This article is dedicated to my friend Jeff Matson who asked me to give my opinion on the article, The Best Christian Argument for Marriage Equality Is That the Bible Got It Wrong. Christians need to accept that Jesus was sometimes wrong—in fact, he might even want us to. by Brandon Ambrosino. I am very appreciative of Jeff for considering my theological knowledge on this subject. There is a mountain I can say about this article; however, I will point out the obvious flaws in Christian theology and logic.
Needless to say I did not agree with anything the writer said in this article. I would recommend reading the article first to understand the full context of this writing. I summed up five different reasons why I did not agree with the article. The writer equivocates the word “love”, does not understand the Mosaic Law, is mistaken on Christs declaration of the end of the world, teaches that God changes His mind, and is confused on what marriage is.
The writer equivocates the word “love.”
When the fallacy of equivocation is used in logic it renders the conclusion unacceptable. This is because the use of a phrase or definition shifts in meaning. Oxford dictionary defines an equivocation as,
Use ambiguous language so as to conceal the truth or avoid committing oneself:
equivocate – Oxford Dictionary
The writer first defines the word “love” as a sexual relationship between people . . . “homosexual love.” Later he uses the Bible definition of “loving your neighbor” which is not sexual.
The problem we have today is our society uses the word “love” in regards to sexuality. The Bible never uses love as a sexual relationship. 1 Cor 13. The Bible says God is love. 1 John 4:8.
I love my son, father, mother, daughter, sister, neighbor and so forth. To confuse this with a sexual relationship is not Christian and is perverted. Love has nothing to do with a sexual relationship or marriage. The fact that the writer does not understand this proves that they are not a true Christian. Read my article on what is a true Christian for more info.
So my point is that, in Christianity, there is no such thing as “Homosexual love,” “heterosexual love,” or any sexual act that has anything to do with love. Those are called something else like, lust (Rom 1:27 KJV), fornication (Eph 5:3 KJV), immoral (1Ti 1:10 NAS), adultery (2Pe 2:14 NAS), marriage (Heb 13:4 NAS) . . . etc.
The writer does not understand the Mosaic Law.
The Mosaic Law (The Law Moses wrote) was extremely restrictive and had harsh penalties because the Israelite’s were very few in number while wandering for 40 years in the wilderness from escaping the Egyptian captivity. The laws were for the purpose of preserving the numbers and preventing further death and degradation of their people.
So did the “Bible get it wrong” by forbidding homosexuality. No . . not at all. If you were stranded in the mountains and were in need of guidance to survive, would you use a Boy Scout manual? It would definitely help your survival. The Mosaic Law was their “boy scout manual” for keeping their people alive.
Homosexuality reduces the speed of the population and child birth rates. When a group of people are trying to survive and build their population, homosexuality will be counter productive to that goal. It is a historical record for what the Israelite’s did at that time. There is nothing to get wrong. Moses’s Laws succeeded and the Israelite’s grew as a nation and prospered.
The writer is emphatically incorrect on Christ’s knowledge of the end of the world
The writer states,
Jesus was horribly mistaken about the end of the world.
The fact is that everything Jesus said would happen, happened. The real issue is that most Christians do not teach the Bible correctly. The writer quotes C.S. Lewis as proof of Christian teaching on this. Many Christians will probably be shocked when I say C.S. Lewis was one of the worst Christian apologists in Christian history. The modern church teaches a mountain of false doctrines about the end of the world; however, this does not mean what Christ told the disciples about the end of the world was wrong.
The “End of the world” is the most controversial teaching among Christians. The most Biblical and acceptable view is that the end of the world happened on 70 A.D. when the Romans destroyed Jerusalem and raised the temple to the ground. That is when the end of the Jewish world occurred. Many Christian teachings on the end of the world ends up in a mad hysteria of ambiguous Bible verses. Christ quoted Daniel,
And forces from him will arise, desecrate the sanctuary fortress, and do away with the regular sacrifice. And they will set up the abomination of desolation.
(Dan 11:31 NAS)
The regular sacrifice did stop and the temple was destroyed in the exact manner spoken of by Christ in Matthew 24 on 70 A.D. when Titus leveled the city on a siege against Jerusalem. So, Christ did not fail on a “prediction.” As a matter of fact, the Bible does not “predict” the future at all. “Predicting the future” is a naturalist interpretation of scripture. God is not subject to time and has no restraints on His knowledge.
The writer teaches that God changes His mind
The writer has no clue who or what God is when he says,
Given what we know about Jesus’ humility, why wouldn’t he be open to changing his mind?
Anyone who thinks God changes His mind does not know the Christian God what-so-ever. A god that changes his mind is no God at all.
God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?
(Num 23:19 KJV)
God is not a human. He does not “look to the future” so as to “predict” the things to come. There is nothing that happens that He does not know and ordain in the first place. All things are ordered and set in its place before God created everything.
being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will
(Eph 1:11 KJV)
although the works were finished from the foundation of the world.
(Heb 4:3 KJV)
I realize most Christians are naturalists and are extremely confused on their own religion; however, this does not make the Bible wrong. God is not some old man sitting in a chair in outer space somewhere just hoping we all love him. As if He needs us to worship Him as if He suffers from some insecure loneliness. God says it and so it will be.
The writer is confused on what marriage is
Christians also are shocked when I tell them that marriage has nothing to do with love. We do not get married because we love someone. If that were true then, if someone loves their mother are they going to marry her? Or a mother that loves their son, are they going to get married? In Christianity, marriage is a “covenant” made between a man, a woman, and God. It’s an oath.
Yet ye say, Wherefore? Because the LORD hath been witness between thee and the wife of thy youth, against whom thou hast dealt treacherously: yet is she thy companion, and the wife of thy covenant.
(Mal 2:14 KJV)
People get married for all sorts of reasons, they marry for money, because they are royalty, because they are poor and need ends meet, because they want a family and children . . . etc. Marriage is to keep fidelity between man and woman in order to prevent production of children from many different women, spreading disease, unlawful sexual consent, rearing children with a mother and a father, preventing lawsuits, single motherhood . . . and many more reasons.
Love makes a happy, healthy marriage; however, love is not the basis of it. The basis is a legal covenantal promise between the man, woman, and God. In other words: the church, the government, family, the married couple themselves who swore the oath, any established religion, and so forth have absolutely no say so whether they are married or not.
If a man was stranded on a desert island, and he had a woman with him. They could swear a marriage oath between each other and take each other in marriage and that would be held viable by God Himself. No government, church, priest, family member, religion or anyone has any authority to abrogate or deny that marriage.
Brief synopsis of the writer and the article
Based on what I have wrote, the writer of the article is not a Christian or is severely unstudied. I would never say someone is damned because they do not have the capacity or access to the “perfect” theology; however, if that person does not have enough knowledge to accurately represent the Bible, it would be best if they did not write anything at all.
With that said, instead of using misleading vocabulary terms and twisting Christian teachings, the writer would be better off forsaking Christianity altogether and finding a religion that accepts his homosexuality. Or just not being religious at all. It makes no sense to me why people deny, alter, explain away, and manipulate a religions teachings when they don’t agree with the religions teaching.
It’s like Cinderellas step sisters trying to make the slipper fit, so they can marry the prince. They don’t seem to realize that the Prince has the particular person in mind and it is not them.
But you do not believe, because you are not of My sheep. My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me;
(Joh 10:26-27 NAS)