...(If you live under a rock, NC passed Amendment One, defining marriage as between one man and one woman, and President Obama announced today that he is in favor of legally acknowledging same-sex marriages.)
I’m both troubled and provoked to thoughtfulness because of a number of things concerning both Christian and non-Christian responses in the last 24 hours.
First, I am struck by the lack of biblical literacy from virtually every voice in this discussion. Let me start with Christians. It seems that we have little sense about what politics does and does not achieve. My brothers and sisters, “we won” is not an appropriate response. Patting ourselves on the back is silly. Moving forward with anything less than continual proclamation of the gospel of the Kingdom of Jesus Christ with the somber realization of the lostness we face is simply missing the point. Politics does not bring victory over sin, death, hell, and the grave – Jesus does. Laws do not change people’s hearts – the Spirit of Christ does. Elections will not bring this country to be a picture of God’s Kingdom – God the Father and his electing purposes will do so when he sends his Son to restore all things at the end of the age. Don’t get me wrong, we ought to vote in a way that reflects God’s Kingdom, and in doing so perhaps some will be confronted with the reality of God and his created order. But please don’t act like temporal laws in a temporal government will ever bring about the true spiritual change that’s needed to redeem hearts, minds, souls, and bodies for Christ.
Personally, I don't care what homosexuals do with each other, but if the political climate is going to make me choose sides, than I say no, gays should not be allowed to marry.
Redefining marriage to include who or whatever is what 's wrong. Accept the term "civil union" and enjoy the same benefits or don't take anything. The traditional role and description of Marriage, both religious and non-religious is still defined as a man and woman and it shouldn't even be debated.
It's funny how they demand respect shown to them, but they seem to lack respect when it comes to the majorities views and beliefs regarding what defines a "marriage."
There are those who ridicule evangelical Christians, comparing them to slave owners, racists, and bigots. The comparison to slave owners is just silly – no one is forcing homosexuals to do hard labor for no wages, beating them for not doing their job correctly, etc.
Shoot, I've heard gay people liken their "struggle" with that of blacks and the civil rights era. Cause gays rode the back of the bus, couldn't drink from hetero-only water fountains, or enroll in college. right
__________________ Look how he spends his time; 43 species of parrots. Nipples for men. Slugs! He created slugs. The can't hear, they can't see, they can't operate machinery. Are we not in the hands of a lunatic? If I were creating the universe, I wouldn't mess about with butterflies and daffodils, I would have started with lasers, eight o'clock, day one.
Good post Shlaol,
The people with an agenda seem to have a hard time keeping their attitude right. The agenda seems to be more important for those people as best I can tell. Tho I'm terrible at figuring out why people do what they do.
On the other hand, for those who support gay marriage, there is one camp that says “who cares what the Bible says.” There is another, though, that seems to think that the Bible actually supports homosexual marriage, relationships, etc. I saw one man post that God gave the Ten Commandments but Moses gave Leviticus, so we just need to look to the Ten Commandments and not the rest of the Law. That clearly indicates a lack of understanding about the purpose, both historically and literarily, of the Law in the Old Testament. Leviticus is not so easily dismissed. Then our President says today that he is being biblical by paying attention to the Golden Rule, to love our neighbors as ourselves. What the President seems to forget is that the first part of the Golden Rule is the Great Commandment, which is to love the Lord our God with all our heart, mind, soul, and strength. The clear command there is to love not just any God, but the God of the Bible, and the God of the Bible has very clear things to say on how he made men and women and what kind of relationships he intends for them.
An excellent post, but I think you ignore the fact that many who support homosexual marriage, myself included, only do so in terms of Civil homosexual marriage. Right now homosexuals in states that do not allow or recognize homosexual marriage are denied numerous rights and benefits that come with marriage. We are not saying that the Bible supports homosexual marriage, nor are we denyimng what scripture says because we are speaking only in term of a Civil marriage.
I, and I think I speak for many Christians who favor Civil homosexual marriage, would strongly oppose any effort to force any church or other religious organization--Christian or otherwise--to perform a homosexual marriage in violation of the beliefs of that church or religious organization.
My problem with gay marriage being illegal is twofold:
First of all, US law does not operate with an agenda of keeping its citizens morally pure - it operates with an agenda of giving people as many rights as possible without infringing on the rights of others. So saying that it should be illegal for religious reasons doesn't work if only because it is a secular nation, and thus the Bible does not and should not be applicable in law.
Secondly, we're not talking about biblical marriage; we're talking about marriage licenses. Could gay people get married in churches? Sure, but they'd have to find a pastor willing to do it first (and they can do that now without the marriage license anyway.). Why not just give gay people legal marriage? It doesn't have to be ordained by God to be ordained by law, and much of the argument against it is just semantics; "Well, it shouldn't be called marriage because..."
And if the name is such a problem, okay, fine. Change marriage licenses to civil union licenses. Problem solved - we have equal monickers and rights for both parties in monogamous and legal relationships, and outside of law it can be called whatever it wants.
Since the name isn't really a problem though, why not just call it marriage? It makes a lot more sense to put something which has the exact same legal implications under an existing monicker (marriage) than to change it and then give it the exact same legalities (as far as taxing, how finances and civil rights work, etc).
Since the United States is a secular society, we should be trying to make the best law we can. Yes, the Bible can be an inspiration, but it can't be the basis of our law (nor is it) - there are people of many beliefs in the US and it should not change, nor should our law be biased towards a particular religion ("The Bible says this, therefore it's in law! We don't care about what that silly Buddhism says.").
Ultimately, theocracies become oppressive regimes (even if the majority agrees with the oppression, it's still oppression - try being a Christian in Iran) or at the least, prejudiced towards people who don't agree with the government's religious agenda (see how Israeli courts treat non-Jews. It's not nice.) and don't profit anyone.
Is God the ultimate authority, perfect, etc? Of course; but many people don't believe this, nor should they be forced to (there is a possibility that we're wrong, regardless of how much conviction we have over the existence of the Christ), and God's law does not have to be our nation's law.
Yes, I try to follow the Bible and live by Christianity, but people should have a choice in that and just because I believe it doesn't mean other people should have to.
James
__________________
If you disagree with God's Divine And Holy Word, you're wrong. It's a fact.
...(If you live under a rock, NC passed Amendment One, defining marriage as between one man and one woman, and President Obama announced today that he is in favor of legally acknowledging same-sex marriages.)
I’m both troubled and provoked to thoughtfulness because of a number of things concerning both Christian and non-Christian responses in the last 24 hours.
First, I am struck by the lack of biblical literacy from virtually every voice in this discussion. Let me start with Christians. It seems that we have little sense about what politics does and does not achieve. My brothers and sisters, “we won” is not an appropriate response. Patting ourselves on the back is silly. Moving forward with anything less than continual proclamation of the gospel of the Kingdom of Jesus Christ with the somber realization of the lostness we face is simply missing the point. Politics does not bring victory over sin, death, hell, and the grave – Jesus does. Laws do not change people’s hearts – the Spirit of Christ does. Elections will not bring this country to be a picture of God’s Kingdom – God the Father and his electing purposes will do so when he sends his Son to restore all things at the end of the age. Don’t get me wrong, we ought to vote in a way that reflects God’s Kingdom, and in doing so perhaps some will be confronted with the reality of God and his created order. But please don’t act like temporal laws in a temporal government will ever bring about the true spiritual change that’s needed to redeem hearts, minds, souls, and bodies for Christ.
I live in North Carolina, and while I know that making a law reflecting a biblical view of marriage won't lead anyone to Christ, I believe if I am given the opportunity to vote as a christian in a way that reflects what I believe in the Bible then I should do so. This is an opporunity that many don't have throughout the world either because they live in a regime that is harsh and oppressive or they don't get to vote at all.
Last edited by suzybeezy; 28th May 2012 at 02:09 PM.
It is strange how it took the word homosexuality to make us look more into the subject of 'marriage'. Before the 1970s, it was noticed that people outside of Christ were divorcing for many reasons....and then remarrying another. There were church debates that took place arguing that people in the secular world didn't have to do the things that the New Testament said Christians were to do according to divorce and remarriage. I don't think the news media picked up on this (or maybe they did), anyway, it must not have been really important to the rest of the world.
If we looked closer into Biblical marriage, we would find that the Genesis account does only mention a man & woman. It says nothing of divorce and remarriage. That would come later...and only to the Israelites after their exodus from Egypt (Deut. 24:1-4). This would have been about 1500 B.C. This means that every couple that divorced, not only divorced and remarried, sinned in so doing. That God will only have seen them as adulterers unless they returned to their original spouse.
So only the Israelites had any commands from God concerning this. The Gentiles (non-Jews) had to take the moral/spiritual 'high ground' by not ever divorcing. Likewise, the non-Christians since 33 A.D. have had to take the moral/spiritual 'high ground' by not ever divorcing, since they have no commands from God concerning this subject like the Christians. (Mt.19:9) (1Cor.7:15)
__________________ "It is a more flat color, and what that does is instantly the cellulite looks more smoothed out."
Personally, I don't care what homosexuals do with each other, but if the political climate is going to make me choose sides, than I say no, gays should not be allowed to marry.
Redefining marriage to include who or whatever is what 's wrong.
Why?
Originally Posted by sorednax
Accept the term "civil union" and enjoy the same benefits or don't take anything. The traditional role and description of Marriage, both religious and non-religious is still defined as a man and woman and it shouldn't even be debated.
Why? That sort of dogmatism seems silly.
Originally Posted by sorednax
It's funny how they demand respect shown to them, but they seem to lack respect when it comes to the majorities views and beliefs regarding what defines a "marriage."
I haven't noticed any homosexuals mocking marriage or any heterosexual relationships.
Originally Posted by sorednax
Shoot, I've heard gay people liken their "struggle" with that of blacks and the civil rights era. Cause gays rode the back of the bus, couldn't drink from hetero-only water fountains, or enroll in college. right
I live in North Carolina, and while I know that making a law reflecting a biblical view of marriage won't lead anyone to Christ, I believe if I am given the opportunity to vote as a christian in a way that reflects what I believe in the Bible then I should do so. This is an opporunity that many don't have throughout the world either because they live in a regime that is harsh and oppressive or they don't get to vote at all.
*stares in confusion*
How does the Bible call on you to discriminate against others and deny them equal civil rights under the law?
NC Marriage Amendment and President Obama 
Linear Mode
