Christians know that God in essence is comprised of three persons. The eternal community is Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The concept seems mysterious. How can any being exist in three persons? There is much more that can be said here, but my pondering here is this: is “threeness” a divine mark?
We humans are likewise triune. We are body, soul and spirit. Body is that which is physical and perishable. Soul is mind, will and emotions: intangible, but real nonetheless. If we are born again, it is the Holy Spirit which comprises the third part of our nature.
We could also see the family as triune. A family comprised of husband, wife and children is one unit, but also three entities.
Finally, one could also see the church as triune. Christ is the head of the church, and according to scripture, there is within the church there are leaders and the flock.
So…..is three a divine mark? Is it a pattern that God built into creation?
Before leaving this topic, this made me think of something else. It seems to me that God has created the universe based on patterns, or templates. Suns have planets. Stars cluster in galaxies. People come in basically one size and shape.
Here’s my point: evolutionists maintain that the similar structures, even the similarity of DNA in man and apes is proof of evolution. I suggest, instead, that it is just proof that the Creator makes things according to patterns. The man-like pattern is just one of many patterns that work.
Sunday, November 12, 2006
Friday, November 10, 2006
The Revolution That Shot America in the Foot
The Anchorage Daily News published this in "Compass" on its editorial page on 8 November, 2006 under the title "Sexual Revolution Came at High Cost." This version has been edited slightly and some references added.
The “sexual revolution” has been part of life in American society now for a century, more or less, and it is worth asking ourselves whether this revolution has made our lives better or worse.
I should get to the confession part right away: I was a willing participant in the sexual revolution. Like many in my generation, I was a willing pawn in the struggle to divorce sex from marriage.
But today, I have discovered that the sexual revolution has costs. And today, I find myself on the other side of the barricades. I have become a counterrevolutionary.
The sexual revolution promised low-cost sexual access. Changing social mores, effective contraceptives, and abortion on demand provided unprecedented sexual access outside of marriage; access purchased before only at the risk of disgrace, forced matrimony, or responsibility for children. Today, the goal of widely available sexual access unregulated by marriage has largely been attained.
But now that the revolution has matured, we should ask whether it is worth the costs – and whether society can continue to pay its many costs.
One obvious cost is the dramatic rise of sexually transmitted diseases. Today, one in five Americans has an incurable sexually transmitted disease, and one in four is within sight. A large number of these will die early. Others will unwittingly infect healthy partners and innocents. The economic, emotional, and social costs are high.
After decades of wishful words in the popular media, we now find that the group that consistently reports the highest physical and emotional satisfaction from sex is comprised of men and women faithfully married to one another. (See Sex in America: A Definitive Survey p 131). It seems that the reality of the revolution does not match the gild with which its promoters paint it. Decreased pleasure from sexual union outside of marriage is, counter intuitively, a cost of the revolution.
Increased divorce rates are another cost. Most who cohabit and those who engage in extra-marital sex are significantly more likely to divorce. The dissolution of a marriage is expensive to adults economically and emotionally. It is especially so to children -- even for decades after the death of the marriage. It is even expensive to society at large.
There is an economic manipulation cost of the revolution. The acolytes of the revolution play on our sexual desires for their economic gain. Whether they produce pornography or sexually charged films, or sell products with the advertising aid of partially clothed men or women, they enrich themselves at our expense. We readily open our wallets to them as they twitch their strings.
Anthropological studies have concluded that societies regulating sexual freedom within the bounds of marriage have consistently been the most creative and expansive. Conversely, those that allow the greatest sexual freedom decline. These studies suggest that we allow this revolution to continue at the cost of cultural creativity and cohesiveness.
Finally, many of the ills of society today – increased crime, drug abuse, alcoholism, children killed in the womb, homelessness, and more – can be traced in large measure to the breakdown of the American family. And, the breakdown of the family can be linked in large measure to the sexual revolution. While there may be no straight line connection between a specific social ill and the sexual revolution, what thinking person could seriously suggest there is no connection whatever?
While adults continue to pay some of the costs of the sexual revolution, it is America’s children who are paying the highest price for it. Without effective voice, and unable to understand the forces that batter them, they do not cry out. If we could really hear their pain, we would retreat with broken hearts to the morality that our grandfathers understood.
The God of the Old and New Testaments laid out a simple morality that works. Our American society was originally built on it. It protects the weak, builds strong families and provides a joy that soars far above the transitory pleasures and drama of the lifestyle pandered by today’s puppet masters of sexual revolution. The pattern does not call for perfection, only repentance and turning away from sin to follow the God who hears and saves.
I regret my own part in the sexual revolution for a number of reasons. I will say this much: I have come to believe that the sexual revolution has shot us individually and as a society in the foot, and maybe in the gut. It is time for the sexual revolution to end, and the counter revolution to begin.
A particularly well written and well documented book that covers this and other subjects related to marriage is Why Marriage Matters: Reasons to Believe in Marriage in a Postmodern Society by Glenn T. Stanton.
I should get to the confession part right away: I was a willing participant in the sexual revolution. Like many in my generation, I was a willing pawn in the struggle to divorce sex from marriage.
But today, I have discovered that the sexual revolution has costs. And today, I find myself on the other side of the barricades. I have become a counterrevolutionary.
The sexual revolution promised low-cost sexual access. Changing social mores, effective contraceptives, and abortion on demand provided unprecedented sexual access outside of marriage; access purchased before only at the risk of disgrace, forced matrimony, or responsibility for children. Today, the goal of widely available sexual access unregulated by marriage has largely been attained.
But now that the revolution has matured, we should ask whether it is worth the costs – and whether society can continue to pay its many costs.
One obvious cost is the dramatic rise of sexually transmitted diseases. Today, one in five Americans has an incurable sexually transmitted disease, and one in four is within sight. A large number of these will die early. Others will unwittingly infect healthy partners and innocents. The economic, emotional, and social costs are high.
After decades of wishful words in the popular media, we now find that the group that consistently reports the highest physical and emotional satisfaction from sex is comprised of men and women faithfully married to one another. (See Sex in America: A Definitive Survey p 131). It seems that the reality of the revolution does not match the gild with which its promoters paint it. Decreased pleasure from sexual union outside of marriage is, counter intuitively, a cost of the revolution.
Increased divorce rates are another cost. Most who cohabit and those who engage in extra-marital sex are significantly more likely to divorce. The dissolution of a marriage is expensive to adults economically and emotionally. It is especially so to children -- even for decades after the death of the marriage. It is even expensive to society at large.
There is an economic manipulation cost of the revolution. The acolytes of the revolution play on our sexual desires for their economic gain. Whether they produce pornography or sexually charged films, or sell products with the advertising aid of partially clothed men or women, they enrich themselves at our expense. We readily open our wallets to them as they twitch their strings.
Anthropological studies have concluded that societies regulating sexual freedom within the bounds of marriage have consistently been the most creative and expansive. Conversely, those that allow the greatest sexual freedom decline. These studies suggest that we allow this revolution to continue at the cost of cultural creativity and cohesiveness.
Finally, many of the ills of society today – increased crime, drug abuse, alcoholism, children killed in the womb, homelessness, and more – can be traced in large measure to the breakdown of the American family. And, the breakdown of the family can be linked in large measure to the sexual revolution. While there may be no straight line connection between a specific social ill and the sexual revolution, what thinking person could seriously suggest there is no connection whatever?
While adults continue to pay some of the costs of the sexual revolution, it is America’s children who are paying the highest price for it. Without effective voice, and unable to understand the forces that batter them, they do not cry out. If we could really hear their pain, we would retreat with broken hearts to the morality that our grandfathers understood.
The God of the Old and New Testaments laid out a simple morality that works. Our American society was originally built on it. It protects the weak, builds strong families and provides a joy that soars far above the transitory pleasures and drama of the lifestyle pandered by today’s puppet masters of sexual revolution. The pattern does not call for perfection, only repentance and turning away from sin to follow the God who hears and saves.
I regret my own part in the sexual revolution for a number of reasons. I will say this much: I have come to believe that the sexual revolution has shot us individually and as a society in the foot, and maybe in the gut. It is time for the sexual revolution to end, and the counter revolution to begin.
A particularly well written and well documented book that covers this and other subjects related to marriage is Why Marriage Matters: Reasons to Believe in Marriage in a Postmodern Society by Glenn T. Stanton.
Tuesday, October 24, 2006
Does "Living Together" Improve Later Marital Success?
A recent front page article in the Anchorage Daily News reported that more American couples are opting for living together than marriage. The article reported that many are choosing not to marry because of the high divorce rate all around them, hoping that a trial arrangement will lead to success.
The desire to work towards a lasting marriage is noble. But does it really work? Even noble deeds can misfire if based on bad information.
Social science continues to reveal the reasons for the tradition of lifelong marriage: it works. It doesn’t just sort of work, it works better than any other arrangement, and it works best for individuals, children and society.
On the other hand, as counterintuitive as it might seem, social science has demonstrated that couples living together before marriage suffer a 50 -100% higher divorce rate when they do marry. And it’s not just higher divorce rates that hurt: as a group those who live together are statistically less equalitarian, more violent, less successful in remarriage after divorce, more depressed, and less caring of children than their married peers, to name a few.
The reality is that while living together may be popular, it most often diminishes rather than enhances quality of life. For the sake of future happiness for millions, this misbegotten approach to relationship belongs in the dustbin of history along with other failed social experiments.
The desire to work towards a lasting marriage is noble. But does it really work? Even noble deeds can misfire if based on bad information.
Social science continues to reveal the reasons for the tradition of lifelong marriage: it works. It doesn’t just sort of work, it works better than any other arrangement, and it works best for individuals, children and society.
On the other hand, as counterintuitive as it might seem, social science has demonstrated that couples living together before marriage suffer a 50 -100% higher divorce rate when they do marry. And it’s not just higher divorce rates that hurt: as a group those who live together are statistically less equalitarian, more violent, less successful in remarriage after divorce, more depressed, and less caring of children than their married peers, to name a few.
The reality is that while living together may be popular, it most often diminishes rather than enhances quality of life. For the sake of future happiness for millions, this misbegotten approach to relationship belongs in the dustbin of history along with other failed social experiments.
Sunday, October 22, 2006
Some Wisdom on Marriage from My Brothers
I led a session on marriage for men at our church’s men's retreat recently. Part of the session involved men sharing what they had learned in their married lives. There are some powerful lessons here.
Here are some of the items on my brothers’ list to of positive behaviors for husbands:
Break soul ties – the sexual revolution took many of us in with its lies and deceit. As a result we have soul connections to past lovers. We must break those “soul ties” by firmly renouncing them and repenting of those wrong connections.
Listen – we males tend to listen little and talk much. Often what our wives need is responsive, empathetic listening rather than our simple solutions.
Prayer – who has the time to pray daily with one’s wife? But if we will do it, we will find new deep new strength in our connection with God and with our wives.
Resolve anger quickly – “don’t let the sun go down on your anger” is good advice. We need to clear it out before the day ends. We must keep “short accounts” rather than unending lists of grievances.
Focus on the good – we men will do well to focus on the good things in our wives and concentrate on our areas of problems rather than the other way around.
Recognize our wives’ strengths and let them exercise them – marriage completes us, each half bringing strengths and weaknesses. If we will give our wives the encouragement to lead out where they are strong, we will together become stronger than the sum of our individual parts.
Look past the little things – there are many small issues that can trip us up. If we will “not sweat the small stuff” our marriages will be more peaceful and we can concentrate on the really important areas.
There are also some behaviors that we husbands must be certain to avoid as well:
Fixing problems – much of the time our wives don’t want us to fix their problems, they want us to really listen.
Quarreling – instead just wrap up your wife in a loving, non-sexual embrace and say “sorry.”
Manipulation – it’s easy to force behaviors through silence, withdrawal, emotional or physical intimidation. When the day comes that one’s wife wakes up to the realization that she has been manipulated, the marriage is in deep trouble.
Disloyalty – this comes even in seemingly unimportant behaviors like speaking ill or making jokes about one’s wife. When I hear a man do that, his stock falls like a stone in my book. But loyalty is also about keeping all of our affections for our wives.
Criticism – our wives tend to be much more sensitive than we men. What seems like a little criticism to us could be huge in their minds. We can easily crush our wives’ spirits. We must be very, very careful with criticism.
Here are some of the items on my brothers’ list to of positive behaviors for husbands:
Break soul ties – the sexual revolution took many of us in with its lies and deceit. As a result we have soul connections to past lovers. We must break those “soul ties” by firmly renouncing them and repenting of those wrong connections.
Listen – we males tend to listen little and talk much. Often what our wives need is responsive, empathetic listening rather than our simple solutions.
Prayer – who has the time to pray daily with one’s wife? But if we will do it, we will find new deep new strength in our connection with God and with our wives.
Resolve anger quickly – “don’t let the sun go down on your anger” is good advice. We need to clear it out before the day ends. We must keep “short accounts” rather than unending lists of grievances.
Focus on the good – we men will do well to focus on the good things in our wives and concentrate on our areas of problems rather than the other way around.
Recognize our wives’ strengths and let them exercise them – marriage completes us, each half bringing strengths and weaknesses. If we will give our wives the encouragement to lead out where they are strong, we will together become stronger than the sum of our individual parts.
Look past the little things – there are many small issues that can trip us up. If we will “not sweat the small stuff” our marriages will be more peaceful and we can concentrate on the really important areas.
There are also some behaviors that we husbands must be certain to avoid as well:
Fixing problems – much of the time our wives don’t want us to fix their problems, they want us to really listen.
Quarreling – instead just wrap up your wife in a loving, non-sexual embrace and say “sorry.”
Manipulation – it’s easy to force behaviors through silence, withdrawal, emotional or physical intimidation. When the day comes that one’s wife wakes up to the realization that she has been manipulated, the marriage is in deep trouble.
Disloyalty – this comes even in seemingly unimportant behaviors like speaking ill or making jokes about one’s wife. When I hear a man do that, his stock falls like a stone in my book. But loyalty is also about keeping all of our affections for our wives.
Criticism – our wives tend to be much more sensitive than we men. What seems like a little criticism to us could be huge in their minds. We can easily crush our wives’ spirits. We must be very, very careful with criticism.
Thursday, October 19, 2006
The Sexual Revolution Disaster in Communist Russia
We have in the West experienced the sexual revolution for over 100 years. The change in our sexual mores has been so gradual as to make it more difficult to observe the effects. It is not obvious to most of us how badly we have been harmed by this revolution.
In Communist Russia, however, the Sexual Revolution came and went quickly because it was a disaster. The words of a former Russian sociology professor tell the story sucinctly:
During the first stage of the (Communist) Revolution, its leaders deliberately attempted to destroy marriage and the family. Free love was glorified by the official "glass of water" theory. If a person is thirsty, so went the Party line, it is immaterial what glass he uses when satisfying his thirst; it is equally unimportant how he satisfies his sex hunger.
The legal distinction between marriage and casual sexual intercourse was abolished. The Communist law spoke only of contracts between males and females for the satisfaction of their desires either for an indefinite or a definite period, a year, a month, a week, or even for a single night. One could marry and divorce as many times as desired. Husband or wife could obtain a divorce without the other being notified. It was not even necessary that marriage be registered. Bigamy and even polygamy were permissible under the new provisions.....Premarital relations were praised and extramarital relations were considered normal.
Within a few years, hordes of wild, homeless children became a menace to the Soviet Union. Millions of lives, especially of young girls, were wrecked; divorces skyrocketed, as did abortions. The hatreds and conflicts among polygamous and polyandrous mates rapidly mounted -- and so did psychoneuroses.
The results were so appalling that the government was forced to reverse its policy. The propaganda of the "glass of water" theory was declared to be counter-revolutionary, and its place was taken by official glorification of premarital chastity and of the sanctity of marriage...
Considering that the whole cycle occurred under a single regime, the experiment is highly informative. It clearly shows the destructive consequences of unlimited sexual freedom.
See also The Revolution That Shot America in the Foot
(Pirtrim Sorokin, The American Sex Revolution (Boston: Porter Sargent, 1956) 113-15 IN McQuilkin, J. Robertson, 1989, An Introduction to Biblical Ethics Tyndale House Publishers
 |
| Joseph Stalin, Secretary-general of the Communist party of the Soviet Union ca. 1942 |
During the first stage of the (Communist) Revolution, its leaders deliberately attempted to destroy marriage and the family. Free love was glorified by the official "glass of water" theory. If a person is thirsty, so went the Party line, it is immaterial what glass he uses when satisfying his thirst; it is equally unimportant how he satisfies his sex hunger.
The legal distinction between marriage and casual sexual intercourse was abolished. The Communist law spoke only of contracts between males and females for the satisfaction of their desires either for an indefinite or a definite period, a year, a month, a week, or even for a single night. One could marry and divorce as many times as desired. Husband or wife could obtain a divorce without the other being notified. It was not even necessary that marriage be registered. Bigamy and even polygamy were permissible under the new provisions.....Premarital relations were praised and extramarital relations were considered normal.
Within a few years, hordes of wild, homeless children became a menace to the Soviet Union. Millions of lives, especially of young girls, were wrecked; divorces skyrocketed, as did abortions. The hatreds and conflicts among polygamous and polyandrous mates rapidly mounted -- and so did psychoneuroses.
The results were so appalling that the government was forced to reverse its policy. The propaganda of the "glass of water" theory was declared to be counter-revolutionary, and its place was taken by official glorification of premarital chastity and of the sanctity of marriage...
Considering that the whole cycle occurred under a single regime, the experiment is highly informative. It clearly shows the destructive consequences of unlimited sexual freedom.
See also The Revolution That Shot America in the Foot
(Pirtrim Sorokin, The American Sex Revolution (Boston: Porter Sargent, 1956) 113-15 IN McQuilkin, J. Robertson, 1989, An Introduction to Biblical Ethics Tyndale House Publishers
Saturday, October 07, 2006
Using Tantrums to Extend Islamic Sharia Law
Militant Islam is finding a new way to impose sharia law in the West without the mess of having to militarily conquer lands in dar al-harb, the house of war. (That's us, the West).
When some egregious violation of sharia law is found somewhere in the world, militant Islam throws a tantrum, riots, burns flags, and kills a few innocents. Apologies are issued in the West, and people quit doing what they were doing.
Examples: the ridiculous Danish cartoon controversy, the Pope's comments about violence in the name of religion, and most recently the Danish People's Party's youth wing mocking the Prophet.
And people quit what they were doing. For example, four performances of a Mozart opera were cancelled in Berlin (one scene of which was tasteless) for fear of offending Muslims. The fear is not entirely unjustified. With burgeoning Muslim populations, murder or mayhem in the name of Al-lah is not impossible in the West, and especially in Europe.
While there must be clear-headed Muslims who deplore all this, where are they? Why aren't they forcefully opposing this? Does not silence suggest assent?
The Jihad is on again. After a few centuries of dormancy, it's back in business.
When some egregious violation of sharia law is found somewhere in the world, militant Islam throws a tantrum, riots, burns flags, and kills a few innocents. Apologies are issued in the West, and people quit doing what they were doing.
Examples: the ridiculous Danish cartoon controversy, the Pope's comments about violence in the name of religion, and most recently the Danish People's Party's youth wing mocking the Prophet.
And people quit what they were doing. For example, four performances of a Mozart opera were cancelled in Berlin (one scene of which was tasteless) for fear of offending Muslims. The fear is not entirely unjustified. With burgeoning Muslim populations, murder or mayhem in the name of Al-lah is not impossible in the West, and especially in Europe.
While there must be clear-headed Muslims who deplore all this, where are they? Why aren't they forcefully opposing this? Does not silence suggest assent?
The Jihad is on again. After a few centuries of dormancy, it's back in business.
Sunday, September 24, 2006
Formal and Personal Worldviews
We are all familiar with formal worldviews. They include Christianity, Islam, paganism, secular humanism, and so forth. Each has a comprehensive worldview; a way of explaining the universe.
But what about personal worldviews? These are the little “isms” that we have adopted from other worldviews.
For example, a person may hold a formal Christian worldview, but believe that nothing happens except that God wills it. This is not Christianity – it is Islam. (If Al-Lah wills) Another Christian may have adopted the naturalist worldview that the earth and all the inhabitants of it are the result of a cosmic accident, because that is what science seems to teach.
How can we who are disciples of Jesus stop “worldview creep?”
Colossians 2:8 says ”Don't let anyone fool you by using senseless arguments. These arguments may sound wise, but they are only human teachings. They come from the powers of this world and not from Christ.” That’s worldview creep.
The only way to stop worldview creep is to continually check the plumb line. “Don't be like the people of this world, but let God change the way you think. Then you will know how to do everything that is good and pleasing to him.” (Rom 12:2 CEV) We do this by regular study of God’s word and regular communication in prayer.
But what about personal worldviews? These are the little “isms” that we have adopted from other worldviews.
For example, a person may hold a formal Christian worldview, but believe that nothing happens except that God wills it. This is not Christianity – it is Islam. (If Al-Lah wills) Another Christian may have adopted the naturalist worldview that the earth and all the inhabitants of it are the result of a cosmic accident, because that is what science seems to teach.
How can we who are disciples of Jesus stop “worldview creep?”
Colossians 2:8 says ”Don't let anyone fool you by using senseless arguments. These arguments may sound wise, but they are only human teachings. They come from the powers of this world and not from Christ.” That’s worldview creep.
The only way to stop worldview creep is to continually check the plumb line. “Don't be like the people of this world, but let God change the way you think. Then you will know how to do everything that is good and pleasing to him.” (Rom 12:2 CEV) We do this by regular study of God’s word and regular communication in prayer.
How We Live and What We Believe
How I live is the real test of what I believe. What I say or write may be interesting, but you can tell what I really believe by observing how I live my life.
Do I live like I believe that Jesus was and is who He said He was?
Clearly, I make mistakes. And I sin at times. My strengths, and training and my experience make me focus on certain areas of life to the near exclusion of parts of the message of Jesus.
But – the trajectory of my life – is it aimed at “Jesusness?”
Do I live like I believe that Jesus was and is who He said He was?
Clearly, I make mistakes. And I sin at times. My strengths, and training and my experience make me focus on certain areas of life to the near exclusion of parts of the message of Jesus.
But – the trajectory of my life – is it aimed at “Jesusness?”
Sunday, September 17, 2006
Do you really believe that what you believe is really true?
I heard a teacher describe it as a "haunting question." Let me write this again:
If I really believed, why do I not always do what the bedrock of my belief system (the Bible and the Holy Spirit) says?
In recent weeks, on two occasions, I have been pierced with clean through by my own unbelief. The first time I failed to act on my beliefs, and again when I heard this haunting question and recognized the depth of my unbelief.
Lord, I believe. Help me in my unbelief. Give me more faith, I humbly ask.
Do you really believe that what you believe is really true?It's haunting because it cuts to the heart of our belief system.
If I really believed, why do I not always do what the bedrock of my belief system (the Bible and the Holy Spirit) says?
In recent weeks, on two occasions, I have been pierced with clean through by my own unbelief. The first time I failed to act on my beliefs, and again when I heard this haunting question and recognized the depth of my unbelief.
Lord, I believe. Help me in my unbelief. Give me more faith, I humbly ask.
Are Americans Bible Believers?
The short answer, apparently, is “no.” A corollary to this, according to George Barna, is that many of the moral and spiritual problems we face can be traced to attitudes behind this answer.
The longer answer is that some of us do, a mind-numbing 4 out of 100. That’s the bad news. The really bad news is that only 9% of self-described born again Christians really believe in the Bible.
Barna calls it a “Biblical worldview.” Here is the definition that investigators asked 2,033 American adults to respond to:
Those who had a Biblical worldview according to this definition had strikingly different views about morality than other adults.
The longer answer is that some of us do, a mind-numbing 4 out of 100. That’s the bad news. The really bad news is that only 9% of self-described born again Christians really believe in the Bible.
Barna calls it a “Biblical worldview.” Here is the definition that investigators asked 2,033 American adults to respond to:
For the purposes of the research, a biblical worldview was defined as believing that absolute moral truths exist; that such truth is defined by the Bible; and firm belief in six specific religious views. Those views were that Jesus Christ lived a sinless life; God is the all-powerful and all-knowing Creator of the universe and He stills rules it today; salvation is a gift from God and cannot be earned; Satan is real; a Christian has a responsibility to share their faith in Christ with other people; and the Bible is accurate in all of its teachings.
Those who had a Biblical worldview according to this definition had strikingly different views about morality than other adults.
People's views on morally acceptable behavior are deeply impacted by their worldview. Upon comparing the perspectives of those who have a biblical worldview with those who do not, the former group were 31 times less likely to accept cohabitation (2% versus 62%, respectively); 18 times less likely to endorse drunkenness (2% versus 36%); 15 times less likely to condone gay sex (2% versus 31%); 12 times less likely to accept profanity 3% versus 37%); and 11 times less likely to describe adultery as morally acceptable (4% versus 44%). In addition, less than one-half of one percent of those with a biblical worldview said voluntary exposure to pornography was morally acceptable (compared to 39% of other adults), and a similarly miniscule proportion endorsed abortion (compared to 46% of adults who lack a biblical worldview).Barna’s summary of this investigation and its conclusions are worth a read. The summary is not long.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)