Strange Abandonment of Principle

 

I really love the Church but if Jared Wright speaks in behalf of the Church with regard to this issue, surely we have an east to west distance of disagreement. Christ said,

And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,
And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?
 (Matthew 19:4-5)

 

Today is a historic day in the history of the State of California and in the history of the United States as a whole. Today is the day when a ban on homosexual marriage will be lifted in accordance with a decision of the California Supreme Court. Homosexual couples from across the United States will descend on California in the coming days and weeks, and will receive the legal rights and responsibilities that accompany marriage.

Today’s removal of the ban on same-sex marriage is part of a larger debate in America over the definition of marriage. Because at stake in the discussion are issues of morality, justice, ethics, and separation of church and state, Adventists cannot and must not remain silent on the issue. Adventists have always insisted on speaking the truth, demonstrating God’s love, and working for justice. For those reasons, I suggest several reasons below that voters in California and elsewhere should stand in firm opposition to any constitutional amendments that would ban same-sex marriage. Below, I enumerate my reasons and provide a starting place for further conversation on the topic.


Seven reasons to oppose a ban on same-sex marriage

1. Adventists affirm separation of church and state. Advocating a ban on same-sex marriage on moral grounds is tantamount to coercive mandating of a religious viewpoint. We cannot spread morality by force through law! We should oppose all efforts to do so.

2. Protecting marriage: Supporters of a ban on same-sex marriage define the issue as protection of marriage. We must note that same-sex marriage is still marriage. Marriage as an institution is not under attack. Rather, it is being affirmed.

3. Promoting fidelity and monogamy: If we, as Christians, support and uphold fidelity and monogamy as better than cohabitation, then we should be consistent. The purpose of marriage is to promote monogamy and fidelity. Get it?

4. Marriage is beneficial for society both structurally and fiscally. Marriage promotes stable, lasting relationships over transient ones. Further, marriage is related to greater financial security and mental and physical health. Married people provide societal benefits for those reasons.

5. We cannot defer to the “will of the people” or “deeply rooted tradition,” as attempts by some organizations have done, to ban same-sex marriage. The will of the people and tradition consented to slavery in America. America’s elected officials outlawed slavery as a violation of human freedoms and dignity. America enacted laws banning interracial marriage by the will of the people and tradition. Appointed judges rescinded the laws as violations of the U.S. Constitution’s 14th amendment. Majority does not equal right. The court-ordered desegregation of schools in the 1950’s also went against the will of the people.

6. Same-sex marriage is NOT a slippery slope to the permitting of polygamy in America.

7. Same-sex marriage does not threat pose a threat to me, my choices, or my way of life. The practice of marital fidelity by homosexual couples does not impinge upon any of my liberties, it does not harm me or my religious practice, and it does not threaten God or God’s sovereignty.

Discussion – an opening for polygamists?

Some have argued that allowing same-sex marriage will open the door to a broad definition of marriage that will inevitably come to include polygamy. That slippery slope argument is demonstrably false. The following discussion comes courtesy of the article Gay Marriage and Polygamy, and is reprinted here for your convenience.

Any proposal for the expansion of marriage must be good both (1) for the individuals involved and (2) for the society in which they live. Gay marriage meets both of these criteria. The case for polygamous marriage is distinguishable (and weaker) on both counts, especially the second.
On the first issue — the effect of allowing gay marriage on homosexuals themselves — the deprivation for gays if gay marriage is banned is greater than the deprivation to polygamists if polygamy is banned. A polygamist may still marry someone if we ban polygamy; he simply may not marry many someones.

The deprivation to the polygamist is large, especially if polygamy involves the exercise of his religious faith, but not total. The gay person, however, has no realistic choice of a mate available under a gay-marriage ban. The deprivation is total.

Further, there is no “polygamous orientation” causing a person to need the close companionship of multiple partners (though some people may prefer it). There is, however, a homosexual orientation, causing a person to need the close companionship of a same-sex partner. The ban on polygamous marriage is the denial of a preference, perhaps a strong one; the ban on gay marriage is the denial of personhood itself.

On the second issue — the effect of recognition on society — the differences between gay marriage and polygamous marriage are more pronounced. There is ample evidence that people who live in stable, committed couples are healthier, happier, and wealthier than those who are single. Gay marriage is a good idea because it will benefit not only the gay couple but their families, friends, neighbors, and taxpayers whose burdens to care for unmarried gay partners is greater.”

Jared Wright is pursuing a M.Div at La Sierra University. He blogs at Adventist Environmental Advocacy.

Source: SPECTRUM

Advertisements

Can Gays and Lesbians Be Saved?

-

Of course we are not Gods and Judges to say that homosexuals and lesbians will be damned, but we are sure that salvation is always open for them. This is what the gospel stands for – a good news to everyone. “There is one lawgiver, who is able to save and to destroy: who art thou that judgest another?”, says James, so we don’t have any right to judge another especially when that person is outside of our faith. “But them that are without God judgeth” according to Paul. Christ, during His earthly ministry, didn’t  judged those people that considered by the society as wicked and unclean, but rather let Himself acquainted with them and befriend with them. But today’s Christians, unlike the Lord, are very quick in judging people particularly when they noticed someone whose actions are not in parallel to their gender, and as a matter of fact, they discriminate them openly.  This isn’t Christ’s representation.

Of course, homosexuals can be saved. God is so near to everybody and He is so much powerful to save even the vilest person in the surface of the earth.  The only thing that must exist within man is his WILLINGNESS – willingness to welcome God’s willingness to save him. Gays and lesbians can be saved… if he/she want to. For them, Christ came as a physician, and for them His blood poured out on the cross. And by this precious blood, every sinners may be cleared and every believing soul may be justified. Paul said;

Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,

Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.” (I Corinthians 6:9-11)

Unrighteousness makes a person to be damned, thus he/she must be saved from it, and it is only by the blood of Christ that they can be saved from it. This is what happened to those believers in Corinthians, including their homosexuals. They believed and then they were washed and justified. And as they were saved from their unrighteousness, they’re no longer live with it but instead lived in a justified and sanctified life. Maybe their actions are gentle as a virgin or maybe their voices are soft as lady (which I think naturally comes out from them), but in their heart they sing a song of praise and thanksgiving to the Lord, worshiping His name and departing from those unrighteousness where they were saved from.