The Definition of Marriage

September 3, 2012

When a parent disciplines a child for doing something wrong, does that mean that the parent does not love the child?  Of course not.  It just means that the parent cares about  teaching the child right from wrong.  That is why we give incentives for good behavior and not for bad behavior.  It is the same concept that government should operate under.  The big question is what do we consider good and what do we consider bad?  On many issues in this country it usually comes down to your worldview…whether it is Christian or secular.  So is the case with homosexuality and the legalization of gay marriage.  The Christian worldview says that homosexuality is sinful and that government should not give incentives that support that behavior, which would include benefits from legalizing gay marriage.  Conservatives in the Republican Party hold this position.  The secular worldview holds the opposite position.  President Obama and other progressives in the Democratic Party have long supported giving the same incentives to same sex marriages that are given to traditional marriages (traditional marriage as defined by the Bible).  Thus, President Obama’s position on this issue is in direct contradiction with the Bible’s teaching.  And if you are voting for progressives such as him, you are supporting this policy.  This should be of concern if you are a Christian.  That is my bottom line up front; now diving into the issue…

The Bible’s Stance on Homosexual Relationships and Marriage

There are a few issues of morality that have significant ties to politics with respect to how governments should handle them.  To me there are a couple that are very obvious.  The first is Abortion, which is an issue of life.  My last post covered that issue.  The second is the issue of marriage and homosexual relationships.  Some issues I will cover later will have some latitude in discussion on the correct way to handle them, but on this particular issue the Bible is extremely clear.  To cover it we must first look at what the Bible says about marriage.

The Original Design for Marriage

God’s original design for marriage is told to us in Genesis.  It is important to note here that this is before the fall.

“So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.” (Gen 1:27)

“Then the LORD God said, “It is not good that the man should be alone;I will make him a helper fit for him.”(Gen 2:18)

“And the rib that the LORD God had taken from the man he made into a woman and brought her to the man. Then the man said, ”This at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called Woman, because she wastaken out of Man.” Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.” (Gen 2:22-24)

The bottom line is that God intended marriage to be between one man and one woman.  This is something that Jesus confirmed in the books of Matthew and Mark:

“He answered,  Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.” (Matt 19:4-6)

“But from the beginning of creation, ‘God made them male and female.’ ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife,and the two shall become one flesh.’ So they are no longer two but one flesh.” (Mark 10:6-8)

In these verses Jesus is actually quoting the passages from Genesis.  The usual argument that I see against this interpretation is that there is polygamy in the Bible.  And there is.  The Bible never hides the sinfulness of man.  There is not a general command that prohibits polygamy in the Bible, but it also does not condone the behavior.  In the instances where the Bible records acts of polygamy, it is always in the context of the problems that it causes.  Reference the stories found in these verses: Genesis 16 (Abram, Sarai and Hagar); Genesis 29 (Jacob);  1 Samuel 1 (Elkanah, Hannah and Peninnah); 1 Kings 11 (King Solomon and his fall).  While there were no general prohibitions against polygamy, there were a couple of specific ones.  In Deuteronomy 17 God prohibits polygamy for Israel’s Kings.   In 1 Timothy 3, Paul prohibits polygamy for those who would be elders in the Church.

Homosexuality and the Old Testament

With the discussion in today’s politics you would think that the problem of homosexuality was a recent phenomenon, but this is not the case.  It was a problem that God addressed in the Old Testament with the nation of Israel.  The Old Testament is very clear that it is a sin.

“You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination” (Lev 18:22)

“If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them.” (Lev 20:13)

In Genesis 19, the story of Sodom and Gomorrah is told.  These two cities were destroyed by God because of their excessive sin.  One of these sins that is specifically described in the story was homosexual acts of the men in the city.

The story from Genesis was actually before the law was given to the Israelites.  Point being that from the very beginning homosexuality was a sin.  Some would argue that we are now under the new covenant so the Old Testament does not apply.  This is not the case.  2 Timothy 3:16  says that “all scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness”.  This means the Old Testament as well as the New Testament.  While we are not under the civil law and the punishments specific to the  nation of Israel, we are still under the moral law of God.     In this particular case though, the New Testament is equally clear that homosexuality is a sin.

Homosexuality and the New Testament

There are two primary pieces of scripture in the New Testament that directly discuss the sinfulness of homosexuality.

“Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things.  Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen. For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.” (Rom 1:22-27)

“Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality,nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.” (1 Cor 6:9-10)

In addition to these writings of Paul, the story of Sodom and Gomorrah is reiterated in the book of Jude.  It describes punishment for sexual immorality, but also specifically says unnatural desire, which is something you will find in Paul’s writings.  When Paul talks about homosexuality, he describes it as something contrary to nature.

”just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which likewise indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural desire, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire.” (Jude 1:7)

In many other places in the Bible it talks about sexual immorality in general as a sin and the consequences that will result (Revelation 21 and 22 for example).  Homosexuality is among many things that can fall under this category.  The question then becomes what position should a government take on this issue?  It all goes back to the Biblical purpose of civil government, which is to promote good and punish / restrain evil.  It is true that government  is external and not internal.  We cannot legislate people’s hearts.  Laws that are enacted  on this issue will not change everyone’s personal behavior.  There will still be those that maintain homosexual relationships (just like there will be those who maintain other immoral behavior such as any sexual relationships outside of marriage). But the government should not reward such relationships; it should instead do its best to restrain them.  This means that the government should not legitimize gay marriage by making it a legal civil union.  It should not give any benefit to such unions, whether it be financial or otherwise.   If you continue reading in Romans 1 you will find further support for this position in verse 32.

“Though they know God’s righteous decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.”

These are pretty brutal and direct words from Paul, but the point he is making here is that we should not give approval to those that practice sinful things.   This would include government.  It does not mean that homosexuals should be treated poorly by Christians or the government.  But at the same time we should not endorse their relationships. As Christians, we should support government incentives for what God considers morally right, not something God calls an abomination.

The Obama Record

The Left has a long record of supporting gay marriage and they are very open about this stance.  In their 2008 platform the Democratic Party once again reaffirmed their support for legalizing gay marriage to include their opposition to the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).  If the last four years are any indication, the language in the 2012 platform will be even more extreme.  To see Obama’s position on this issue, I think it is important to first look at his own words.  This first quote comes from the book, The Improbable Quest by John Wilson (2007).  It was in response to General Pace’s comments that homosexuality was immoral.

“I do not think homosexuals are immoral any more than I think heterosexuals are immoral” 

The real issue here is that it is obvious that President Obama does not use the Bible to guide his policy.  If he does not use it for social policy, it is almost guaranteed he does not use the Bible as his guide for other decisions.   It also goes back to the church he attended for 20 years led by the now infamous Rev Wright.  This particular denomination, United Church of Christ, recognizes same sex couples.  This is one of many teachings from this church that are not exactly Biblically grounded.  But back on point, here are some comments by Obama in 2009 at The Human Rights Campaign 13th annual dinner.  The HRC is the nation’s largest lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) civil rights organization.

“For nearly 30 years, you’ve advocated on behalf of those without a voice. That’s not easy. For despite the real gains that we’ve made, there’s still laws to change and there’s still hearts to open. There are still fellow citizens, perhaps neighbors, even loved ones – good and decent people – who hold fast to outworn arguments and old attitudes; who fail to see your families like their families”

“this fight continue now. And I’m here with a simple message: I’m here with you in that fight.”

“My expectation is that when you look back on these years, you will see a time in which we put a stop to discrimination against gays and lesbians – whether in the office or on the battlefield. (Applause.) You will see a time in which we as a nation finally recognize relationships between two men or two women as just as real and admirable as relationships between a man and a woman.”

“I will end Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. That’s my commitment to you.”

“I’ve required all agencies in the federal government to extend as many federal benefits as possible to LGBT families as the current law allows. And I’ve called on Congress to repeal the so-called Defense of Marriage Act and to pass the Domestic Partners Benefits and Obligations Act. (Applause.) And we must all stand together against divisive and deceptive efforts to feed people’s lingering fears for political and ideological gain.”

“For while there will be setbacks and bumps along the road, the truth is that our common ideals are a force far stronger than any division that some might sow. These ideals, when voiced by generations of citizens, are what made it possible for me to stand here today. (Applause.) These ideals are what made it possible for the people in this room to live freely and openly when for most of history that would have been inconceivable. That’s the promise of America, HRC. That’s the promise we’re called to fulfill. (Applause.) Day by day, law by law, changing mind by mind, that is the promise we are fulfilling. “

Obviously these are not comments that can be supported from a Biblical perspective, either from a personal viewpoint or one on government policy.  But they should not have come as a surprise if you followed Obama before he became President.  Like I did with the abortion issue, here are a few items from before he was elected.

  • Obama said he was Ok with teachers reading a book about a prince marrying another prince to a 6 year old
  • Obama stated he does not believe that being gay is a choice, not something cured with prayer
  • Obama opposed Proposition 8 in California
  • Obama opposed DOMA passed in 1996 stating “I opposed the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996. It should be repealed and I will vote for its repeal on the Senate floor. I will appeal any proposal to amend the U.S. constitution to ban gays and lesbians from marrying. I know how important the issue of equal rights is to the LGBT community. I share your sense of urgency.”
  • Obama voted NO on constitutional ban of same sex marriage
  • Obama was rated 89% by the Human Rights Campaign indicating pro gay rights stance
  • While a Senator, Obama Co-Sponsored the Domestic Partnership Benefits and Obligations Act of 2007 that would provide benefits to same sex couples who were federal employees

You can check out the link for the sources.  While not exhaustive, it would have given you a good idea on his position on the issue.  All of this was available before the last election.  One of the problems with electing a President who does not hold a Biblical view of marriage are the people he surrounds himself with, whether it be advisers or appointees.  Reason being is that these are the people that will be developing policy.  President Obama has appointed a record number of homosexual officials as well as those who support his views on this issue.  The administration’s claim is that they have appointed more than the last two administrations combined. I wanted to cover a few that I think are especially relevant:

  • Secretary of State Hillary Clinton holds similar views on gay marriage as Obama.  This appointment is especially harmful because not only are they promoting the normalization of gay marriage here in the United States, they are also promoting the idea to the rest of the world under the pretense that this is a value that America holds.  Here is a speech Hillary Clinton gave to the global community in December of last year where she is promoting gay rights.  She went as far as to say that those with religious convictions are an obstacle standing in the way of protecting the human rights of LGBT people.
  • Obama appointed Roberta Achtenberg, who is homosexual, to the commission on civil rights  This will influence policy on civil rights.  It is another indication that he sees this issue as a civil rights issue, and not a Biblical one.
  • Obama appointed Chai Feldblum to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.  Feldblum has stated that society should not tolerate private beliefs that adversely affect homosexuals
  • Obama chose Joe Somonese as one of his co-chairs for his re-election campaign. Somonese is the President of Human Rights Campaign   As I have mentioned before, Obama has a close relationship with this LBGT advocate and often appoints representatives from this group to various commissions he creates to develop policy.
  • Obama appointed Bishop Harry Knox to head the faith based initiatives started by President Bush.  Harry Knox is an openly gay Bishop who has made some pretty disturbing comments from a Christian perspective.  Here is a short post I wrote when he appointed him in 2009 that includes some of those comments.  Saul Alinsky believed that one of the ways to bring radical change to America was to infiltrate the churches and replace Biblical teaching with their own.  This is the case of Harry Knox, but Obama has taken it a step further bringing people such as this into government to develop policy.
  • In my opinion one of Obama’s scariest appointments was that of Kevin Jennings as the director of the Office of Safe and Drug Free Schools (or the Safe School Czar).  This is a man who now admits to failing to report a case of ongoing statutory rape while teaching…similar to Penn State’s Sandusky.  Mr. Jennings is a GLBT activist who founded the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN).  GLSEN holds workshops around the country that help people try to change curricula at schools starting with kindergarten to make it inclusive for homosexuals. Jennings counts Harry Hay as a man who inspired him.  Harry Hay was associated with NAMBLA, the North American Man/Boy Love Association.  NAMBLA’s stated goal is “to end the extreme oppression of men and boys in mutually consensual relationships,” meaning they believe that pedophilia should be accepted and legal.  The post I wrote adds a couple more disturbing details about this man.

This is not an all inclusive list, but I think it gives us an idea of how extreme Obama’s views are and why it is important to elect a President who holds a Biblical view on marriage, especially in an age where the executive branch has so much power. The policies that this administration has enacted are certainly in line with those he has appointed.  Here are a few examples:

These policies are the result of electing a President who does not hold a Biblical view on marriage.  As a Christian it is important to evaluate the candidates on their positions on issues such as this one before voting.  If you were not convinced before the last election, Obama has now given four years of policy decisions that reinforce the fact that he is on the wrong side of the argument.  His policies and statements are in direct contradiction with the Bible’s teaching on homosexuality and how the government should handle this important issue.   The question is now…how will this affect your vote.

Be Sociable, Share!

Comments on this entry are closed.