail and David. Thanks to the Bible we know that King Eglon was fat. There are a total of 30 people whose looks are described in the Bible. But how many people in total are mentioned in the Bible? Approx 3000. So what is the percentage of people whose looks are described compared to the total number of individuals mentioned in the Bible? 30/3000×100=1%. bias against in-born dark skin betrays a preoccupation with looks in a away that the Scriptures don’t
Thirdly, bias against in-born skin betrays a manner of assessing individual worth that is quite alien to the Scriptures. One thing is clear in the Scriptures: the substance of an individual rests not on appearance but in the heart. [1Sam. 16:7 But the LORD said to Samuel, “Do not look on his appearance or on the height of his stature, because I have rejected him; for the LORD does not see as mortals see; they look on the outward appearance, but the LORD looks on the heart.”]
God has Drawn a Demarcative Line Between the Two Genders
Introduction
Ever since God created man and ushered him into a relationship with Himself, he has drawn lines which were never meant to be crossed. He drew a line in the Garden of Eden [Gen. 2:16: …“You may freely eat of every tree of the garden; Gen. 2:17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat,….”]. He drew lines on the peak of Mt Sinai [Ex. 20:13: You shall not murder, Ex. 20:14 ¶ You shall not commit adultery]. He drew lines on the mountain on which he stood as he delivered the great beatitudes [Matt. 5:32 But I say to you that anyone who divorces his wife, except on the ground of unchastity, causes her to commit adultery; and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery].
Sermon Thesis
God has drawn a demarcative line between the two genders. He desires that we not cross the line; Also He wills that the genders show consideration one for the other in light of their differences
God has drawn a demarcative line between the two genders; He desires that we not cross the line.
God has drawn a demarcative line between the two genders. Here is a Bible trivia for you. From which Book of the Bible has this statement been coined? Genesis. What chapter? Chapter 1 What verse? Verse 27: (Gen. 1:27: So God created humankind in his image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.) God has drawn a demarcative line between the two genders. His desire is that we not cross the line.
What are some of the manifestation of gender line crossing?
1. Gayism
I can sense some of you saying this in you heart, “time out preacher-man, drop it guy, don’t even go there, unless, of course, you are confused about who we are, in which case we would be more than glad to remind you: “We are not Americans who (a) are the chief exporters of the gay rights movement (b) have among them a exclusively gay church (Metropolitan Community Church) (c) have plans underway this fall an exclusively gay and lesbian school in New York and (d) a few weeks ago produced the first publicly gay Anglican bishop—bishop-elect Gene Robinson of New Hampshire,” a decision, by the way, that is threatening to split the Anglican church worldwide. Bishop Nzimbi and his team are meeting even as we speak to decide on whether to dis-fellowship the American sector of the Anglican communion, a move that I personally would support without hesitation. “We are not even Canadians in whose land gay marriages are legally recognized in at least two provinces. We need to remind you that we are Africans. If it is vices you want to talk to us about, you know our vices. Speak to us about tribalism, for instance. But please don’t speak to us about homosexuality. Homosexuality is not just our vice.“
If that is you stance towards the subject of homosexuality, deservedly, you have every reason to pat yourself in the back because you follow in the very footsteps of our late beloved president.
Back in the 60’s, the late President, Mzee Jomo Kenyatta is said to have once confidently declared (and I quote) “there is no african word for homosexuality…the practice is totally unknown to the black man” As it turns out Mzee was speaking contemporaneously, not timelessly. If Hayati were to rise from the dead this very second, he would have no choice but to swallow his words. Why? Because
(i) There exists today an indigenous term for gayism, any one knows the term? Shoga. (ii)There are Kenyan homosexual practitioners; we even know the names of some of them. Daily Nation, June 24th, 1998 makes mention of 42-year old Odongo. The same issue named Amin,a 54 year old primary school headmaster. If you jog your memory, you might be able recall an estatemate, someone you grew up with of whom it was rumoured that he was gay. I recall someone who I grew up with who was gay. His name was Thuo. Kenyan homosexuals are now emerging from the closet. A good example is our fellow Kenyan diasporean Kerugo Macharia. Believe it or Macharia has posted his confession on the web for all to read. The confession reads in part: “In 1995, my first year in America, I began to question my sexual identity and to look for positive affirmations of it. I found my first positive affirmations of it in literature written by white gay men. Their voices helped me identify one aspect of my nature and to explore it”
(iii)There exists in our motherland a local chapter of an international advocacy group known as the LGBT advocacy group? LGBT stands for Lesbian Gays Bisexual and Transgender. The local chapter goes by the acronym Galebitra. I could not find the meaning of Galebitra; but I would not be surprised if the term is an acronym for Gay Lesbian Transgender. The coordinator of Galebitra is Jeremy Mirie.
(iv) There is talk out there that the new constitution is homosexuality-tolerant. And that may just be true based on an interview conducted by an East African Newspaper correspondent featuring Prof. Makau Mutua who used to be the Kenya Human Commission Chairman, is a current delegate to the new constitution referendum, and law professor at the Buffalo Law school in New York. Prof. Mutua had this say about homosexuality and the draft constitution: “there is misunderstanding about the view of African culture and African tradition, vis-à-vis homosexuality. My understanding is that before the advent of Christianity in the pre-colonial era, Africans never punished, discriminated against or looked down upon individuals who are today referred to as homosexuals…. It is in fact Christianity and its strict sexual moral code that introduced the hatred, discrimination, and exclusion of homosexuals from society. So the fact that the draft bill seeks to tolerate … homosexuals … is a very welcome development.”
If when I first mentioned the term homosexual, you, for a moment, thought the topic was irrelevant, I hope you now realize your naivete. Homosexuality in Kenya is no longer a myth, it’s a reality and it’s high time we talked about it from the pulpit.
The gay movement poses a two-pronged threat.
–The first threat has to do with the way in which pro-homosexual theologians seek to dilute the forcefulness with which the Bible condemns homosexuality. Let’s look at these passages: Lev. 18:22 reads, You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination. Lev. 20:l3 says, If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall be put to death; their blood is upon them. Rom 1, 18,26 and 27 says, For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and wickedness of those who by their wickedness suppress the truth (18). For this reason God gave them up to degrading passions. Their women exchanged natural intercourse for unnatural (26), and in the same way also the men, giving up natural intercourse with women, were consumed with passion for one another. Men committed shameless acts with men and received in their own persons the due penalty for their error.,(27). Pro-homosexual theologians read these texts and then argue that what is being condemned here is the homosexual act itself (act of lying with a male as with a woman or vice versa), not the homosexual relationship or desire per se. In other words, a homosexual is fine as long as the relationship stays platonic.
–The second threat posed by the homosexual movement is the kinds of scientific arguments it advances on its own behalf. An often-quoted psychoanalytical theory states that a father’s detachment or nonparticipation in a child’s upbringing causes a son to develop a compromised sense of secure-maleness because of lack of opportunity for the son to pattern his developing personality after that of his father. Then there is the genetic hypothesis which purports that homosexuality is determined from the word “go,” i.e., at the moment of conception due the presence of the so called “gay” gene
To the extent that you buy into these theological and scientific arguments or reject them totally is to the same extent that you will either grant or deny homosexuality a foothold in your life.
Speaking to the proposed distinction between the homosexual act and the homosexual relationship, I, personally, find this proposed dichotomization to be quite cosmetic and superficial. A Homosexual relationship, just like a heterosexual relationship, sooner or later culminates in the sex act. So spare me the platonic love nonsense.
As regards the psychoanalytical theory, the environment that I grow up in may influence my behaviour but ultimately the buck stops with me. I am ultimately responsible for my behaviour.
As regards the genetic hypothesis, namely the “gay” gene theory, if the hypothesis is true and if the psalmist’s assertion is also true that we owe our conception and uterine development to God, then the only logical conclusion that can be made is that God is responsible for the creation of the gay gene. But why would a God who created the gay gene turn around and then condemn homosexuality?
2. Transvestism.
Due to time I will not dwell much on this particular manifestation. There is one thing that I would like to pint out, though.
Any males in the house that have earing or plaited hair? Some are of the opinion that earing wearing or hair plaiting by the male gender should be categorized as transvestism. I cannot disagree enough. You have to see a real transvestite—I never sone myself until I came to this country- to realize that the male earing wearers or hair plaiters in our midst are nowhere close to passing themselves as females. They are simply being fashionable. Having said that, though, male earing wearers and hair plaiters, the burden is on you make sure you are not violating the Rom. 14 principle about not stumbling the weaker brethren.
God has drawn a demarcative line between the two genders. He wills that the genders show consideration one for the other in light of their differences
Let’s look at 1 Pet. 3:7 [Husbands, in the same way, show consideration for your wives in your life together, paying honor to the woman as the weaker sex, since they too are also heirs of the gracious gift of life — so that nothing may hinder your prayers]
The gender difference that Peter spotlights here is the relative weakness of the female gender. To this end he calls on the male gender to show consideration, to pay honour. I suggest to us that there exists several other gender differences, viz., biological/physiological differences. And for each of these other gender differences, Peter’s appeal still stands: show consideration! show consideration!
Due to time limitation we will only look at two. Besides citing these differences I will also suggest ways in which we can show consideration one for another
(a) Physical strength
Facts:
(i) The male has a BMR (Basal metabolic rate) 10% higher
(ii) the male converts 50% more energy into muscle
(iii) the male has larger windpipes and branching bronchi
(iv) the male has a larger heart which is able to pump larger volume of blood
Bottom line: The male is stronger, he can handle heavy work and is more energetic
Ways of showing consideration
(i) Be willing to take care of household chores that are physical taxing like let’s say scrubbing the bath-tub
(ii) Groceries can be pretty heavy; if there is any single reason why the male should go shopping with the female is so as to handle the heavy grocery
(iii) Since the male is stronger, the last thing you want to do is hit the female. Being the stronger one, males who beat females engage in a mismatch. There is no better expression of cowardice than a stronger person punching a weaker person. If you want to hit someone, males, find your match. I hear Don King Promotions is signing up new recruits. Sign up with Don King. He is bound to find you a good match, like Tyson. Then show us how good a fighter you are.
(b) Sexual Arousal
Facts
(i) The testosterone in the male produces neurotransmitters in the hypothalamus which then lowers the threshold of responses so that it takes less stimulation to attain arousal
(ii) The estrogen in the female causes the inhibition of synaptic firing in the brain leading to need for more sensory and cognitive stimulation
Bottom line: The male is not only easily aroused but is aroused by what they see; the female not only requires more stimulation but is aroused by touch and by words
Ways of showing consideration
(i) Single males, since the female gender is turned on by words, there is a three-word phrase that you should never utter unless you really really really mean it. You may not, should not, cannot, loosely, casually blurt out the words “I love you” unless you are willing to facilitate the fulfillment of the fantasy that this three-word phrase triggers in the female psyche. You see gentlemen, those words fling the female into fantasy land—fantasy land filled with possible wedding colour themes ; fantasy land filled with bridesmaids, wedding bells and pastor Ruto. The female’s expectation of you, Mr. Man, is that when she finally makes her way back from fantasy land to reality you see to it that her fantasy matches reality . Failure to convert her fantasy into reality results in a broken heart, broken pieces.
(ii) Females, since the male is aroused by sight, you show consideration by seriously thinking through your dress-code. For our sake, you may want to set aside the sphaghetti sleeves, the sleevless blouse, the tight miniskirts, the see-throughs. We are not asking that you put on a buibui—as in make it your noble goal to always underexpose yourself, not overexpose yourself. If you did that, you will be fulfilling the biblical principle of modest dressing.
Conclusion
In conclusion, we started out by pointing out that ever since God created mans and ushered him into a relationship with himself, he has drawn lines that were never meant to be crossed. Gender demarcation is an example of such line drawing.
God Has the Alien’s Agenda at Heart
WHETHER IT BE PHYSICAL OR SPIRITUAL ALIENISM, GOD HAS THE ALIEN’S AGENDA AT HEART
Introduction
The exact date I cannot recall; the event itself, however, I cannot forget. I was northbound on Abram’s Rd on a drizzling afternoon of spring 2000. As I was approaching the Abrams-Forest crossroad, the lights turned red. Naturally I hit my brakes. In a split second, my stationary Isuzu had been rear-ended and tossed into the middle of the Abrams-Forest junction. Realizing that I had not given up the Ghost after all, I slowly opened the driver’s door and with paper and pen in hand headed straight towards the driver’s window of the car that had just rammed into me. The first sentence that leapt out of my mouth was “let me have your insurance information.” The African American teenager behind the wheel told me she did not know where the insurance information was since the car belonged to her uncle. I had her check the glove compartment. She claimed it wasn’t there. In the absence of the insurance information, I thought it wise to involve the police. But lest the lady move her car and tamper with the evidence I ordered her to freeze as I made my way to a nearby booth to make a call. As I headed for the booth a police car showed up. Apparently the officer had noticed the accident. So I abandoned my calling plans, raced back to the accident scene and I identified myself to the officer as the owner of the rammed vehicle. He asked us to both move our cars to the adjacent shopping center. We did that and then approached the officer. The officer instructed us to exchange insurance information. I pulled my information out. Already aware that the African American teenager had no insurance on her, I let the officer know.
What did the officer do? Did he write her a ticket since driving a car without an insurance is a “ticketable” offense? No! Did he at least reprimand the girl for driving without insurance? No! All he said was, “let her give you her uncle’s phone number; you call the uncle for the insurance information.” That treatment puzzled me. Later on I narrated this treatment to one of the seminary police, and he too thought the officer’s handling of the incident was un-procedural.
To this day I am convinced that this officer treated me unfairly because I spoke with an accent. He was unwilling to allow the Law to take its full course because he suspected I was an alien. He was unwilling to take the alien’s agenda at heart. As I have reflected on this officer’s unjust dealing with me, I am comforted by one precious, priceless thought, which is, God is so unlike this officer. To borrow the phraseology of Num. 23:19 which reads (Num. 23:19: “God is not a human being, that he should lie, …”), God is not this police officer that He should dismiss, disregard, ignore the alien’s agenda.
Physical and spiritual alienism: Three demonstration of how God has the alien’s agenda at heart
Demonstration#1: When it comes to physical alienism, GOD’S LAW reveals that He has the alien’s agenda at heart
When it comes to physical alienism… Let’s define “physical alienism”. “Physical” we understand. In the context of this sermon, physical is the opposite of spiritual. How about alienism/alien? Merriam-Webster’s dictionary defines the term alien as “a person of another place.” I would like to modify that definition a little bit to fit our context. Let’s define “alien” as “one who is away from home.” “Alienism would thus refer to the “state of being away from home.” “Physical alienism” would refer to the experience of being physically away from home.
When it comes to physical alienism, God’s Law reveals that He has the alien’s agenda at heart. If you want to know whether a system has your agenda at heart, look at the system’s legislature or the system’s constitution. We have heard some commentaries emerge from behind this pulpit—commentaries on Kenya’s new constitution. So far we have heard negative commentaries. Now I am not questioning the veracity of those negative comments. All I wish to highlight is that there are positive aspects of the new constitution. Those of us who have read the draft form of the new constitution would attest with me that the new constitution, in as far as the treatment of the Kenyan in Diaspora is concerned, does have our agenda at heart. Here are 2 articles of the constitution for your consideration.
Article #23: Dual citizenship is permitted under the laws of Kenya. A person who as a result of acquiring the citizenship of another country lost the citizenship of Kenya at any time before the coming into operation of the constitution, is entitled on application to be registered as a citizen of Kenya.
Question: Has it not been the agenda of the Kenyan in Diaspora to acquire dual citizenship? Well, article #23 of the new constitution addresses that agenda. Does this article then reveal that the framers of the constitution have the agenda of the Kenyan in Diaspora at heart? The answer would have to be “Yes.”
Article #77 reads: Subject to any provision in the constitution, Parliament shall enact a law to provide for the registration of, and voting by, citizens who are outside Kenya
Question: Has it not been the agenda of the Kenyan in Diaspora to be able to participate in the elections at home? Well, article #77 of the new constitution addresses this very agenda. Does article # 77 then reveal that the framers of the new constitution have the agenda of the Kenyan in Diaspora at heart? The answer would have to be “Yes.”
In the same manner that the new constitution reveals the extent to which the framers have the agenda of the Kenyan in Diaspora at heart so does the Law of God reveal the extent to which He has the alien’s agenda at heart.
What does the law of God say about aliens? Time does not allow us to take a peek at all the alien-related laws. But here are just two among the many.
Cognizant of the vulnerability of the alien to oppression or maltreatment God’s jurisprudence categorically restrains the natives from mistreating the alien: (Ex. 22:21 ¶ You shall not wrong or oppress a resident alien, for you were aliens in the land of Egypt; Lev. 19:33 ¶ When an alien resides with you in your land, you shall not oppress the alien.).
Cognizant of the vulnerability of the alien to injustice, God’s jurisprudence categorically restrains the natives from denying the alien justice: (Deut. 24:17 ¶ You shall not deprive a resident alien or an orphan of justice; … Deut. 27:19 ¶ “Cursed be anyone who deprives the alien, the orphan, and the widow of justice)
Beyond promulgating pro-alien legislature, God himself poses as the alien’s watchman ( Psa. 146:9 The LORD watches over the strangers; he upholds the orphan and the widow, but the way of the wicked he brings to ruin). God also poses as the lover of the alien (Deut. 10:17 For the LORD your God is God of gods and Lord of lords, the great God, mighty and awesome, who is not partial and takes no bribe, Deut. 10:18 who executes justice for the orphan and the widow, and who loves the strangers, providing them food and clothing.)
So what are the implications of the biblical truth that, when it comes to physical alienism, God has the alien’s agenda at heart?
1. As an alien, have you been a victim of maltreatment? Maybe an officer let a native off the hook at your expense or a teacher graded you down because you have an accent or you were strip-searched at the airport because you looked different. I can imagine the bitterness or the vexation that the mistreatment brought to you. You probably felt helpless, unable to bring the mistreater to book. I encourage you, in the name of the Lord to let go the bitterness or the vexation. God took note of the mistreatment. His requirements still stand (Ex. 22:21 ¶ You shall not wrong or oppress a resident alien,; Deut. 24:17 ¶ You shall not deprive a resident alien or an orphan of justice;). To maltreat an alien is to break God’s commandment. And in His justice He will not overlook such an infraction.
2. When we arrive in a foreign the land, we should not be duped into thinking that God would be such an inconvenience that He has to be left at the airport. Who leaves the scene without the bodyguard? So how would you even contemplate leaving without one one who watches over the alien? Who voluntarily leaves behind a loved one? So how would you even contemplated leaving behind the one who loves the alien? My advice to you, then, is if you left God at DFW, make you way back there and get Him.
ere and get Him
Demonstration #2: When it comes to sin-engendered spiritual alienism, God’s measure to ensure its sweet cancellation demonstrates that He has the alien’s agenda at heart.
When it comes to “spiritual alienism … . “ Alienism,” we have already defined. It’s the state of being away from home. “Spiritual alienism” would thus be referring to the state of being spiritually away from home.
Home for you and me, spiritually speaking is relationally being with God. The state of man upon birth, however, is one of relational separation from God. The cause of the separation is sin. That you and I have sinned, Romans 3:23 makes clear: (Rom. 3:23 since all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God). That sin is the cause of the separation between God and man Rom. 6:23 clearly attests to (Rom. 6:23: For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.); (the wages of sin is death) death here refers to the rift or the valley or the separation between God and man since death in its essence means separation. Left to our selves this rift between God and man would forever remain unbridged becausing nothing in and of ourselves can bring about the bridging of the rift–no works however good or impressive or laudable, no church attendance however frequent, no tithing however high, no baptism; nothing. Eph 2:9 says (Eph. 2:9: not the result of works, so that no one may boast.)
The good news, though, is that God has supplied the bridge that forever cancels the rift between Himself and man.
During the colonial era, when the British wanted to establish a road between Kirinyaga and Embu in the Mt Kenya region to fight Mau Mau insurgence, there was one snag. The Nyamindi river that flows from Mt Kenya into RiverTana required a bridge. However there was neither time nor resources for that kind of project during the state of emergency. Unknown to the mbeberu but known to the locals was the existence of a bridge somewhere in the woods of Murinduko. It was a strong bridge almost 20 metres long. The bridge exists even today–about a Kilometer from Mururi trading center off the Embu-Nairobi Rd. The locals would use the bridge to cross the Nyamindi Brook. As much as the locals utilized the bridge, no one knew how this bridge came into being. So the the residents of Murinduko and the Mt Kenya region came up with a name for the bridge. They named the bridge “Ndaraca ya Ngai” (which means “God’s bridge”)
God has supplied a Ndaraca that forever cancels the rift between Deity and mankind. That Ndaraca is Jesus Christ. Jesus is the Ndaraca ya Ngai.
If you were to repent of your sins and receive Christ, you would become a believer. Once a believer this description would be true of you as it was for the Ephesians believers (Eph. 2:12: Remember that you were at that time without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world; Eph. 2:19: So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are citizens with the saints and also members of the household of God). When it comes to sin-engendered spiritual alienism, God has put in place a measure to ensure its sweet cancellation. That God has such a measure in place demonstrates that He has the alien’s agenda at heart.
Demonstration #3 When it comes to Heaven-associated spiritual alienism, God’s measure to ensure its glorious termination demonstrates that He has the alien’s agenda at heart.
No sooner is an individual transfered from the kingdom of darkness to the Kingom of God’s beloved son, upon belief, and of that new believer it is said “you are no longer strangers and aliens but you are citizens with the saints and members of the household of God–no sooner is all these true of a believer than the believer is branded an alien yet again. This time the alienism is not the sin-engendered spiritual alienism. That type of spiritual alienism is cancelled upon belief. This time the status of the believer is the heaven-associated spiritual alienism.
Philippians chapter 3 verses 18-21 reads (Phil. 3:18: For, as I have often told you before and now say again even with tears, many live as enemies of the cross of Christ. Phil. 3:19 Their destiny is destruction, their god is their stomach, and their glory is in their shame. Their mind is on earthly things. Phil. 3:20 But our citizenship is in heaven. And we eagerly await a Savior from there, the Lord Jesus Christ, Phil. 3:21 who, by the power that enables him to bring everything under his control, will transform our lowly bodies so that they will be like his glorious body. ). If our citizenship is in heaven, then as long as we out here we remain aliens. But not for long. Soon and very soon we are going to see the King. Soon and very soon the roll will be called. In the words of the hymnist James M Black:
(When the trumpet of the Lord shall sound,
And time shall be no more,
And the morning breaks, eternal, bright, and fair;
When the saved of earth shall gather over on the other shore,
And the roll is called up yonder, we believers, we will be there.
When the roll is called up yonder,
When the roll is called up yonder,
When the roll is called up yonder,
When the roll is called up yonder, we believers, we will be there.
On that bright and cloudless morning
When the dead in Christ shall rise,
And the glory of his resurrection share;
When his chosen ones shall gather
To their home beyond the skies,
And the roll is called up yonder, we believers , we will be there.
When the roll is called up yonder,
When the roll is called up yonder,
When the roll is called up yonder,
When the roll is called up yonder, I’ll be there…)
Challenge
God is pro-alien through and through. He is pro-alien when it comes to physical alienism. He is pro-alien when it comes to spiritual alienism. The question is whether you are pro-God? He is already pro-you; are you pro-Him?
.
Nicholas oyugi's Weblog 