Newsweek published an article in which it claimed that what the Bible teaches about love argues FOR gay marriage.
As I read the article, there were two areas of objection that kept popping up in my mind. Firstly, most of the examples used were the exception, rather than God's design; and secondly, many of the Bible verses were quoted out of context.
The first example used was Abraham sleeping with his servant when he discovered his wife Sarah was infertile. But, the article did not point out that the Bible shows that Abraham was wrong in bearing Ishmael through his servant, because he did not trust God to fulfill His promise; and that God fulfilled His promise when Sarah gave birth to Isaac. Other examples used were of polygamy, but, God never showed approval for it; and the article did not point out that the Bible shows all the negative effects of polygamy on those who practiced it.
The article even used Jesus being single as an example. But, Jesus came to earth to be the Savior, and the Church is metaphorically the Bride of Christ. So, there was a purpose for Jesus being single; but, this was a special situation and should not be used to indicate anything about God's design for marriage in general. The apostle Paul was similarly an "exception" rather than the "rule"; in that his ministry caused him to constantly be on travel to his missionary journeys, to be imprisoned, and to have his life in danger. So, for his ministry, he had the gift of celibacy, and may have been more effective in singleness. Again, that does not change God's design for marriage.
If the article, by citing these examples of exception, are trying to make an argument that gay marriage should be allowed as just another exception; the problem with that is the Bible does not support any of the exceptions that go against God's design either. Just because it occurs in society does not mean that it is right. This goes back to existing discussions about absolute truth versus relative social laws, and ethics versus morality. So, for example, even though society has made it legal to have an abortion, the absolute truth is that killing is wrong, and therefore the destruction of human life in the womb is wrong. The Bible has clearly stated that homosexuality is a sin and goes against God's design, such as in Romans 1:27:
"And in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error"
Then, as for Scripture being quoted out of context, we can often cite verses to support our viewpoint, but, by not taking into the context of the whole Bible, the verses can be misinterpreted. So, for example "There is neither Greek nor Jew, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Jesus Christ." was used in the article to support gay marriage because of it's inclusiveness. The passage in Galatians 3:28 was talking about "inclusiveness", but not for marriage. It was specifically referring to the salvation through Jesus Christ.
The arguments about being loving, inclusive, and accepting the opinion of society can be used to condone many things. However, when something goes against the design of God, the Creator, we cannot just say that it is right. In Genesis, God's design for marriage was clearly one man and one woman. And studies support this by showing that the best environment for children is one in which they have one father and one mother.
Tuesday, December 9, 2008
Newsweek on Gay Marriage
Newsweek published an article in which it claimed that what the Bible teaches about love argues FOR gay marriage.
As I read the article, there were two areas of objection that kept popping up in my mind. Firstly, most of the examples used were the exception, rather than God's design; and secondly, many of the Bible verses were quoted out of context.
The first example used was Abraham sleeping with his servant when he discovered his wife Sarah was infertile. But, the article did not point out that the Bible shows that Abraham was wrong in bearing Ishmael through his servant, because he did not trust God to fulfill His promise; and that God fulfilled His promise when Sarah gave birth to Isaac. Other examples used were of polygamy, but, God never showed approval for it; and the article did not point out that the Bible shows all the negative effects of polygamy on those who practiced it.
The article even used Jesus being single as an example. But, Jesus came to earth to be the Savior, and the Church is metaphorically the Bride of Christ. So, there was a purpose for Jesus being single; but, this was a special situation and should not be used to indicate anything about God's design for marriage in general. The apostle Paul was similarly an "exception" rather than the "rule"; in that his ministry caused him to constantly be on travel to his missionary journeys, to be imprisoned, and to have his life in danger. So, for his ministry, he had the gift of celibacy, and may have been more effective in singleness. Again, that does not change God's design for marriage.
If the article, by citing these examples of exception, are trying to make an argument that gay marriage should be allowed as just another exception; the problem with that is the Bible does not support any of the exceptions that go against God's design either. Just because it occurs in society does not mean that it is right. This goes back to existing discussions about absolute truth versus relative social laws, and ethics versus morality. So, for example, even though society has made it legal to have an abortion, the absolute truth is that killing is wrong, and therefore the destruction of human life in the womb is wrong. The Bible has clearly stated that homosexuality is a sin and goes against God's design, such as in Romans 1:27:
"And in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error"
Then, as for Scripture being quoted out of context, we can often cite verses to support our viewpoint, but, by not taking into the context of the whole Bible, the verses can be misinterpreted. So, for example "There is neither Greek nor Jew, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Jesus Christ." was used in the article to support gay marriage because of it's inclusiveness. The passage in Galatians 3:28 was talking about "inclusiveness", but not for marriage. It was specifically referring to the salvation through Jesus Christ.
The arguments about being loving, inclusive, and accepting the opinion of society can be used to condone many things. However, when something goes against the design of God, the Creator, we cannot just say that it is right. In Genesis, God's design for marriage was clearly one man and one woman. And studies support this by showing that the best environment for children is one in which they have one father and one mother.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment