I’m really not ready or qualified to write about this…

Conservative Christians Selectively Apply Biblical Teachings in the Same-Sex Marriage Debate

I’ve been mulling writing something about this topic and debate for awhile now.

This isn’t it. It’s just what I wound up writing when I posted this in my Weekly Link Round Up. It’s particularly relevant for me right  now because I’ve two friends getting married soon who are heterosexual, yet not Christians (I think they would describe themselves as pagan, at least on occasion), in a church with a minister. I volunteered to make sure his relatives up north could watch the wedding live (I was grateful that my friends and family in Australia were able to see my wedding here). To be honest that offer was instinctive, because it was something I could do for them (I don’t know what sort of present we can afford), but I desire to love and serve them, and part of that is caring for them and giving them resources that helped my wife and I prepare for our marriage, and serving them as I can during their ceremony. They and their friends know my beliefs, and I see this as an appropriate way to exemplify His love in front of them, rather than condemning the marriage as un-Biblical.
think I agree with the above two articles,at least in their sentiment. I would write a full post on the matter but I think I would be a little out if my depth. To me a wedding is much less ‘legitimate’ in the Bible sense if the parties are not claiming to be Christians. And Corinthians says we are not to judge those outside the body – so if they’re not claiming Christ, how is there an issue? Admittedly weddings are a Christian rite, and that makes them more complex as an issue for those performing it, but providers of flowers, food etc? If I never served someone at Wal-Mart or at a hospital because of their sin, I wouldn’t have anyone to serve. Jesus served sinners. It’s complicated, but I think issue is indeed being made out of one element of society when it should be made of a range, if it should be made at all.
Possibly a more significant issue that maybe should have been addressed decades ago is the right of anyone not fitting Biblical criteria for marriage being permitted a wedding. We don’t let professed Hindus and atheists get baptised, and no Imam is going to let an atheist preach in his mosque, so why do we allow openly non-Christian/sinful weddings to take place in Churches? As a society we’ve lost the sanctity of the institution already, so why make an issue when everybody wants in, is it because they no longer fit our stereotype? I think that the lukewarmness and sin already permitted and tolerated by many congregations gives them little basis to single out specific examples that they hold prejudice against.

I’m reminded of 1 Cor 10:27 – I think there are grounds for asking a lot less questions, especially in who we provide goods and services to, for the sake of our conscience, and that this would save us trouble. I see no mandate in scripture for extremely rigorous vetting of the people we deliver services to. Of course, we don’t have to provide cake toppers with two guys, just as my wife and I found that not every shop sells them with a white man and black woman on top. Surely the law of love, and of doing everything as unto the Lord (Col 3:23).
My perspective on this debate has been shaped greatly by Preston Sprinkle’s discussion of homosexuality and the bible in a series on Eternity Bible College‘s Faculty Blog. He’s writing a book on the subject. It bears reading if you’re committed to being faithful to the Scripture when discussing homosexuality, because it turns out not all of the verses quoted as ‘proof texts’ aren’t as clear-cut as some people would like them to be.
Advertisements

2 comments

  1. Thank you for that. I agree with the Daily Beast too. The link does not work, there is an extra bit: I saw it and deleted it from my address bar.

    One problem. Hypocrisy is one argument as to how others might see the Christian cake-maker who refuses to bake for a gay couple: but what would you say to that baker?

    1. Fixed – thankyou.
      Honestly? I don’t know. I guess I would want to ask and explore their the motivations and beliefs that they lived out in their refusal. One one level, like with Paul’s dealing with non-kosher meat and meat offered to idols, if you’re convicted, you should probably follow your convictions, if you know better, then you should do better according to your knowledge. On another level, we have to obey the law of the land. Baking a cake doesn’t contravene the Bible, no more than building a house does. If that cake or that house is then used to celebrate a non-Biblical wedding, or worship satan, or house orphans, that’s not really in our control. Should a car salesman not sell a car to a guy who’s openly a womaniser who might take girls into the backseat to commit fornication? I would be worried that if my brother-in-law and I went to get a cake for his wedding and were refused service with or without an explanation, because we were misconstrued to be buying it for ‘our’ wedding, then there’s an issue either way.
      I would probably discuss the people Jesus ate and spent time with – we didn’t accuse him of encouraging drunkenness at Cana (where people were evidently fairly sloshed already) nor of Zaccheus’ tax-collecting practices.

      But at the end of the day, I would encourage the baker to seek Him for him/herself, and follow how He leads and convicts them.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s