CultureWatch

Bill Muehlenberg's commentary on issues of the day...

Love Is Not the Same as Acceptance

Jun 16, 2013

Can you love someone while disapproving of what they do? In our morally confused times many folks think not. They think that we must simply accept anything; not to do so means we are unloving or intolerant. And governments have bought this contorted moral reasoning as well.

But this is a recipe for disaster, and we had better get such matters sorted out before we cause even more damage. Let me tie this in to a common question. I am often asked what I would do if one of my children were caught out in some obvious sinful behaviour or lifestyle. The homosexual activists especially like to throw this one out: ‘What would you do if your child came out as a homosexual?’

They seem to think that this is a conversation stopper, and that they have nicely cornered me. Well no, it is not the end of the conversation, and no they have not cornered me. The answer is actually rather simple: I would of course continue to love my child, even though I would not approve of the course of action they have embarked upon.

Any parent will love their children through thick and sin. It does not matter if they go off into a life of crime or perverse heterosexual promiscuity. A parent will still love his or her own, but need not and should not condone any dangerous, risky or morally wrong behaviours and lifestyles.

So I of course would continue to love my child, all the while pointing out that the path they are now on is certainly not advised, and certainly not condoned. Indeed, because I love my children so much, I only want what is for their very best. Who would be happy with their children embracing a dangerous and unsafe lifestyle which can take years off their lives?

How is that being loving? If you really love someone you seek the very best for them. You certainly do not just accept whatever path they choose. Especially if you are a Christian, you always want what is best for them, and that means you want God’s best for them.

You do not want them living in open rebellion and defiance of God’s clear word and standard on human sexuality. You will want them to repent and renounce any such sinful lifestyles, and come back to conformity with God’s word and God’s will.

You see, we cannot confuse love with acceptance. Biblical love is willing the highest good for the other; it is not allowing them to wallow in sin and a dead-end lifestyle. I will always love my kids no matter what, but I do not have to accept everything they may choose to do or engage in.

There is nothing loving about allowing any person you love and care for to head off on a destructive and hurtful direction. We dare not accept anything and everything they get themselves into. Yet far too many Christian parents are doing just that.

They think they must accept, embrace and condone anything their children do. That is not at all being a loving parent. That is being an irresponsible and unbiblical parent. That is simply sending their kids to an early grave and a lost eternity.

And our Western governments are no better on this issue. They have in fact gone full circle here. They once prohibited such dangerous lifestyles, but then went to permission, and have now gone all the way to active and zealous promotion.

Yet on other high-risk behaviours it has reversed course. I refer to how governments deal with tobacco use. Once it was open slather, but now the state is cracking down big time. The state is doing everything it can to deter smokers and deter others from taking up smoking.

Thus we now pay outrageous prices for a pack of cigs – this is called a “sin tax”. Astronomically high taxes on tobacco products are there for one reason – besides being a revenue raiser: to discourage folks from smoking or taking it up. And it works.

Smoking rates are now well down from what they were 50 years ago. So why the bizarre double standards here? Why does the West actively endorse and promote one dangerous lifestyle, while actively deterring and discouraging the other?

In fact, we are witnessing a major role-reversal when it comes to this topic. While Russia once was the “evil empire” doing great evil at home and abroad, and America was once the light on a hill and a force for good, remarkably the tables are now turning.

America under Obama is getting more and more evil by the day, especially with his active and incessant promotion of the radical homosexual agenda. Meanwhile, Russia under Putin is taking the opposite approach. He has championed a number of courses which will not give the homosexual militants free rein.

Most recently Russia has passed a new law that prohibits the promotion of homosexuality and other risky sexual behaviours among minors. It is concerned enough about its children to actually withstand the militant homosexual agenda here.

And Obama is doing the exact opposite. Consider this news item: “At an event at the White House on Thursday commemorating Pride Month, two third-grade children introduced President Barack Obama. Zea and Luna, nine-year-old twins, read appeals from a letter that they apparently sent to the nation’s leader last December. Among the other subjects they discussed in it was gun violence, increased funding for schools and — same-sex marriage.”

Using and exploiting young children for crass political purposes is always wrong, and when these children are used to promote dangerous and unhealthy agendas, it is even more to be condemned. But this is par for the course for Obama.

But back to the original question: What do you do if your child comes out as a homosexual? You love them and always be there for them. But you do not condone or mollycoddle their dangerous and risky behaviour. Governments too should do the same – and most are when it comes to something like tobacco use. Yet they have caved in when it comes to an equally high-risk lifestyle: homosexuality.

We certainly live in confusing times. And the confusion over love and acceptance is a big part of this.

www.lifesitenews.com/news/media-howl-as-russia-protects-its-children-from-gay-propaganda
www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/06/14/we-have-two-moms-third-grade-kids-introduce-obama-at-white-houses-gay-pride-event/

[1044 words]

13 Responses to Love Is Not the Same as Acceptance

  • That the GM promoters would use such a tactic shows how reliant on emotion is their entire case! Who would change their belief that drugs are bad because their kids have gone on a bender and are now addicted?

    And what sought of relationship would it be that you had to change your moral principles in order to have your kid love you? That isn’t love.

    And as for the use of kids; social engineers love this tactic because it pulls at the heart strings. Everything’s emotion, emotion, emotion to them. The Left is all about feelings.

    Damien Spillane

  • Instead of a Christian-governed nation, I believe there is an even a better way to promote peace, love, and Jesus in our country. Instead of raising an alarm when they are removed from government buildings, I believe we should hang the 10 Commandments in our own homes and on our hearts. If we honoured them by our actions, it wouldn’t matter what the government did, because the hearts of unbelievers would be touched dramatically. Think of the stories of Joseph, Daniel, and of course our perfect example, God’s Commandment Keeper, Jesus. His life of love, grace, and perfection changed the course of history—no earthly government required.
    Miranda Dudley

  • Thanks Miranda

    Yes true, but it does matter what governments do. Right now many Western governments are trying to stamp out Christianity. We have every right in a democracy to stand up for religious freedom and freedom of conscience and not let them go without a fight. We don’t need doormat believers who allow tyrants to walk all over them and destroy a society. We saw that happen in Nazi Germany and the results were horrific. We are called to be salt and light and to seek righteousness for our nations. So yes we maintain our personal devotion to Christ, but we also have civic and social responsibilities as believers as well.

    Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

  • Hi Bill, I had just begun to ponder your stance from such a perspective. Your typical stance against homosexuality is quite hard lined, so it is refreshing to hear a Loving stance on the matter. I am now convinced that your head and heart are in the right place on this issue. We are to “Love the sinner, but hate the sin”, while at the same time be “Salt and Light to the World.” – it can be hard to be both Salt and Light. I think most people prefer to be Light to the World, as it is passive; whereas to be Salt, action is required, but tempered by love. In a world where we want everyone to like us, it can be hard to reprimand someone, especially a peer, out of love and concern.
    Matthew Patchon

  • People who commit sodomy and buggery curse themselves through their choices and conduct.
    Michael Ejercito

  • Yes, it is a bit of a puzzle that the anti smoking and the pro-homosexual campaigns altogether. When you look at the anti-smoking campaign, you could just argue that because people no longer are concerned about eternal life, because they believe that this life is all there is, they would want to extend this life to its greatest possible extent. But then what to make of the pro–homosexual daaign when statistics have proven that it shortens one life even more than that of smoking? The only thing I can come up with at this stage is that helped by the false comfort of retroviral treatment for sti-aids, there is a deeper more destructive element at work. As some commentor pointed out on one of your other articles, Bill, the destruction of geneology must be again the object of evil, as it has often been that way in the old testament where the geneological line of kings was preserved by God’s miracle by just a hairs breadth. We know Satan can not destroy what God has planned, he was unable to destroy the genology of Jesus, I just wonder what else he is seeking to destroy with his death promoting deception. now. Many blessings
    Ursula Bennett

  • Bill, in some Christian circles there seems to be some confusion on this issue of love being the same as acceptance, with regard to God’s relationship to human persons – “God loves and accepts you just as you are” etc.
    Scripture seems to indicate to me that God certainly loves all human persons right where they are at, but He can only accept those who are “in Christ” as His eternal Children.

    John Gillespie

  • Of course you would continue to love your children if they came out on the side of homosexuality. Even if they didn’t embrace homosexuality themselves but just came out in support of those that do, you would still love them. Why would one sin change the way you love them when they have been sinning their whole life even as you trained them to live rightly before God? We have always loved our children and sought to teach them the ways of God, and they have frequently chosen to do their own thing against God’s will, be it to lie, to steal, to fight back or be selfish in their motivations, but we still love them. Why then would their being homosexual be any different?

    Tim Badger

  • Only roughly one in every thousand verses talks about God’s love. There are a number of books in the Bible in which God’s love is not mentioned at all such as Acts (where we read about New Testament evangelism and how the gospel spread further and further) and others in which it is barely given a mention.

    Even when God’s love is referred to, it is not saying God loves everyone unconditionally as some would like to make out.

    Yes we are called to love everyone but that is love in the sense of being sensitive to their needs and treating others how you would like them to treat yourself and to consider their wellbeing as important as your own. This – which many unbelievers find difficult to understand and/or are unwilling to accept/tolerate – of course requires that we neither accept nor tolerate sin. For if we tolerate their sin then we cannot consider their wellbeing as important as our own. We are called to repay evil with good.

    God’s righteousness is what God offers. He offers to change us to make us righteousness to free us from slavery to sin and enable us to live better lives. In our best moments we all would admit that we wish we were better people. That is what the message of the gospel is that if we repent and go on believing in Jesus, God will save us from our sin. It has been said “I have been saved, I am being saved, I will be saved”.

    Regarding Light, to be the Light of the world we need to be present. We need to spend some time out in society whether that be in the workplace or wherever we are called to be and for our lives to show what God has imparted to us, to demonstrate that we have something worth having, and that God really does change lives for the better, that we have all fallen short of God’s standard and that he can make the unrighteous, righteous.

    The Salt of the earth (see Luke) was quite a different salt to what we use as a flavouring or preservative today. It was both a fertiliser for the soil and a disinfectant for the dung heap. It could very easily be mixed up with sand and if a deceitful merchant did that, it would become useless and once discovered it would be thrown out where all the rubbish went, onto the street to be trampled.

    Salt needs to be of sufficient quality and quantity and to be applied in the right place to make a difference, to promote what is good and restrain evil.

    Matt Vinay

  • Thanks for this, Bill. You know, I am once again under attack and this time it was because I dared to post my opinion on a Youtube video of a short film. Here, you can check it out (and the comments) for yourself: www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ROXTFfkcfo&lc=yLe2OxD8t52IdQT9Gl6gjtBHbyIGdYrCPr9_q48PRVY

    Mark Taylor

  • Thanks Mark. They don’t seem to be very tolerant of you.

    Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

  • Being a homosexual is not risky.

  • Thanks Nicole, but let me call your bluff. Of course this is a high risk and dangerous lifestyle. Pretending it is not does not change the facts. I have penned entire books documenting all this. Let me simply offer two articles from a leading homosexual medical website.

    This one is for homosexuals:
    glma.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=Page.viewPage&pageID=690

    This one is for lesbians:
    www.glma.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=Page.viewPage&pageID=691

    I hardly think you will be able to accuse this medical group of being homophobic.

Leave a Reply