With all of the frenzy surrounding the Supreme Court’s deliberating over The Defense of Marriage Act in what I’m calling “Unsolicited Opinion about Gay Marriage Week,” I went back and forth about whether or not to write a comprehensive post, or series of posts, on the subject. At this point I’m deciding to hold off on that.
I do want to offer one thought.
I can’t help but think that the anger, fear and contempt coming from many Christians this week, stems from finding our identity in the state rather than Christ.
Hear me out, it’s really not a stretch at all.
Homosexual couples already exist and the government can’t and shouldn’t have any say in that. They want the right to marry. The arguments against gay marriage are adorned with references to the Bible, but really the Bible only addresses the act. In no way does it address the state recognizing the union of same-sex couples. When you get right down to it, the basic argument of those who oppose gay marriage is: They shouldn’t be able to have what I have -an official recognition from the state.
This leads me to believe that many Christians are basing the legitimacy of their marriage on the fact that they received a certificate from the government.
The truth of Christian doctrine is that God ordains marriage, not the state.
Once, when talking to a friend who had recently gotten married, he told me that he and his wife went to a Justice of the Peace to get married before the state, and then, a few days later, on a cruise with their friends and family, they were married before God. I thought that was beautiful, they recognized that for practical purposes it would be beneficial to receive a certificate from the government, but only God could truly ordain their marriage -which leads me to my point. Whatever you believe God thinks about homosexuality, the government issuing a piece of paper doesn’t change that.
Is your marriage legitimate because the government says so, or because God says so?
Like I said, I truly think that all of this anger, fear, and contempt is rooted in the fact that we find more identity in the government than Jesus.
That’s what happens when you worship a Jesus with a flag draped over him. You just wind up worshiping the flag.
Be Sure To Subscribe To the Email List & Never Miss a Post or Podcast
Live by the state, die by the state.
From what I can gather, it seems that opponents to gay marriage are vocalizing their opinions not just to worship the state, but because their silence would passively aid proponents of gay marriage in the legitimizing of their unions. I think many Christians take to heart the idea in Scripture that when we are silent about others’ sins, they become our own. Perhaps opponents to gay marriage feel a sense that they are morally obliged to speak out against it, or else they would feel they were being bystanders to more culturally approved sin, thus allowing those sins to be theirs as well. Whether or not they are reading too much into this invitation found in Scripture to call others out on their sins is up for interpretation, but I do think this is where more of the motivation for their activism comes from.
@jgerhardt I think you are right, but part of what my point is, is that the sin is already there, the government recognizing that union is something else all together.
@jgerhardt I think you are right that this is the thought process of those against gay marriage. However I think that by their own logic they are wrong. They acknowledge that homosexuality exists whether the government grants them rights to marry or not, which is what the Bible speaks to. It does not speak to the government recognizing those couples as married.
It’s easier to ignore our own sexual immoralities if we can keep everyone agreed that someone else’s is worse.By the way, have you noticed the horrendous amount of hetero sexual rape that is being ignored these days?Also I’m perfectly fine with glorifying sexy fornication in movies as long as it isn’t homosexual. .. because that’s gross– i mean detestable to God.Christians have to rally against homosexuals or we have to admit that we are the same.
@RJ Barnett Oh RJ, you and your witty social commentary.
@beardonabike @jgerhardt Christians in America seem to have forgotten that the “sin” isn’t homosexual marriage, but homosexuality itself. Research shows that most Christians who oppose gay marriage do NOT oppose the idea of homosexual unions but rather the use of the word “marriage” to describe those unions. It stands to reason, therefore, that most Christians don’t have an issue with the sin itself. Just with the linguistics.
It helps that the government exists.
Not exactly sure what you mean by this. I’m not advocating for no government if that’s what you mean.
Well here is my opinion on marriage. There are a few reasons why people say they get married. Some say that they get married so they can live together. Well, two people can live together, happily, ever after! So that’s not a marriage. Some say that they got married, so they can have children, well, people have children all the time that aren’t married and are wonderful parents. Throw that one out. Again others will admit that they get married to make a commitment to each other. Well that’s cute, you are getting a piece of paper that makes it harder for you to end a relationship? Nigga please! The amount of divorces that happen today makes this argument totally irrelevant. How about this one, to make your relationship official. Naw Jack! You can post a picture on Facebook with the caption ‘We’re official’ or put it in the paper to make it official. So what’s left? Marriage, in my opinion, makes a relationship divine! Something bigger than the both of you has brought you together. God is introduced into the relationship. Until they are married, a couple’s commitment to each other is a mere human commitment, with all the limitations of being human. The marriage pushes the commitment beyond human limitations. The blessings made in the marriage invoke God’s name upon the couple, and bring God into the union as a partner. (to me, this is symbolism of the trinity, Father, Son, Holy Spirit=God, Groom, Bride)) You are married not just because you chose to be, but because God has said so.
Without a wedding you can have love, commitment and family—but it isn’t holy. Only by marrying according to the bible tradition does your union become sacred. Only after the wedding is your love blessed by God himself! Remember the story of Abraham and Isaac? God told Abraham to Sacrifice Isaac. Many say this is symbolism of God sacrificing Jesus. Well, more symbolism occurs. The Book of Solomon refers to God as the groom (a man), and His Church as the bride (woman). Love who you want, I really don’t care. But, unless it follows God’s Plan, DON’T call it a marriage, call it something else!
@JoeyRogers
Are you asserting that marriage doesn’t facilitate child rearing? Because while single parents can be good parents, a child does better with two parents because there’s greater stability and financial security. When the parents aren’t married, the relationship is more likely to end, which is harmful to the child. I know people who aren’t Christian who are married, and I have no problem saying that they’re married despite the fact that they aren’t basing their marriage on the Bible. Should there be a law that only marriages that reflect Christ and the church be called marriage by the state? You have every right to personally believe that your marriage is more “legitimate” than another’s because you believe God has blessed it, but that doesn’t mean that the state should make that into a law. You also failed to mention perks of marriage like gaining citizenship, not having to testify against a partner, financial perks, and allowing a parent’s partner also be considered a parent even if the offspring isn’t theirs genetically.
@Kdub I just posted my opinion. I’m playing Call of Duty right now and I’m in between matches so I don’t feel like responding more than what I’m writing here. You responded with your opinion. Cool! Awwww yeah, NUKETOWN! Gotta go!
@JoeyRogers @Kdub So in my marriage trinity, am I the Son? Because I’d rather be the Holy Spirit. Does that make me gay?Getting married by the state has nothing at all to do with God blessing a marriage. I think that is the point Shane was trying to make, Take that flag off of Jesus, it makes him look weak.No wait, I get it, non-Christians shouldn’t be allowed to get married, because that word is magical.
@JoeyRogers I think part of what I’m saying is that the government’s definition of “marriage” doesn’t really need to be the Kingdoms definition of marriage.
This was a really good article i really enjoyed it. Will certainly call back at a later date. thank you
http://www.freepostsextoys.com
I think there are a lot of holes in much of what you’ve said but dude, don’t you remember my wedding? We were married twice in 1 hour, once for God and once for the State of Virginia. That’s the only thing I completely agree with you on, that God is the true ordainer of marriage.
Yet if we are to obey one law in the Old Testament then we must obey all. And yes I agree, God ordains the marriage not the state. The state just comes behind and files papers on what God made.
You may want to visit this site too! http://www.headwingnut.com
I agree! Plus, I just want to know why we, as Christians, feel the need to enforce our opinions about the interpretation of the Bible on other people. Isn’t our faith secure enough to handle that other people don’t think the same way? In my opinion, homosexuals live in our country and pay taxes so they should have the same rights as anyone else.
I just found your blog and was scrolling through your posts. Came to this post and am now a “disciple!” I have been saying this for years. As a Libertarian and strong Christian I see no reason why the government should regulate morality just because it’s my morality. I would rather live in a FREE country where we all are free than in a Christian directed country.
@TinStar I’m glad you like it. I’ve thought a lot about the libertarian side of this issue. I do think there is a point where the government needs to step in and enforce morality. Murder for instance, even though 99.9% of people agree is wrong, is technically a moral issue. I still want murder to be illegal. I think the difference is with murder the victims are unwilling participants so they must be protected. So while I generally agree that morality can’t be legislated, it’s not an absolute.Thanks again for reading, and for the support!
@beardonabike Good point and I agree there are valid use for government involvement for some items which may also be considered “moral.”
@TinStar Thank God I’m not alone in this.
@uponacloud @TinStar Far from it!
@beardonabike @TinStar The only other libertarian I know is atheist, it feels lonely sometimes in this society.
very clearly articulated Shane.
what do you think about this?
I think the confusion, prejudice and disconnect in the greater christian community, on gay marriage, and several other divisive social issues, is rooted in a more fundamental compromise by most churches.
Im talking about churches seeking corporate status with their governments, for tax purposes.
Somewhere, at some point in time, there must have been a wider theological debate, or not, about obtaining a government license to exist as a church business.
I remember that as a small rural fellowship here in Canada, we talked about it many years ago, and quickly abandoned it once we found out that its a bait and hook mechanism to get christians to shut their mouths on contentious moral issues during election campaigns, as well as giving governments insight, and by default, oversight of our most important endeavors as a church, through the financial lense.
Not to mention that it also redefines church leadership as non executive and spiritual by overlaying titles on pastors and elders , such as CEO, TREASURER, BOARD of DIRECTORS etc.
In fact, when a group of believers whom God calls his body, and family, reconstitute themselves as a business, they disqualify themselves from being salt and light as Jesus told us we will be if we continue in His Word. The operative word being ‘if’.
Most churches, as I understand, are businesses, and the money saved from taxes by operating as a charity, is the key pillar of support for this man centered,
edifice worshiping, industrial religious complex that is now morphing into the defacto governing body of the elite world leadership cabal.
So, this marriage between state and increasingly state look a like churches, cant be depended upon to offer Gods perspective on gays, or gay marriage, or much of anything else. The confusion among christians increases as the clarity among pagans, on so called moral issues, turns from cultural imperative to law.
The churches’ woeful ignorance of our own history is used against us by spiritual oligarchs to divide and conquer us, as happened in Jesus day.
Our only way out of this is to do what Jesus said, and says.
Turn to him, with all our hearts, in the day of trouble, and he will deliver us.
Forsake our idols, and seek Him together at His feet, like children.
And He doesnt have an executive office in our christian political parties, church buildings, mission orgs, seminar and conference bldgs or even in Jerusalem, though Im convinced if some group built a head office in Jerusalem and announced that Jesus visited there every Sunday morning to consult with His executive team of leaders, a lot of folks would buy into it.
We are in Babylon, like the Jews were as captives, and God is testing us, and separating those who will spiritually return to rebuild His walls and temple, from those who will stay and not have a part in seeing His glory restored. And Im not talking about restoring Christian America to its lost glory.
That was a facade that Im glad to see fade.
Im talking about seeing His Kingdom come, in us, through weak, humble vessels, surrendered to God, defiant of Satan and evil mens schemes to ensnare the weak.
Let the gays be gay, and marry, and let sinners sin, as we all used to.
We have a great work to do rebuilding the walls around His presence, and we cannot be distracted to come down and discuss anything, because its a ploy to get us to stop.
NEVER!
blessings all.
Greg
Did Jesus say to the adulteress, “You’re good, I got your back. Take care.”?
I don’t think so.
Neither should we say – “Eh – do what you want. As long as you love God, that’s what really matters. Go and have fun – OH and by the way, if you want to make an official endorsement of WHATEVER it is you get the urge to do, heck, just let me know where to sign my name, cast my vote or march in your parade. That’s right – I’ll one up Jesus!! He only told the adulteress to take care. I’ll say, “Hey, have fun and can I give you a lift to the orgy?””!!This is obviously messed up – and not reflective of anything Jesus came to live, to model and ultimately to die for.
But, yeah – go ahead with your, “I’m a Christian, that’s why I’m always nice.” philosophy. “Nice” equates directly to “good”, right?
Sure it does.
Sure it does.
@Mike Kemp Hi Mike, thanks for reading.
I’m concerned that you’ve misread this post. If you’ll look, you’ll see that I did not address the morality of homosexuality. I have convictions about that, but that’s just not what this post is about.
This is about allowing the STATE to define IN OUR HEARTS, what marriage is, instead of letting Jesus & the Bible define it.
For example I have some convictions based on my relationship with Jesus about food and it’s rightful place in our lives & heart. However, I don’t believe that it’s the government’s place to limit the number of cheeseburgers we can have per week.
The government doesn’t outlaw or define greed, lust, jealousy, gossip, or pride, and it shouldn’t. It’s not governments place to do so.
So to use your illustration, your position is more like Jesus saying “Adultery is wrong, therefor we should pass a law that bans adultery.” Why doesn’t Jesus say this, because sin is in the heart. Passing a law does not necessarily prevent or block sin. This is also not the way of Jesus.
As for my “nice” philosophy, those aren’t my words, and I feel that you might be projecting on to me some caricatures that you’ve encountered in other places.
@beardonabike
A very well-stated response.
However, your personal position on the issue, I believe, is made apparent by the premises in the argument you make.
Premises:
1) To uphold the honor and the virtue and the design of marriage, as designed by God at Creation is better described as “fighting against gay marriage” … and then
2) Having erroneously labeled those who see themselves as people who are honoring something as opposed to those who are “fighting against” something, you then proceed to characterize them as “Caeser worshippers” – or, literally, in your equivalent, “State worshippers”.
So – in reality – you are maligning people you characterize as being “maligners”.
I consider this to be rhetorical trickery, or sleight of tongue, which I consider to be a dubious undertaking that is deserving of ridicule and condemnation.
Interesting, then, too, that you don’t characterize those **seeking** the State’s endorsement of their lifestyle as “State worshippers”, since – well – what would anyone care if the *state* approved of their behavior, if they were not, in fact, “State worshippers”?
-Peace
@Mike Kemp I’m going to go ahead and say that we’ll be agreeing to disagree on this, but to your points…
For point 1: Are you under the impression that God will be forced to recognize the marriages of homosexuals if the state says they are legitimate? I assume not. Therefor marriage (as God defines it ,not the state), will continue to be upheld.If you are making the case that you are FOR God’s design of marriage, rather than AGAINST gay marriage, then it takes a great suspension of disbelief for this to make sense logically.
For point 2: We can worship things without be a worshiper of them. Because I misstep and have a moment of greed, then I have momentarily worshiped money or possessions instead of God. That’s what sin is, replacing God’s rightful place in our hearts with something else. If you believe that I’m saying that those who fight against gay marriage or give undue prominence to the state are not true believers, then I’m greatly sorry and would never say that.
@beardonabike @Mike Kemp A civil marriage is merely a list of rights and things that protect people. Are you Mike suggesting that heterosexual marriage approved by the state (in my case I would be married in the state Church anyway unless I marry outside of the UK, but if I married let’s say a Catholic the state would still recognise the civil agreement as well as the religious marriage) makes us state worshippers? I just want my right to visit my husband in hospital and the other stuff, which isn’t something that is given me by the Church of England.
@uponacloud @beardonabike
==> [A civil marriage is merely a list of rights and things that protect people. Are you Mike suggesting that heterosexual marriage approved by the state (in my case I would be married in the state Church anyway unless I marry outside of the UK, but if I married let’s say a Catholic the state would still recognise the civil agreement as well as the religious marriage) makes us state worshippers?] <==
Not saying that at all. I don’t believe anyone is a “State worshipper” except those who … who … well I do believe “State worshippers” exist, but now that would open a a can of worms wouldn’t it?!! I’ll just answer your question: No I’m not saying that at all.
Perhaps the State should dissolve the concept of marriage altogether – as a legal thing. That, to me, would be a more logical extension of Shane’s concerns here than what is being suggested: Expanding it to include even more people under “state beneficience”.
@Mike Kemp I think we may have found consensus on something. I definitely believe that the state should get out of the marriage business all together! That would be the best outcome.
@beardonabike
You obviously don’t know me if you think I’ll ever agree with anybody about anything.
No, no it doesn’t work like that 🙂
What’s the opposite of “consensus” anyway?
@Mike Kemp HA!
@Mike Kemp
“Did Jesus say to the adulteress, ‘You’re good, I got your back. Take care.’?
I don’t think so.”
//
Actually, yes he did. Note John’s account of the women caught in adultery (John 8:1-11). The religious fundamental wanted to stone the woman (keeping in observance of The Law), and Jesus decided to use the opportunity to make it a commentary on a Holiness VS. Mercy code–obviously valuing mercy over that of Holiness. So where do you land– mercy, or holiness? Your generalities of the LGBTQ community engaging in orgies and parades are a bit offensive.
@beardonabike I’m not sure God really defines marriage in one particular way. Whose marriage from scripture are we looking at? David? Jacob? Solomon?
Good observations @beardonabike .
@PragmaticFragmentation Actually, no. It’s not a commentary on mercy vs. holiness as much as mercy vs. law, in which Christ clearly falls on the side of mercy. But He also does say “leave your life of sin” (NIV), which is a recognition of the sin without the requirement of punishment. This is not the same as “You’re good”. This is, in fact, saying “you’re not good, but I give you mercy anyway” as only Christ could.
@jhanan Holiness is an observation of the law according to Torah. I think we fundamentally agree, and the notion remains the same.
@PragmaticFragmentation My definition of holiness is not related to the law at all – simply being set apart for Christ. Given your definition, I think you’re probably right that we agree. I just always think it’s important to note that while mercy reigns, it does not negate sin so much as cover it.
@PragmaticFragmentation @jhanan
Whoa love the username: PragmaticFragmentation. Hmmm … that’s something to think about now isn’t it?!!Anyway – I disagree with the notion that “Christ fell on the side of mercy.”. Rather, I think Christ was demonstrating what the Purpose of the Law is, and always has been: Mercy. Did He not say, “I have not come to abolish the Law, but to Fulfill it.”? I believe what He was doing here was fulfilling the law. So he affirmed it in spirit (mercy) and in letter (“leave your life of sin”).
So – as always – when it comes to sin – we – I apologize in advance for the quaint adage – we love the sinner (the adulteress – “where are your accusers?”) and hate the sin (“leave your life of sin”).
Telling homosexuals it’s OK to keep being homosexual because Jesus came down on the “side of mercy” is not merciful. It is disingenuous, irrational, patronizing, weak-minded and ultimately, condemning them to a life of sin – which the Bible says leads to death. Calling homosexuals “children of God, gloriously-created being of eternal value, destined for glory and honor” is accurate and truthful. Telling them (and anyone else) they can do whatever they want with their bodies whenever they have the impulse to do so is lying and destructive.
==> [Your generalities of the LGBTQ community engaging in orgies and parades are a bit offensive. ] <== Stop thinking your offense is significant. It’s silly. If you’re that easily offended redirect your browser to PinInterest, or whatever. Google “gardening” or “tapestry” or something. Look if you don’t know the gay community has a rich history of orgies and flambouyant parades I can’t help you. You’ve obviously not been paying attention. Now don’t be childish and say, “Well ALL gay people don’t….”. Yeah – I know that. I’m simply characterizing the community the same way they readily – and proudly – characterize themselves. Notthing wrong with parades mind you … but orgies .. eh…
*Woman; sorry for the typo.
I love your post.
I think it’s wonderful.
Very insightful and well-articulated.
And I agree that we must put Jesus first, and country second, if even that high up.
This is a very good post, and one worth considering. My objection to gay marriage, apart from the implied moral stamp of approval that legality brings with it, is that it will begin to be used as a legal club against those who do not support homosexuality. We’re already seeing lawsuits from homosexual couples against businesses that will not provide services for their weddings, due to moral conflict. Gay marriage becomes a wedge, allowing the government to slip in and begin to police and monitor things which the government has no business in.
@jhanan
Furthermore, gay marriage undoes all the laws and concerns pertaining to incest, since incest exists to prevent physiological deformity. ALL LAW – or the vast majority of it, is based on the concept of the nuclear family, and gay marriage will explode the foundation of our society, if we believe that we are a society of laws. Can a man marry his son? Can a man have children simply to have sex with them? Can a woman marry her sister? Why not? Who are we to tell anyone else whom they can or cannot love? People have promote all sorts of things, much stranger than what is being suggested here. Please don’t think this is “fringe” behavior that could never become the norm. Polygamy? Obviously, this is perfectly acceptable if gay marriage is acceptable. What about polyamory? Why not? Who are we to suggest that *two* people must be “ordained” to lead a home? Why couldn’t 12 lead a home? Or 4? Or 40? 40 people that love each other should be allowed to get married, just as 2 do now, should they not?http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2013/04/legalize_polygamy_marriage_equality_for_all.htmlhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PolyamoryThere's a reason marriage is a sacred institution and a reason God said, “A man shall leave his father and mother …”.Because the family is the basic building block of society as the cell is the basic unit of the body.
@jhanan
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyamory…http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2013/04/legalize_polygamy_marriage_equality_for_all.html
sorry, let’s try that again … maybe this will work
@jhanan
oh well I tried …
@jhanan I think that’s a valid concern.
The “angry, fearful and contemptuous Christians” you mention above (sounds a lot like “bitter clingers” to me) are not the only ones that believe the purpose of “gay marriage” is to destroy “actual marriage”:
Delayed reaction: AMEN.
Too late for that. The state is involved in everything. To just sit back silently and allow evil people to make evil laws is the same as “when good men do nothing then evil reigns”. Psalm 82:3-4 commands us to “DEFEND the cause of the weak and fatherless; MAINTAIN the rights of the poor and oppressed. RESCUE the weak and needy; DELIVER them from the hand of the wicked.” When the state changes from judeo christian laws to secular humanist atheist laws those who are harmed are mainly children and women. Why oppose homosexual marriage? The same reason we have restrcitions on zoning. We want a moral society. We don’t want prostitution and pornography in our neighborhoods. We don’t want children fostered or adopted by pedophiles. We can still be loving and not make certain “sins” criminal, but we also don’t have to sit back and be silent when the pendulumn swings and secular society tells us we must accept this activity as normal and or keep our yaps shut.
“Homosexual couples already exist and the government can’t and shouldn’t have any say in that. They want the right to marry. The arguments against gay marriage are adorned with references to the Bible, but really the Bible only addresses the act. In no way does it address the state recognizing the union of same-sex couples.”
Romans 13: http://biblehub.com/romans/13-3.htmFor rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, http://biblehub.com/romans/13-4.htmfor he is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer.
The ruler is God’s servant for our good. We are to be afraid if we do wrong, and he is to bear the sword to punish evil doers. This is carrying out God’s wrath!
How the the ruler, the state, the government-punish the evil doer if they cannot discern what is evil and what is good? There must be a source of knowing good and evil, and yes, we know that is the Scriptures, which Jesus upheld! Of course Jesus spoke of God’s creator rights over marriage . The State is is wield the sword to what is evil. Homosexuality is evil, and perverts the image of God. Here Jesus appeals to His Own created order in marriage. The State should do no less, or the state is evil.
Matthew 19: http://biblehub.com/matthew/19-3.htmAnd Pharisees came up to him and tested him by asking, “Is it lawful to divorce one’s wife for any cause?” http://biblehub.com/matthew/19-4.htmHe answered, “Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, http://biblehub.com/matthew/19-5.htmand said, ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’?http://biblehub.com/matthew/19-6.htmSo they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.” http://biblehub.com/matthew/19-7.htmThey said to him, “Why then did Moses command one to give a certificate of divorce and to send her away?” http://biblehub.com/matthew/19-8.htmHe said to them,“Because of your hardness of heart Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. http://biblehub.com/matthew/19-9.htmAnd I say to you: whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery.”http://biblehub.com/esv/matthew/19.htm#footnotesa
Finally someone who has put into words what I have been feeling for months. It kills me when the big C church spends time worrying about the government as if it exists as another arm of itself.
Jesus Christ does not need the American government to sell his philosophies wholesale.
I prefer my church to be aggressive about spreading the Gospel of grace and love and my government to give us the freedom to do so by staying out of the way! This may mean that people have the right to choose another path. I believe however if Christ’s message is lived out in our lives there is nothing that compares to it’s allure and beauty.
Setting aside Romans 13:1-7 (and the fact that, in the United States, “We the People” are the “higher powers” instead of Caesar) and the responsibilities that passage places on the rulers/higher powers in terms of administering justice, etc…..
I believe the main concern that Bible-believing* Christians have today over same-sex marriage in America is that, once the state recognizes it, then they (the Bible-believing Christians) will be forced to not only recognize it, but effectively endorse it, in the public square and/or marketplace or else face social, economic, legal, or political consequences. We’re already seeing this happen with Christian business owners being forced to service same-sex weddings….if, that is, they want to remain in business.
In the book of Acts, Paul appealed several times to his rights and privileges as a Roman citizen to advance the Gospel of Christ. Christians in America should do the same. And when we sense that the political and legal landscape in America is changing in a way that will undermine our religious freedom, freedom of speech, and/or freedom of conscience, we should speak out. To NOT speak out would be a grave mistake (at best) and (frankly, in my opinion) a serious injustice in our part.
Thank you Shane for your thoughts. Many christians have behaved in very ugly ways about this issue, which often unfortunately leads to more and more people not wanting to follow Christ or be involved in His church. I hope this whole situation changes for the better someday.
Shane, are you familiar with the facebook group Against Equality? If not, I think you would find them intellectually stimulating and sympathetic. They are primarily a gay group of social intellectuals who write and publish on the topics of social engineering and oppression of the poor. As the name of their group suggests, they are opposed to marriage equality and state their reasons which are diverse and eye opening.
@Peter Very interesting. I’ll have to check it out. Thanks Peter.