This is blog #2 of a continuation of my response to a missive/blog posted several months ago entitled "Why I am a Christian Who Supports Gay Marriage." Please Google it and check it out before continuing.
Concerning Statements About Gay Marriage Being A Human Rights Issue:
Time for a pop quiz for all you Bible-believing Christians: How many times is the phrase "human rights" used by Christ in the Gospel accounts? OH, sorry, that may be a bit restrictive...Let me rephrase: How many times is the phrase "human rights" used in the New Testament of the Bible? Uh, wait, that's probably still a bit too restrictive...Let me try again, one last time: How many times is the phrase "human rights," or anything similar to that phrase, used in the whole Bible? Ok, sure, you can have some time to look it up; but while you're there, maybe you can also check on the the following additional questions in your pop quiz:
- How many times was the phrase "civil rights" (or any similar phrase) voiced, defined, supported, or otherwise advocated by Jesus Christ, the Apostles, or any of the writers of the New Testament?
- How many times was the word "gay" used by any of the Bible writers to describe a person who engaged in homosexual behavior?
- How many times did Jesus, Paul or any of the writers of the books of the Bible contradict, rescind, or dispute God's restrictions concerning sexual relations in Lev 18:6-23 in any way?
- And finally, for extra credit, how many times are the words "tolerant" and "intolerant" used in the Bible?
If you answered "ZERO" to all of the above questions, you would be 100% correct (make that 110% correct if you answered the bonus question), and you may go to the head of the class.
My point of the above exercise is this: It would seem that Christians who are conflicted by cultural and societal practices which challenge Christian mores and standards would spend more time trying to determine what secular concepts are not supported by the Bible, and therefore provide invalid input for living according to the Christian lifestyle, rather than trying to figure out how to get around Biblically supported teachings which challenge human activities that the secular world deems acceptable. It's amazes me to see how so many Christians have bought into a bunch of modern, politically correct words and phrases designed by secularists to demonize those who resist their attempts normalize activities which God clearly disapproves of in His Word from the beginning. But then I am reminded that the Original Christian faced similar opposition in His day from the those who claimed to represent God's interests, as He challenged there attempts to bend God's Word and and misrepresent the spirit of His Law in order to justify their practices and beliefs and normalize their hypocritical behavior.
In the very beginning of her blog, the blogger declares that "gay marriage" (and, therefore, the whole issue of homosexuality, or same gender sex) is neither a religious or a political issue, but rather, is a "human rights" issue. Yet I would argue that just a few minutes of research reveals that homosexual behavior is addressed by by every major religion in the world, and virtually all of them either forbid or strongly discourage same gender sexual activity. (Islamic cultures are especially harsh on this issue; I read one report that said since 1979 [the year after the Muslim revolution there] at least 4000 people have been executed for homosexual activities.) Therefore, it is definitely a religious issue. And to say gay marriage is not a political issue is just plain ludicrous: The whole point for having homosexual advocacy groups, especially under our "representative" type of government, is to focus money and energy on electing and/or intimidating politicians and law makers who are favorable to their cause so that they can garner power to force the majority (who in our case are primarily also religious!) to accept, protect and advocate for their lifestyle if they don't "come along peacefully." In fact, in my opinion, the phrase "human rights", along with similar "buzz" phrases like "civil rights" and "social justice" are all political terms because they have their definition in the eyes of the beholder: My idea of "human rights" is obviously different from what your idea is, just as the United States' concept of "human rights" is certainly different from China's or Iran's or Syria's.
From a Christian standpoint, neither Jesus nor the apostles nor the Bible writers ever taught on, mentioned or even alluded to the concepts of "human rights" or "civil rights"; and this at a time when slavery, prostitution, torture, poverty and discrimination against race, ethnicity and gender was the norm, not the exception. Why do you think that is? Could the answer be found in Christ's own words: "But seek first his (the Father's) kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things (your earthly wants and needs and rights) will be given to you as well"? (NIV Matt 6:33) As a matter of fact, the reason Judas Iscariot betrayed Jesus to the Pharisees in the first place is because he was angry and disappointed when he realized that Jesus did not come to lead an insurrection against the Roman occupiers who had enslaved the Jewish nation. Essentially, history shows that Judas was a member of a core group of insurrectionists who thought that the prophecies concerning the coming "Messiah" meant that God was going to provide a leader who would help to physically overthrow the Roman Government and thereby restore the Jews' human, civil and religious rights; when he saw that Jesus was not about worldly revolution, he betrayed Him for 30 pieces of silver. In other words, Jesus was betrayed, persecuted and eventually killed because He did NOT support or become involved in a worldly human rights movement; guess Christians today who are persecuted, demonized and attacked by organizations and members of groups like the gay rights movements are in good company!
You see, here's the thing: Although He occasionally commented on the evils of His day, the reason Jesus didn't become involved in human or civil rights movements of the day, join protests and speak out against things like slavery, prostitution, sexual deviation, abortion, anarchy and the like, or help to establish human regulations to control the evils of the flesh is that He knew that until a man's spirit and heart are changed (renewed) by the indwelling presence of God, he would eventually be controlled by what his flesh wants to do. It's like this: When I was a kid growing up I would occasionally stand up mouth off to my dad, who would promptly tell me to sit down and shut up; I would usually do as instructed to avoid a whipping, but believe me, on the inside I was standing up mouthing off for all I was worth. The older and bigger I got, the less fear of retaliation and punishment I had, the more I would do what my "inner boy/man" wanted me to do than what my dad wanted me to do. But by the same token, as I grew older I became more mature and more "civilized," I became much less likely to engage in all the rebellious activity my flesh wanted to engage in. The point is, just because Jesus didn't speak out against every evil activity that people around Him might be engaged in, it certainly didn't mean that He supported or approved of those activities. When you read Romans chapter 8:1-14, you learn that God is not really interested in "human" or "rights" or anything else that has to do with the things of the flesh and this world; His only interest is in the things of the Spirit, especially our eternal relationship with Him, because, as it says in Romans 8:28. "And we know that in all things God works together with those who love him to bring about what is good—with those who love God." After all, "If God is for us, who can be against us?"(Rom 8:31)
