NOTE: This is a written version of my podcast on the subject. I’ve also written a response to follow up questions to this.
- What is marriage?
- How did we get to this point?
- Common Objections
- Consequences
- A Christian Response
What is marriage?
Whether it be shows on television, court cases in the news, or a gay couple next door, it seems that the subject of gay “marriage” is unavoidable these days. The definition of marriage is under constant debate, with words such as “intolerance,” “hatred,” “old-fashioned,” and “discrimination” thrown around quite often. Were we to listen only to our televisions, it would be quite clear that gay “marriage” is a wonderful advance, the new civil rights struggle that all right-minded people ought to support. And yet, as Christians, we must look beyond the media, movies, and music to find out what marriage is; we must listen to what God says.
When we look in the Bible, we find that marriage is a foundational institution that was created and defined not by man but by God. In Genesis 2:24, right after God has created a woman for Adam, he defines marriage, saying, “Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh” (ESV). This is not something God created merely for believers; it is a creation ordinance, a blessing given to all of humanity.
Nor is this view of marriage confined to the Old Testament; it is consistently affirmed in the New. When Jesus was questioned about divorce (Matthew 19:1-12), he again looked to this passage to define marriage and made clear that this was not man’s opinion but God’s own unchangeable definition. Indeed, when a man and woman are married, Jesus says that God himself joins them together. The Apostle Paul likewise looked back to Genesis when discussing marriage in Ephesians 5:22-33 and revealed that the marital union of husband and wife represented the much greater union of Christ and the Church. Both the Old Testament and the New make clear that God created marriage as a lifelong union of a man and a woman.
Given the clear biblical teaching that marriage is not a man-made institution but a joining-together done by God himself, governments have no power to create or redefine marriage; they can only recognize it. Thus it clearly follows that governments should not recognize gay “marriage” for the simple reason that no such thing exists. Since marriage is by definition a heterosexual union, gay “marriage” is a meaningless phrase that makes no more sense than a “square circle” or a “married bachelor.”
To use a rather ridiculous example, imagine that Bill Gates decided that dogs truly are a man’s best friend and went on a massive campaign in favor of dog ownership, running commercials on its virtues and giving a golden collar and free dog food to all dog owners. Now imagine that the cat owners of America, longing for the benefits of dog ownership, used their clout to pass a law stating that felines shall now be classified as dogs. Well, regardless of what the government call them, cats would still be cats and not dogs. In a similar way, the union of two men or two women will never be marriage, whether or not the government gives them a marriage license.
How did we get to this point?
The shift in thinking necessary for gay marriage actually occurred long before there was a same-sex marriage movement, in times when the very idea of it would have been universally condemned. The ideas that led to gay marriage arose first in our conceptions of heterosexual relationships. Over the last few centuries, in countless books, songs, movies, and plays, the idea has gradually become dominant that marriage is simply when two people are “in love” and make some sort of commitment to each other. This, combined with the dramatic weakening of divorce laws, has created a culture in which marriage is seen as merely a private arrangement between two adults for their own romantic satisfaction. Some wedding vows now say “as long as love lasts” rather than “till death do us part.” Marriages where romantic love fades are derided as “fake marriages.”
With this shift, all the groundwork necessary for gay marriage had been done. Since then, the Sexual Revolution, the Gay Rights Movement, and the decline of Christian belief in America have erased much of the stigma of homosexuality. Because the romantic, “being in love” aspects of marriage came to be seen as definitional of it, it became quite easy to make the leap from marriage being “a man and woman who love each other” to “two people who love each other.”
Of course, when analyzed against the biblical and historical definitions of marriage, it’s easy to see the error of this overemphasis on romantic love. In many cultures, arranged marriages were the norm. For example, in the classic musical Fiddler on the Roof, there’s a rather humorous song called “Do You Love Me?” where the main character, Tevye, after 25 years of marriage, asks his wife if she loves him. And yet despite the fact that he’s not sure, he and his wife are no less married than their daughters who marry boys because they’re in love with them.
We also know that there are cases where people truly are in love and yet cannot be married. A current commercial in support of gay “marriage” shows a bride trying to walk the aisle to meet the groom but being held back by wedding guests. It ends with the question “What if you couldn’t marry the person you love?” It’s a powerful add, one that plays on our emotions (and manages not to put a gay couple in sight). And yet imagine one additional detail: imagine the bride and groom were brother and sister. Suddenly our perception of the situation would change dramatically. Romantic love may be a wonderful part of marriage, but it does not a marriage make.
None of this is saying that romantic love is bad. The Bible celebrates the romantic and erotic aspects of marriage, but it does not make them definitional of marriage. Marriage remains a lifelong covenant between a man and a woman who are joined together by God, not a private and temporary arrangement between two people for emotional satisfaction.
Common Objections
Aren’t we “legislating morality” and forcing our beliefs on others?
This whole objection is fundamentally flawed. All laws are based on someone’s conception of morality; for instance, anti-discrimination laws (quite popular among gay rights activists) are based on the belief that it’s wrong (immoral) to discriminate against people. The only question is whose morality the law will be based on. While Christians ground their morality in the revelation of our Creator and Judge who is morality’s very source, secularists ground their moral judgments in nothing greater than their own subjective, self-interested feelings and the ever-changing opinions of their culture.
However, for the sake of argument let us grant this premise. We need only look to human history to see that it is in fact gay “marriage” advocates who are forcing their beliefs on others. In thousands of different cultures, separated by great gaps in time, language, location, and religion, there has been an institution called marriage. The details of it and laws relating to it have varied greatly, and yet the great commonality has been the union of a man and a woman. The idea that marriage is between a man and a woman is not merely the Christian understanding; it is the understanding of the human race. Against this we have a conception of marriage that is not even a few decades old, forced upon an unwilling public by a small group of media and political elites and put into law by a small group of judges who abused their power by ignoring both the law and the will of the people. Who is truly forcing their morality on whom?
Why aren’t you respecting the separation of church and state?
We are. Separation of church and state means that the state may not establish a state church, like the Church of England, nor may it legislate articles of doctrine, such as requiring people to believe in the Trinity. However, separation of church and state does not mean that people may not vote and pass laws based on their religious views. Many of our nation’s greatest causes, such as the abolition of slavery and the civil rights movement, were advanced by people who used explicitly religious arguments (e.g. Martin Luther King, Jr.).
Shouldn’t gay people have an equal right to marry?
Of course. Gay people have always had a right to marry whomever they desire. A gay man may marry any woman he pleases, and a lesbian may marry any man she pleases. This is not mere semantics. A gay person cannot “marry” someone of the same sex for the simple reason that marriage is by definition the union of a man and a woman. What gays are really lobbying for is the right to change the definition of marriage. However, since God defines marriage and has not changed his mind, their efforts will be unsuccessful, regardless of how many governments pretend otherwise. Two men can no more be married than a shape can be a square and a circle at the same time.
Isn’t a ban on gay marriage just like a ban on interracial marriage?
No! Anti-miscegenation laws were wrong precisely because they banned marriages based on an arbitrary characteristic (race) that plays no part in the definition of marriage. On the other hand, there is no such thing as a gay “marriage” ban, because there is no such thing as “gay marriage.” Rather, laws that define marriage as a heterosexual union protect the definition of marriage from being cheapened by falsely calling homosexual unions marriage.
Why do you hate gay people?
We don’t. Christians are called to love all people and proclaim the glorious gospel of God, which offers forgiveness and new life to all those who repent and trust Jesus as Savior and Lord. However, love does not mean giving people everything they want or agreeing with them against God. It would actually be hatred to go along with the lie that is gay “marriage” and encourage gay people to persist in their sin.
Consequences
Government approval of homosexuality
If gay “marriage” is the law of the land, the government will officially consider homosexuality something good, worthy of promotion. Indeed, this is the very reason homosexuals have fought so hard for it. In California, for instance, gays already can have all the benefits of marriage through civil unions. They pursue gay “marriage” not for any benefits but because they know that it is a powerful sign of social recognition. It’s about respect and approval, not benefits.
A redefinition of family
God created children to be born in a loving family, with both a mother and a father exemplifying what it means to be a man and a woman, each playing their own special role and using their own special gifts for the child’s welfare. Commonsense tells us and science has confirmed that perhaps the most important factor in a child’s wellbeing is loving in a natural family with a mother and father. In this sinful world, children may lack a mother or father, but only through tragedy, whether by the tragedy of death or the tragedy of divorce.
Yet with gay “marriage” as official public policy, the state will be promoting a new definition of family, one in which it’s not important for children to have a mother and father, only “parents.” Saying that it’s tragic when children don’t have a mother and father will be considered hate speech. What constitutes a family will depend only on whatever arrangement gives adults the most sexual and emotional satisfaction, and children will suffer because of it. Rose O’Donnell’s six-year-old child asked her, “Mommy, why can’t I have a daddy?” and she answered, “Because I’m the kind of mommy who wants another mommy.”
Further redefinition of marriage
If gay “marriage” is the law of the land, the popular conception of marriage will be “a union between two people who love each other.” Having successfully attacked as arbitrary the requirement that the two people be a man and a woman, claiming that “love” is all that matters, activists will eventually realize that the requirement of two people is just as arbitrary. I would challenge you to listen to the arguments used to advance gay marriage and simply substitute in “group marriage.” You’ll see that they fit quite nicely. If the battle for heterosexual marriage is lost, the exact same arguments will quickly be used to make marriage a union between any particular number of sexually involved people who claim to love each other. “What if you couldn’t marry the person you love?” will become “What if you couldn’t marry the person(s) you loved?”
Indoctrination in schools
In a world where marriage licenses no longer have fields for “Husband” and “Wife” but only for “Spouse 1″ and “Spouse 2,” children will be instructed from a very young age that marriage is just a union of two people, that homosexuality is a good thing, and that opposition to homosexuality is hateful, intolerant, and bigoted.
Government persecution of Christians
Government persecution of Christians is not some distant threat; it’s a reality in places very near to us. For instance, in Canada, where the gay rights movement has advanced farther than in the U.S., a pastor who denounced homosexuality was fined $5,000, ordered to apologize, and banned from making “disparaging remarks about gays and homosexuals.” A Christian in England was arrested for passing out leaflets presenting the biblical perspective on homosexuality.
If gay “marriage” and “gay equality” become official government policy, Christians will officially be seen as bigots. One need only look to gay “marriage” advocates’ favorite analogy: interracial marriage. If gay activists are analogous to civil rights activists, then orthodox Christians are analogous to segregationists. We’ll be seen as similar to the KKK and Neo-Nazis, only minus the sheets and swastikas. Christians will be disqualified from holding government positions. Companies with Christian businessmen will be sued for discrimination. Christians will be fired from their jobs. Churches will be sued if they refuse to hire homosexuals. Pastors who read passages from Leviticus and Romans will be jailed. These things could take a while; they may not happen to you, but they will hurt your children or grandchildren if the gay rights movement achieves its goals. Nor is this a Christian scare tactic; gay rights activists themselves have acknowledged that religious liberties will be taken away when “gay equality” is achieved.
Our Response
Use what power God has given you in our government: Vote!
In this democracy we are blessed to live in, God has given us the opportunity to take part in its government. We may not be running the show, but we can use our voice to vote for laws and politicians who will respect God’s laws, rather than abuse their power to promote wickedness.
Pray
We’re self-deluded if we think we can accomplish anything of value or significance without God’s help. Pray for God’s intervention and grace in our nation. Also, pray that our leaders will govern justly and allow us to “lead a peaceful and quiet life, godly and dignified in every way” (1 Timothy 2:2, ESV).
Boldly proclaim the gospel of Jesus Christ, which can alone change hearts
Laws can help restrain wickedness and promote virtue, but they have no power to save. Only the gospel of Jesus Christ can change the hearts of wretched sinners like us and change the lives of all those who trust in him. Our hopes do not rest in earthly politics. Regardless of political advances and setbacks, we find our hope in a Savior who defeated the powers of evil on the cross, our victory in the Lord who rose victoriously from the grave, and our future in the King whose Kingdom is ever advancing. Whether the future be friendly or hostile, we know that with God on our side we have nothing to fear.
Related Links
Posts
