The recent approval of same-sex marriage in Iowa and Vermont has brought this emotional issue back into the headlines.
Proponents claim that sexual orientation should have the same constitutional protection and social sanctions as race and gender. Opponents claim that the historical definition of marriage as one man and one woman should continue to be upheld by the law. Both sides have violently expressed their views over the years, and both sides are wrong.
For a Christian who bases their beliefs on the Bible, there can be no doubt that homosexuality is a sin, just as adultery is a sin.
The question then becomes how a Christian should deal with unrepentant sinners. Paul answered this question in a letter to the Corinthians:
I wrote you in my letter not to associate with immoral people; I did not at all mean with the immoral people of this world, or with the covetous and swindlers, or with idolaters, for then you would have to go out of the world. But actually, I wrote to you not to associate with any so-called brother if he is an immoral person, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or a swindler--not even to eat with such a one. For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Do you not judge those who are within the church? But those who are outside, God judges. REMOVE THE WICKED MAN FROM AMONG YOURSELVES. (1 Corinthians 5:9-13 NAS)
Viewed in this light, the issue becomes clear. Unrepentant homosexuals who call themselves Christians are to be judged and avoided by the church. Unrepentant homosexuals outside the church, like all sinners, are not to be judged or avoided by the church, but left instead to God to judge.
Passing laws to effect moral change is not only unbiblical, it's also counter-productive as proven by Prohibition and the "War on Drugs." Making sinful behavior illegal does not create Christians. It creates criminals of those who will not obey, or hypocrites of those who obey unwillingly.
Our job as Christians is to evangelize the lost, not force Spirit-led lifestyles on those who don't have the Holy Spirit to lead.
Let the homosexuals marry. But let them marry outside the church.
Comments
Thanks for this perspective! I featured your article today in The Weekend Embrace: "Freedom and Unity" edition.
examiner.com/examiner/x-1916-Sex--Relationships-Examiner~y2009m4d11-The-Weekend-Embrace-Freedom-and-Unity-edition
Wow! What a lovely presentation with just enough sting to hopefully help individuals to think with the bigger head!
Great perspective! I just wish more folks would espouse their feelings and beliefs with substance as you did here!
jon-paul
Your article is prejudice against gay people. You can site passages from the Bible to pick on any group you wish. The Bible used to be used to justify slavery and prejudice against blacks. More and more people every day are understanding that this is discrimination. You pick and choose what you want out of the Bible and ignor the rest. Pure discrimination.
Just another contorted way to express religious bigotry.
You're wrong on so many levels. Most every law you can think of has a moral basis: murder, tax cheating, social security. Marriage law even with same-sex marriage would still prohibit underage, incestuous, more than two, too closely related, etc type marriages. We as Christians are not to judge the sin of non-Christians, but that doesn't translate to not enacting laws that are based on morality. Please identify one law that doesn't differentiate and judge the appropriateness of one type of behavior over another.
Every judicial decision we've had on the subject of same-sex, from Lawrence to In re Marriage cases, to the latest from Iowa, all decided that it was "immoral" to deny same-sex couples the right to behave in a certain way. You seem to believe that the only people pushing for a certain moral stance are right wing Christians, and certainly not folks on the Left. That's a false premise.
Perhaps the proprietorship of marriage should be seen as yet another example of the State arrogating territory far beyond its alleged competence. (You know: like running schools.) How about: no marriage "laws" at all. The church, whose authority over real marriage is, in my view, both comprehensive and exclusive, should solemnize marriages according to scripture; people outside the church can call whatever arrangement they like by whatever name they wish (may I suggest "sodomatrimony?"). In this way, liberty might flourish even as opportunities for low comedy might multiply.
I have no problem with same sex marriage; my problem is, I don't like the way they celebrate.
I am quoting an important part of scripture in regard to the same sex marriage and the so called Christian ethics group. I hope you would put this on the air so all can see the actual HYPOCRICY of the entire item
Ron Glynn
Canada
.1. Old Testament law
The punishment for adultery was death by stoning for both the man and the woman (Deut. 22:22), a bride who is found not to be a virgin is to be stoned to death (Deut. 22:13-21 It is one of the curiosities of the current debate on sexuality
.1. Old Testament law
The punishment for adultery was death by stoning for both the man and the woman (Deut. 22:22), a bride who is found not to be a virgin is to be stoned to death (Deut. 22:13-21 It is one of the curiosities of the current debate on sexuality that adultery, which creates far more social havoc, is considered less "sinful" than homosexual activity. Perhaps this is because there are far more adulterers in our churches. Yet no one, to my knowledge, is calling for their stoning,
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!