"Evangelicals" Who Compromise on Marriage

Bereans,

I thought I would publish one more post about the problem of compromise on the definition of marriage.  In last week's post I shared with you some thoughts and information on the Senate's move to pass the "Respect for Marriage Act," which would make so-called same-sex "marriage" a federal right.  As I shared last week, twelve Republicans voted with all fifty Democrats to move this legislation forward.  

This week, the bill passed, with the same group supporting it.  It will now move to the House of Representatives, where it will surely pass and be sent to President Biden who will sign and gleefully celebrate it.  What I want to emphasize in this post is how compromise over the years among "evangelical leaders" on this issue has led to the situation in which we now find ourselves.  The old saying "You give an inch, and they'll take a mile," has been the theme of the sexual revolution.  Every "small" compromise always leads to greater sexual deviancy, as they immediately press for the acceptance of more perversion (Romans 1:18-32).  We are now at a point where it could be best described as sexual anarchy.  The last great hurdle is the normalization of pedophilia, and that is already coming at light speed.  (More on that in an upcoming post.)

This first article involves David French, a very popular social commentator among the evangelical "elites" and intellectuals.  His columns appear often in The New York Times and other prominent publications.  Most of the elites have liked him because he sounds intellectual and reasonable, and not--as a friend of mine said--"like Sean Hannity."  

While his views were biblically orthodox early on, over the past two decades he has slid down the slope of compromise, and influenced many evangelical leaders along the way.  One example of such compromise is to agree that homosexual couples ought to have some "rights" as couples.  While this sounds "fair," it denies that God declared that such relationships between people of the same sex are forbidden, period.  To cave in and say that they should have the same rights as married couples (e.g. - inheritance rights, visiting rights, medical decision rights) is to equate such relationships as a legitimate form of union that is comparable to marriage.  

These compromises set up the eventual demand that marriage be redefined.  After marriage was redefined by the Supreme Court, they demanded that their relationships be celebrated and promoted more than true marriage.  Though you may not have heard of him, David French has significantly influenced many so-called evangelicals who were "on the fence" to now take the position that same sex "marriages" should be permitted, as long as churches and religious organizations don't have to participate.  Such compromise by encoding evil into our laws only brings about the wrath of God on a nation.

Article 1: https://wng.org/opinions/the-parable-of-david-french-1669034447

The second article spells out how the Biden administration and liberal/progressive groups plan to use this legislation to force Christians out of the public square.  The sexual revolution agenda marches on with full strength thanks to compromisers like David French and those who fall for such "worldly wisdom," as supporting this act "as long as it protects religious rights."  This is a deal with the devil that will only end up bringing more persecution on the church.

Article 2: https://pjmedia.com/culture/marktapscott/2022/11/18/biden-democrats-moving-to-ban-traditional-marriage-advocates-from-the-public-square-n1646900

Finally, the first half of this Relatable podcast with Allie Beth Stuckey hits the nail on the head about pastors who compromise so they can avoid offending the world.

Podcast link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=auyZUesaDcU

Grace and peace to you,
J.W.