In the wake of the controversy surrounding Alistair Begg and his censure by other Evangelical leaders for counseling a grandmother to attend her grandson’s “transgender” “wedding,” another controversy is brewing. It has been well-established by biblical exegesis and affirmed by solid and reasoned Christian leaders that attending a same-sex wedding would be sinful and offer tacit approval of such a blasphemous demonstration of rebellion against God’s created order. Yet, there are those who abandon sound biblical reason in favor of emotionalism and hang on to it by a thread at their own peril.

But the other controversy that is now rearing its head is the question: “Can a Christian attend a same-sex baby shower?” This question was posed by a writer a Crosswalk and, reading through the article, it immediately became clear that the person writing the article has no interest in good biblical doctrine.

Right off the bat, in the first paragraph, the author writes:

As same-sex marriage has become more prolific and socially acceptable, there is a growing number of same-sex parents. Personally, I’ve interacted with same-sex foster parents who also attend the same church as I do.

Okay, my first questions back to her would be: What are you doing at a church filled with homosexuals adopting children? What is your pastor preaching that makes such people believe that trafficking children to homosexual parents is perfectly normal and acceptable? Seriously, I’m having a hard time getting past just the first paragraph in this absurd article. Clearly, someone with a deficient and sub-biblical worldview is writing this piece.

But I digress. The author goes on to twist the Scriptures—the kind of Scripture that any seasoned believer should know better than to twist—to make her case that its okay to attend a same-sex baby shower. She writes, “Jesus shows us a radical alternative way of navigating our sin.”

“He asks who is sinless among us. Only they have the ability to justly throw stones! (John 8:7-11) Then Jesus, the only one with the right to judge us, goes to the person stuck in sin and gives them the chance to follow him. They have the chance to leave their life of sin and pain!

It’s our job to be Jesus to our lost friends...”

Full stop! Giving us permission to tacitly approve of unrepentant sinful lifestyles was not Jesus’ purpose in this passage. The real meaning of this passage where Jesus addresses the crowd ready to stone the woman caught in adultery, is a profound illustration of grace, judgment, and repentance, not an endorsement of sin or a command to ignore God’s law in pursuit of a misconstrued notion of love. Jesus’ intervention was not to abolish the law or condone the woman’s sin, but to highlight the hypocrisy of the accusers, also unrepentant sinners, and to point towards a deeper need for mercy and repentance.

When Jesus says, “Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her,” He exposes the universal sinfulness of humanity, reminding us that all fall short of God’s glory and are in need of forgiveness. His subsequent interaction with the woman, “Go, and from now on sin no more,” clearly communicates that while grace is freely given, it is also a call to transformation and a departure from sin.

But the author already knows this, and instead has chosen to misuse this passage in a way that reflects her emotions rather than what God’s word actually says. From the outset of her article, she already made it clear that her decisions were made in light of the multiple homosexuals she has in her church, her community, on her children’s sports teams, etc.

She then asserts that “If the couple are unbelievers, they are not held to the same standard of the Bible, so extra grace should be dispensed.” But why? Of course, grace and truth should be dispensed to everyone, but what biblical standard says that “extra grace” should be given in such a situation simply because they’re not believers? And, by her definition of “grace” as deduced from her article, it can only be given in the way of affirmation.

She then attempts to argue that attending a baby shower is somehow different from attending a homosexual wedding. She writes:

A baby shower is different from a wedding in that every child is a gift from God. This sort of celebration is designed to joyfully support the arrival of a new person whom God has a special plan for. While we may understand that same-sex relationships are not God’s best, we are called to nurture and love every child. Even if we do not feel called to participate in the baby shower, we should find a way to love this family and their child. 

Let’s break this down. First off, no, it’s not different than attending a wedding. The same argument can be made of weddings that she is making of children here. Marriage is a gift from God, too. But when that gift is perverted into something that God hates, it should not be celebrated. Yes, children are a gift from God—but let’s be abundantly clear, trafficked children are not “gifts” to homosexual perverts. They’re simply not, they are trafficked from their true mothers and fathers, or in some cases, an appropriate adoptive family that is living in accordance with God’s created order, and handed over to be raised in an unnatural way. That is not something to celebrate, it is something to despise. And those involved in it should be called to repent.

I understand Crosswalk has been off the rails for a number of years, but its associations with well-known Evangelical organizations and figures from Focus on the Family to John Piper should demonstrate just how far Evangelicalism has fallen, the lack of backbone from church leaders to hold these organizations accountable, and the dire need for sound, biblical teaching in the ever-shrinking brigade of biblical local churches.