Tuesday, August 4, 2009

Keeping the Courts out of the Marriage Debate

I think what Matt S was indicating was that the LGBT who proclaim Christ are calling dark light and evil good. The bible is very clear about this sin. The bible is very clear that we are all rebellious. Meaning I sin and fall short of the glory of God. It is another thing, however, to say that my sin is OK and acceptable in God’s eyes. No one will arrive at judgment without sin, we all stand condemned. What is in question is standing on the word of God or saying that God was a liar when He condemns homosexuality. And, perhaps I should restrain, but Paul said that the Athenians were deeply religious people, too, spiritual, religiosity and Christianity are not one in the same.

As far as the equal rights part, we live in a country where we have a say in the laws. As bible-believing Christians, we’ll continue to fight for biblical commands, but, in the end, we will obey authority in the absence of disobeying God. However, just to quickly address the rights question and reiterate a question asked often, what is the difference between the right of two men (or women) marrying versus three men or three women and one man? In the sliding scale of "equal rights", do you have an eternal measuring stick for those?

Didn’t this conversation
already happen in a way?

New Comment
Wow, Matt. I think that, in order to prevent a straw man argument, I would say that….

  • Standing by a biblical condemnation of homosexuality does not mean standing by a continuation of Levitical law (Christ fulfilled the law).

  • I can’t speak for anyone else, but I never said anything about not having LGBT people around my family. I also don’t avoid adulterers, the promiscuous, thieves and gossips. I don’t avoid them and I reach out to the lost in my community. I also try not to shy away from fellow believers who revel in their sin.

  • I believe in obedience to God’s commands. Just because I have an innate urge, a chromosomal tendency for pornography, for stepping out on my wife, for gossiping, etc., it does not invalidate my command to obedience. Unlike many of my brethren, I don’t discount genetic links (I see them as products of the fall). I don’t believe they hold the water that is desired, though, as a tendency is not an absolute (i.e. those who are blind are those who truly don’t have a choice).

  • As far as society goes, any argument made will eventually break down. Society is a fleeting wind that passes and changes with time. The word of the Lord stands forever. The arguments you linked there are mostly emotional. The other are simply rehashes of how to introduce something into the text that’s not actually written.

In the end, I support God’s biblical command. Legally, I’ll support it. When the law diverges, I’ll still obey it provided it doesn’t violate God’s commands.

Just out of curiosity, would you support legalized unions and civil rights with a legal definition of marriage as man and woman?

No comments: