Follow by Email

Joan and Bill

Friday, June 26, 2015

Supreme Court Marriage Equality

I received an e mail from the National Association of Evangelicals
taking issue with the Supreme Courts decision on Gay Marriage.

They quoted Jesus saying marriage is between a man and
a woman and how this decision destroys the concept
of Gods ordaining marriage between a man and a woman.

This is how I answered them

 Unfortunately you are wrong about marriage.

This does not change God given marriage between one
man and one woman.

What this does is provide an exception for people who
are different so that in spite of their difference they
may experience a fuller life.

You quote Jesus about marriage but you fail to quote his
reply when asked why some men do not marry.

Jesus said, there are some eunuchs who are born that
way from their mothers womb.

He had commented on Eunuchs who make themselves that way
for the kingdom of heaven meaning priests and monks etc.

He commented on Eunuchs castrated as being made that way
by men.

He commented on Natural Eunuchs born that way.  These were
the homosexuals of today covered under the law. They were
physically whole. They were allowed to marry and adopt children.

Jesus understood there would be those like your organization who
would be against this and that is why He said, let he who can
accept this do so.

You are wrong about marriage equality and you fail to report
Jesus full teaching, and you should know better.

Bill Donahue


Anonymous said...

Hello Bill,

You argue for homosexuals to marry and obtain children.

But you appear to use a text of Christian scripture that was directly about not marring and having children:

"10 The disciples said to him, “If this is the situation between a husband and wife, it is better not to marry.”

And to this condition of not-marrying, then:

"11 Jesus replied, “Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given. 12 For there are eunuchs who were born that way, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others—and there are those who choose to live like eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it.”"

There are some who cannot physically consummate a marriage, some emotionally unable to, and some who chose not to because of their commitment to the job in hand.

Why is that hard to understand?

Why did you invert his reply to advocating marriage, especially for homosexuals?

Dennis Wuest said...

Good point. It's what's natural to them. Their feelings are not sin. Nor is a choice. Who would choose it? But now the lifestyle is a different story. An existence based on carnality will not work.

Lamplighter4712 said...

i take no issue with marriage one way or another .. To me the purpose of that institution was to protect paternal rights of the children that the woman might produce ..
So it is more or less for geneology purposes .. i thought that civil partners was a good idea . but how ever one choses to see it .