Another Response to the Overturning of Proposition 8

I say another response, of course, because the blogosphere has been brimming with reactions and sound analysis of the Wednesday ruling. Proposition 8 was ruled unconstitutional, which decision effectively legalized homosexuals' rights to "marry," at least in the eyes of the state.

Preeminent among those responses is Dr. Albert Mohler's, who is always amazingly adept to comment on the downward-spiraling of American culture from the Biblical perspective. Over at PyroManiacs, Frank Turk also offered a thoughtful, helpful response, linking to a couple other posts he's done on the subject in the past, one of which I found to be excellent. James White offers the exasperated response, and I stand right there with him on that. Dan Phillips comments briefly, but effectively. Fred Butler is as sharp as always. And let's face it: the Christian blogosphere wouldn't be the Christian blogosphere without a post up at Between Two Worlds, even if Justin is on vacation.

So, with all of those giants, why would I bother giving my two cents? Better yet, why should you bother reading it?

Well, my point isn't to try and comment on something that these others have missed. Not at all. Yet at the same time I do indeed want to remind us of what's important in this whole discussion and call us to keep first things first.

It's likely that as you Christians seek to be a good steward of the Truth of God that has been entrusted to you, and a witness of it amongst your unbelieving friends, that you'll enter into the discussion of why the issue even matters to Christians anyway. Why do we care? What's all the fuss about? I mean, why can't we grant the same rights to two consenting adults who want to make a commitment to each other for life?

Not Just Because Homosexuality is a Sin

One answer that you might be ready to give is that we Christians care about preventing the legalization of gay "marriage" because the Bible clearly states that homosexuality is sinful. As the Bible is the inspired, inerrant, and infallible Word of God, and our sole authority for all matters of life and godliness (2Pet 1:3), we must accept its word as binding. Here are some examples:

• Leviticus 18:22 - You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination.
• Romans 1:25-27 - For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, 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.
• 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 - Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God.

So it's clear. Those who say the Bible doesn't forbid homosexuality don't have leg to stand on. It's clear that Scripture condemns homosexuality as sinful, and thus just as all other sins it is worthy of death. It is a mark of rebellion, and those who practice it will not inherit the kingdom of God, but along with the rest of those who persist in their sin "their part will be in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death" (Rev 21:8).

And so, as the purpose of the civil government is to promote the general good and well-being of the society and to restrain the evil therein to the best of its ability (Gen 9:6-7), we believe the government should not sanction that which the Lord of the Universe expressly forbids. Violating God's Word is never the best thing for any society, as long as Jesus is Lord.

But having said all that, I'm saying don't give that answer. At least, don't give just that answer.

Not Just Because God Himself Defines Marriage as Heterosexual

Another answer you might be ready to give is that we Christians care about preventing the legalization of gay "marriage" because God Himself is the One who created marriage, who performed the first marriage (Gen 2:18, 21-22), and He Himself defines marriage as being between only one man and one woman. And as God is the Lord of the Universe, we must accept His Word. Here's what He says:

• Genesis 2:18, 21-22 - Then Yahweh God said, "It is not good for the man to be alone; I will make him a helper suitable for him." ... So Yahweh God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and he slept; then He took one of his ribs and closed up the flesh at that place.God fashioned into a woman the rib which He had taken from the man, and brought her to the man.

God purposed to make a companion suitable to Adam when it became apparent that there was no fitting match among the creatures of the earth. And He sovereignly caused Adam to sleep deeply, Himself took one of Adam's ribs and fashioned it into a woman, and then presented the man with his bride. God did not make another man from Adam's rib, but made a woman. In God's mind, only a woman was a "helper suitable for him."

• Matthew 19:3-6 - Some Pharisees came to Jesus, testing Him and asking, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any reason at all?" And He answered and said, "Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning MADE THEM MALE AND FEMALE, and said, 'FOR THIS REASON A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER AND BE JOINED TO HIS WIFE, AND THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH'? So they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate."
  

So when a Pharisee asks Jesus about divorce, Jesus, the Lord of all (Ac 10:36), talks about marriage. He declares that God's purpose was to create human beings "male and female." Now, it is not an accident that He said this. In the context of a discussion about marriage, Jesus prefaces His comment on divorce by underscoring that God made humanity as male and female. God did not make us only male, or only female. He intentionally designed that a man shall leave his family and be joined to his wife, and that these two -- this man and wife -- should become one flesh. He does not speak of a man leaving his parents to be joined to his husband, but his wife.

And so the very definition of marriage from the Creator -- and thus, the authority -- on marriage is that it be between one man and one woman. To sit quietly by, then, while our government -- which we have been blessed with the right to participate in as (at least what used to be) a democratic republic -- in rebellious, treasonous fashion seeks to redefine that given definition would itself be an act of treason against our King.

And yet having said all that, I'm saying don't give that answer. At least, don't give just that answer.

Because It's a Matter of the Clarity of the Gospel

If we're going to speak into this situation with any sort of prophetic voice (read: having a Biblical impact), we need to give the reasons why homosexuality is a sin, and why God has defined marriage between one man and one woman.

Marriage is a wonderful, beautiful, and glorious institution. But the truth is that marriage is not those things in and of itself. God has designed marriage to be a symbol, or a picture, that points to something greater than itself. And it is only so wonderful, beautiful, and glorious because of that something greater that it points to. And that is the Gospel of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. That is, that after man rebelled against God in the Garden by sinning against Him, their sin separated them from their God and subjected them to spiritual death absent a redeemer. Because no human being could ever atone for his sin, the Father lovingly sent His Son Jesus to live the life we should have lived, to die the death we should have died, so that everyone who trusts in Him alone for their righteousness before God should not suffer eternal punishment, but should be saved. And of all those whom the Father has given to the Son, He will lose none. He will never forsake His bride, but will always live to make intercession for them (Heb 7:25).

Marriage is an institution set up by God with a specific purpose: to glorify Him (to make much of Him) by magnifying the relationship of covenant-keeping grace that exists between Christ and His Bride, the Church.

In Ephesians 5, the Apostle Paul gives us the most amazing, breathtaking instruction on marriage in all of Scripture. There, he quotes Genesis 2:24, just like Jesus did in Matthew 19:5 and Mark 10:7-8: "For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother and shall be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh." Then, the very next thing he says is, "This mystery is great; but I am speaking with reference to Christ and the church."

Ponder that. Let that sink in. He is speaking about marriage with reference to Christ and the church. Keep that in mind as we consider other things he's said in the passage.

Earlier, Paul is giving the Ephesian church instruction on how to conduct themselves in their marriages. He basically lays out a plan of loving headship on the husband's part (Eph 5:25-30) and respectful submission on the wife's part (Eph 5:22-24). Now, what is absolutely astounding is the reasons he gives for why a husband must lovingly serve his wife and why a wife must respectfully submit to her husband.

• Ephesians 5:22-23 - Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body.
• Ephesians 5:24 - But as the church is subject to Christ, so also the wives ought to be to their husbands in everything.
• Ephesians 5:25-27 - Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up for her, so that He might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, that He might present to Himself the church in all her glory, having no spot or wrinkle or any such thing; but that she would be holy and blameless. So husbands ought also to love their own wives as their own bodies.
• Ephesians 5:28-30 - He who loves his own wife loves himself; for no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ also does the church, because we are members of His body.

This is absolutely staggering. Throughout the entirety of Paul's instruction on marriage, the reasoning, the foundation, the basis for his commands is the work of Christ in His relationship with the Church. The Gospel is why husbands must love their wives and wives must submit to their husbands!

What is this all telling us? It's substantiating the claim I made above: that marriage is a picture, or a parable, of Christ and the Church -- of the Gospel of Christ's covenant-keeping grace with a people to whom He has committed Himself, and who have committed themselves to Him. When Paul says that "This mystery is great," and then tells us that he's speaking about Christ and the Church, he's establishing that marriage is designed to point us to the Gospel: that precious Good News that has saved us from sin, wrath, just punishment, fruitlessness, and a wasted life; that precious Good News that has gotten our sin out of the way so that we can enjoy fellowship with our Creator and Redeemer! So that we can spend eternity gazing into the beautifully glorious face of our God, who will dwell among His people in love in the Paradise of the New Creation.

Now this is why Christians should be opposed to the legalizing of gay "marriage": because it mars the picture of that precious Gospel that marriage is designed to be. If marriage is given to us in order to point us to the reality of Christ's covenant-keeping grace with His people, and if the husband pictures Christ and the wife pictures the Church, then any tampering with those participants confuses and obfuscates the Gospel.

And that's what should get our dander up. Not tax breaks. Not nomenclature. Not social agendas. The Gospel. Make sure the people you're having these conversations with leave knowing the difference. And if they don't know why the Gospel is so precious to us, why it's such a treasure, why it's to be so rigorously defended and protected...

Tell them.

Guard,
through the Holy Spirit who dwells in us,
the treasure
which has been entrusted to you.
- 2 Timothy 1:14 -

But we have this treasure
in earthen vessels,
so that the surpassing greatness of the power
will be of God and not from ourselves.
- 2 Corinthians 4:7 -

For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.
- Matthew 6:21 -

A Letter to Our Representatives

So we've arrived in Southern California! The car made it! Praise God! I'm actually three days into my Seminary orientation. It's been a ton of information, but also a really enjoyable time. (Actually, at this moment, I'm on break from a three hour crash review session on English grammar, which, if you know me, is my bread and butter, my being a language teacher.)

But I still don't have internet access set up in my home, so I'm not able to get back to my regularly scheduled programming here at For Our Benefit. But I do have something that I'd like to share with you guys for the Wednesday post. It's a letter written by one of my very close friends and treasured brothers in Christ to Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi regarding Barak Obama's proposed health care bill.

Now, both this friend of mine and I do not favor heavy involvement in the political process. The kingdom of God and the kingdom of this world are two separate kingdoms. We should not put our hope in the political process to effect change in the world; it will fail us. All our hope for positive change is in the transforming power of Gospel of Christ.

Having said that, there is a however. My good friend expresses that 'however' in an email he sent to other Christian friends introducing his letter. I'll let you read it from him.

So, is this post beneficial? Is it for our benefit? I believe so. I pray that you are benefited and helped by what is written. I was.

For the most part, I tend to stay away from being very involved in the political process, because I believe that since all of our lives are governed by our God then not much of our lives is of relevance to that political process. But I also do believe that we American Christians have been placed in a country that is unique. In our country, we can and are supposed to be stewards of the “practicality” of how we live. Because of this unique privilege that we have, and because our democratic leaders are being so aggressive to violate our biblical beliefs, I have felt inspired like never before to write to our representatives. However you can and however your conscience guides you to, I want to encourage you to do the same thing. I have attached to this email a copy of the letter that I have sent to our senators Menendez and Lautenberg and to our speaker of the house Pelosi.

-----

August 11, 2009

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi
450 Golden Gate Ave.
14^th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94102

Regarding: President Obama’s Health Care Bill

Dear Madame Speaker,

I am a one-and-a-half generation “Hispanic” American. I suspect that generational adjective does not exist, but I think that it fits me well. I was born in New York City in 1973, and when I was nine months’ old, my mother traveled back to Ecuador, South America taking me with her. At fifteen years of age, I traveled back to the United States by myself, not knowing how to speak any English. After six months’ worth of watching American soap operas and hundreds of infomercials, I learned to speak the language (I have a slight accent). I am 35 years’ old now, and since those days of soap opera-watching, it has been one of the greatest thrills of my life to get to know the beautiful details of our nation’s history.

And so I am writing this letter to tell you, with all due respect, but directly, that you do not have the right to force upon me and upon millions of other Americans a health care system that we do not want for ourselves. It is our right to decide whether we want to have medical coverage or not. And if we decide that we do want to be covered, it is our right to decide what kind of coverage we want. You do not have the right to determine what our needs are, because you are not the provider of our needs. We will decide, under the authority and protection of our constitution, what those needs are and will advance ourselves in whatever honest and legal way we can so that we can provide for those needs.

We Americans have been born free, and with rights. We have the right to lawfully do what we want with our money, talents, and resources. These are ours, not yours. You do not have the right to pass a piece of legislation that forces us to give a portion of our money, talents, and resources to benefit other individuals whose property these three things that I have listed are not. Each of us does not have the same intelligence, education, or moral integrity as every other American. Thus, you do not have the right to pass a piece of legislation that treats us as if we have the same make-up as every other American. Your party claims to be the philosophical offspring of that splendid man, Martin Luther King, yet your party seeks to violate that most profound of principles that he proclaimed—that any law that does not conform to the law of God is no law at all. Our rights, according to our constitution, are natural rights, given to us by God, yet you seek to violate them. And committing such violation, you proclaim yourselves to be despots and not at all men and women of virtue.

You are not representing me and millions of other Americans, yet to represent us is what your chosen profession is supposed to be. If you truly believe that your proposed plan is so beneficial, spell it out to us Americans clearly, simply, and in detail. We can listen to you if we want to, but if we decide that we do not want to be enslaved under your plan, you must respect our individual sovereignty. That you refuse to explain to us Americans the details of your plan only shows us that you are not interested in being civil servants. Civil servants are individuals who have been inspired by wonderful pragmatic ideals. So inspired, and so seeing the beauty and strength of these ideals, civil servants are careful to be articulate in presenting the benefits of those same ideals. That you refuse to explain to us the details of your plan only shows us that you are interested in dictating to us, who are free Americans, and in coercing upon us a philosophy that we do not agree with. That you refuse to explain to us the details of your plan tells us loud as thunder that you are interested only in being satisfied by power.

There is much more that I want to say to you in this letter, but it has been my intention to be as plain-spoken and thus as succinct as I believe it is necessary for me (for all Americans) to be during this absolutely crucial time in the history of our amazing nation. I have wanted to present in detail what I believe will be the unavoidable consequences (financial and moral) that your plan will cause, but an anecdote that I heard from an American radiologist two weeks ago, I hope, will be enough. The American radiologist was training together with a British one who had come to train in the US. They were giving medical care to a mentally disabled patient. The British radiologist was shocked at the dedication with which the American one was caring for the patient. “In England, we put these people in a room with open windows and hope that they catch pneumonia,” the British radiologist said.

Without any intention whatsoever to be melodramatic, but with reason and therefore passion to exercise my privilege of being a free and responsible citizen, I write to tell you that I want this America to remain and to improve. Your health plan will cause, without a doubt, neither. Forced slavery never does.

Do not violate my rights.

An American citizen.