In his excellent book, _When Harry Became Sally_, Ryan Anderson recounts the story of a woman named "Crash," who started taking testosterone at 20 and detransitioned at 27. (1/)
What strikes me about her testimony is how clearly she realized that those who affirmed her in her desire to transition had harmed her, even though they were trying to be helpful and affirming. (2/)
“She [my doctor] hurt me, helped me hurt myself. That definitely wasn’t her intention but that’s still what happened. This contradiction is difficult to face and understand. She treated me like I wanted to be treated at the time. (3/)
“She was supporting me and helping me do what I was convinced was best for me and I appreciated that a lot. … And now when I look back I’m horrified and creeped out. (4/)
“There’s something disturbing about doing something you think is good for yourself but that turns out to be really self-destructive and it’s even worse when so many other people were helping you and making it easier for you to do it. (5/)
“It’s hard enough taking in how I managed to hurt myself when I was trying to find happiness and express my true self. How am I supposed to deal with how all these people in my life were trying to be helpful but were actually enabling? … (6/)
“I did trust my [healthcare] providers (as much as I can trust any medical professional) and they helped me destroy myself.…”
Then she turns to address her doctor directly: (7/)
“You thought you were doing good but you were giving me tools to hurt myself. I thought I needed to come to you to get what I needed to be happy but I was wrong. We both had no idea what we were doing, what was really going on. (8/)
“Your good will didn’t end my suffering, it increased it. …
“Your kindness led to more scars, not less.”
This testimony illustrates a profound point: love is not unconditional affirmation. (9/)
Even if someone believes she is pursuing her greatest self-fulfillment, it is not love to affirm her in her delighted self-destruction.
Love seeks the objective benefit of the beloved. And sometimes what is _good_ for someone is plain contrary to what they _want_. (10/)
Let us be courageous enough to love well, even when it means crossing someone’s deeply felt desires. (11/11)
“For just as the Father has life in Himself, even so He gave to the Son also to have life in Himself.”
The Father has “life in Himself”—i.e., the attribute of aseity or self-existence. (1/7)
The Son has this identical attribute of aseity (life-in-Himself), but He possesses it in a different manner than the Father does. The Father has life-in-Himself that has been given to Him by no one. The Son has this same life-in-Himself that was given to Him by the Father. (2/7)
Since the divine attributes are identical to the divine essence, the Father’s “giving” of the attribute of life-in-Himself (i.e., aseity) to the Son is nothing other than the Father’s eternal communication of the divine essence to the Son; i.e., eternal generation. (3/7)
@SharonDevol “If men struggle with each other and strike a pregnant woman so that she gives birth prematurely [lit., “so that her children (𝘺𝘦𝘭𝘦𝘥) come out (𝘺𝘢𝘵𝘴𝘢’)”], yet there is no injury”—no injury to whom? Surely, yes, to the pregnant woman. 1/
@SharonDevol But the nearest antecedent to the term “no injury,” or “no harm done” is the 𝘺𝘦𝘭𝘦𝘥. It is the children who “come out” prematurely.
So, if there’s any injury 𝘦𝘪𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳 to the mother 𝘰𝘳 to the children, the man who has caused injury ... 2/
@SharonDevol ...“shall surely be fined as the woman’s husband may demand of him, and he shall pay as the judges decide. But if there is any further injury”—further injury to whom? To the same ones referred to in the first occurrence of the term “injury,” namely, ... 3/
All of your pat answers for why God doesn’t exist, all of your rehearsed talking points for why Jesus isn’t Lord or why the Bible isn’t true, all of the excuses and rationalizations for your sins— 1/
One day soon, you will have to look into the face of your holy, omnipotent Judge, before the unending torment of eternity. How will your talking points fare then? What will your clever quips avail for you when the books are opened, when your heart is laid bare before holiness? 2/
What will you say then?
There will be nothing 𝘵𝘰 say. Your heart will lie open and exposed. You will have forfeited your own soul. And you will curse yourself for all of the mercy you spurned—for all those times you derided the Gospel of your salvation as a fairy tale. 3/
John MacArthur on Hebrews 13:17 and the pastor’s accountability:
“Beloved, the priority that I have in my life as a minister in this church—the priority of all those who minister here as pastors and elders—is the priority of watching for your souls. They watch for your souls. 1/
“…It’s very easy for many pastors to just watch for your bodies, to make sure that you’re here. That’s not even the issue. The issue is to watch for your souls, to make sure that your spiritual life is what it ought to be, and that’s the priority. […] 2/
“We’re like nurses…with critical care patients. We care for your souls. … It’s a serious thing to be a critical care nurse in the church. It’s a serious thing to be a wakeful shepherd of a flock that has sheep that are forever going astray. … 3/
“There would then be no article of faith about which anything could be settled and proved for certain…” Things get clearer when you realize that this is the object of those who oppose the inerrancy/perspicuity of Scripture. (1/11)
If Scripture is true in all it affirms, and if that truth can be genuinely 𝘬𝘯𝘰𝘸𝘯—because God has the power and wisdom to communicate it to His creatures clearly—then those creatures are 𝘢𝘤𝘤𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘣𝘭𝘦 to that revealed Word. (2/11)
The lovers of the truth love that! Those who have been granted the new birth in Christ, and who therefore practice the truth, 𝘭𝘰𝘷𝘦 the light, and come into the light, so as to manifest that their deeds have been wrought in God (John 3:3, 21). (3/11)
A timely word from Martin Luther on biblical interpretation:
“Everywhere we should stick to just the simple, natural meaning of the words, as yielded by the rules of grammar and the habits of speech that God has created among men; … (1/4)
“…for if anyone may devise ‘implications’ and ‘figures’ in Scripture at his own pleasure, what will all Scripture be but a reed shaken with the wind, and a sort of chameleon? … (2/4)
“…There would then be no article of faith about which anything could be settled and proved for certain, without your being able to raise objections by means of some ‘figure.’” … [Me: This is the design of those who deny inerrancy. Certainty is the enemy of error.] (3/4)