The Scripture says “for this reason the man shall leave his father and his mother and cleave to his wife.” The theological justification for marriage is that the woman was taken out of the man, and thus should be reunited with him in sexual union. That does not and cannot apply to same-sex couples. The man was not taken from a man, nor the woman from a woman. Same-sex marriage is excluded on theological grounds, not to mention moral grounds.
September 20, 2022
Same-sex Marriage is Theologically Excluded
Posted by Jason Dulle under Apologetics, Same-sex Marriage[12] Comments
Thinking to Believe 
September 20, 2022 at 6:28 pm
Excellent posting Jason!
Same-sex marriage is the product of a perverse & unnatural affection and lifestyle.
If same-sex marriage is acceptable to society, then what comes next?…..polygamy marriage and incestuous marriage?
All is contrary to the laws of God in Scripture……as well as nature.
LikeLiked by 1 person
September 20, 2022 at 6:46 pm
Well telling the truth will never garner a crowd. I’d rather please God than man any day. Thanks.
LikeLiked by 1 person
September 20, 2022 at 11:29 pm
I always thought this was obvious.
LikeLike
September 21, 2022 at 9:14 am
TR, well said and dont stop saying it but the people that need to hear it cant hear it unless prompted by the Holy Spirit.
LikeLike
September 21, 2022 at 1:35 pm
I assume that we are referencing Matthew Chapter 19, verses 3 through 9 here?
LikeLike
September 21, 2022 at 2:21 pm
John,
The verses that you mentioned refer to divorce, not same-sex marriage.
Divorce is not the topic of this thread.
LikeLike
September 22, 2022 at 12:56 pm
nic7777, yes, it should be obvious to Christians. Unfortunately, it’s not. More and more Christians/denominations are affirming same-sex marriage as morally acceptable from a Biblical perspective.
LikeLike
September 22, 2022 at 12:58 pm
johnwenld3god, I’m referring to Gen 2:24, but Jesus does reference the same passage in Mt 19:5.
LikeLike
September 24, 2022 at 2:47 am
“The theological justification for marriage is that the woman was taken out of the man, and thus should be reunited with him in sexual union.”
I see a couple problems with that. First, your claim may be a justification for SOME of the 45,000 or so denominations of Christianity, but certainly not all of them, nor is it justification for the thousands of other theologies that exist in the world today. Why should members of other (or no) religions care about or follow the teachings of scripture for a religion or an interpretation they don’t believe? Would you consider it justified for Muslims to insist you pray toward Mecca five times a day?
Second, since God in Genesis says many times to go forth and multiply, I would think the most important theological justification would be to enable THAT to happen, not to symbolically return Adam’s rib to Adam. If it’s the reuniting part that’s important, a simple hug could suffice for that.
Third, if the idea is meant to symbolize the reuniting of what was taken from the man (his rib) to make the woman, wouldn’t it make far more sense for the woman to have the body part that gets inserted into the man, rather than the other way around? Either that or Adam should have been made from Eve’s rib. Either way would make sense, but the man going into the woman ruins the symbolism.
For these reasons, your claim sounds like a classical ad hoc rationalization devised just to discriminate against gays: https://www.learnreligions.com/ad-hoc-explanations-causes-and-rationalization-3968430.
“That does not and cannot apply to same-sex couples. The man was not taken from a man, nor the woman from a woman. Same-sex marriage is excluded on theological grounds, not to mention moral grounds.”
One could just as easily make the OPPOSITE claim. After all, a man inserting part of his body into another man could be argued to be more symbolic of the “rib” being reInserted into Adam, right? That’s why I think your claim is an ad hoc justification for discriminating against gays.
While of course some people marry for convenience, access to resources, parental arrangement, marital arrangement, etc., if you ask the vast majority of couples why they married, they will almost always say they did so as a celebration and commitment of their love—not to fulfill some symbolic reunion of Adam’s rib with Adam. Marriage is about love more than anything else.
And by that standard, who cares who gets married to whom? If you think gay marriage doesn’t fit with you or religion or your definition of marriage, fine, don’t marry someone of the same sex, problem solved. But why push others to conform to your religious interpretation when they aren’t even members of your religion? Why not let others who are different from you share the same celebration and commitment with someone they love that you get to do, without getting all judgy on them? Just let them experience their own joy and happiness! Why look for reasons to be divisive and cruel?
LikeLike
September 24, 2022 at 7:43 am
Hi Jason,
The Christian churches who are accepting same-sex marriage and homosexuality into their congregations, I would think that THAT disqualifies them from calling themselves a “Christian” church.
The reason I say that is because “Christian” should mean to be “Christ-like” and these sinful acts are diametrically opposed to God’s laws and anything Christ-like…..instead they are perverse and this lifestyle is straight from hell.
These homosexuals need to be saved by God’s grace, not encouraged into their sin and then be lost forever.
No sane person can claim to love the One True God of the universe, while indulging in a sinful lifestyle…..a sinful lifestyle and all other sin that God became a man and died on a cross for in order to redeem humanity from those sins.
Once the LGBTxyz agenda is allowed in a church, there are no boundaries’ as shown in this article…….
https://www.westernjournal.com/one-church-hosts-drag-queen-story-hour-kids-others-condemn-whiteness-progressive-christianity-grows/
No, these churches are NOT Christian churches, they are more like Flip Wilson’s “Churches of What’s Happening Now”……….and they ain’t good.👎🏼
LikeLike
September 26, 2022 at 10:53 am
Here’s a perfect example of what’s going with “churches” who support same-sex marriage and the LGBTxyz agenda.
https://www.theepochtimes.com/culture-war-erupts-in-texas-town-over-drag-bingo-event-hosted-by-christian-church_4753201.html?utm_source=News&src_src=News&utm_campaign=breaking-2022-09-26-2&src_cmp=breaking-2022-09-26-2&utm_medium=email&est=9sPtgPkfeEoqSGBY3qJRvi18lSLWzHHeuv%2FCIDULqY0HlsoLxtsbnRDyzMKOSm0%3D
LikeLike
September 28, 2022 at 8:59 am
Hmm, apparently Jason isn’t approving replies with multiple links, so I’ll try again without all the supporting links.
“The Christian churches who are accepting same-sex marriage and homosexuality into their congregations, I would think that THAT disqualifies them from calling themselves a “Christian” church.”
But that’s just one interpretation of what Christians should believe. With over 45,000 Christian denominations out there (and an average of two more forming every day!), there are tens of thousands that disagree with you. There’s no requirement for the Bible to be taken literally, and most denominations consider it inspired by God but written by fallible humans who inserted their own beliefs and cultural biases of the time. Their beliefs are just as valid as your own.
And with so many Christian denominations out there, is it wise to play the “not real Christians” game? After all, if you were to level that accusation at all the denominations you disagree with, Christianity would consist of only a vanishingly small segment of the religious landscape. And considering how quickly Christianity is shrinking in the US (losing over a million followers per year, despite its daily fragmenting), wouldn’t shrinking the size of the Christian tent only accelerate the shrinkage?
“The reason I say that is because “Christian” should mean to be “Christ-like” and these sinful acts are diametrically opposed to God’s laws and anything Christ-like…..instead they are perverse and this lifestyle is straight from hell.”
A couple problems with that. First, Jesus never said ANYTHING against homosexuality. What he DID rail against was divorce and remarriage, yet you virtually never hear about Christians trying to make divorce illegal, right? Why would you pick on gays but give divorcees a pass? (Could it be that almost half of all Christian congregations are divorced and remarried, which would dramatically reduce the number of Christians even further?). It seems to me that you should feel free to not get married to someone of your same sex if you believe it’s wrong, but why prevent others from doing so? That just seems unnecessarily divisive and cruel.
Second, many homosexuals aren’t even Christians. Should they be required to follow the teachings of your particular interpretation of Christianity? I mean, would you be happy if Muslims become the majority and pass laws that require you to wear a burka? This is precisely why we have freedom of (and from) religion, so nobody can be forced to follow the beliefs of other religions.
“No sane person can claim to love the One True God of the universe, while indulging in a sinful lifestyle…..”
You mean like getting divorced and remarried?
LikeLike