Bible Question - Gays and Marriage

Post Reply New Topic

Where in the bible does it specifically say that marriage is between a man and woman only? I was wondering if the bible actually has that wrote in it or if it just somewhat imply marriage is strictly between man and woman. Also, where in the Bible does it specifically say two people of the same sex cannot marry?

One last tjhing, if it does say in the bible that marriage is between a man and woman. Then why do Bible believers actually listen to what is wrote about that issue and not practice many of the other things the bible says one must do?

The bible does say it in many verses, but you are right people pick and choose the things they follow. Nobody does it all. So the bottom line is do what you think is right and be a good person.God will judge you based on what is in your heart, and he will know if it's sincere or an act! Just be a good person.If you really want to know some of the many verses i will let you know, but not just to debate about it.

Well, there are several OT passages which explicitly endorse polygamy, so clearly the mantra of "one man, one woman" is not strictly Biblical. I'm not familiar with any passages that define marriage as between a man and a woman, all I'm aware of is the passage in Leviticus which denounces gay sex. Such a prohibition implies that gay marriage would not be allowed; however, mainstream Christian theology holds that Levitican laws don't apply to Christians, so that's a moot point unless we are also going to outlaw razors and shaving cream.

Jezus states clearly that God had intended that marriage was between one man and one woman. Some prohibitions from the law of Mozes are later repeated in Acts and in the letters. It makes it perfectly clear that every kind of sexual behavior outside a marriage of one man and one woman which may not be (biological) closely related is equally prohibited. It does not single out homosexual behavior because also sex before or outside of marriage is condemned in exactly the same manner. Just as lying, stealing, etc.

It's interesting to note that Paul makes explicit notice of the fact that some of the faithful had in the past had been practicing what we now call homosexual behavior but did no longer do these things.

The bible does not condemn emotions: to feel something is not a sin. Only actions or behavior can result in sin. It does warn that dwelling on feelings, keeping unhealthy desires alive, can lead to unwanted behavior and therefor sin.

Chapter and verse, please.

I thought it was the first part of Matt 19.

Yeah, Matthew 19, at the beginning basically says that marriage is between a man and a woman, although not explicitly but rather implicitly in the terminology used.

Basically, in just about every discussion of marriage, a man and a woman is implicitly accepted as the framing for how the institution works, with the foundations (often considered to begin in Genesis) being between a man and a woman. In addition, there are a significant number of passages condemning homosexual sex. Because of that, I would have to argue that even though I doubt there is a passage literally going against gay marriage, this is really because gay marriage was so rejected that the possibility of it was not worth considering.

As for the other things that the Bible tells believers to believe, there are multiple issues:
1) the average self-proclaimed Christian is not very theologically educated, and is likely rather resistant to theological instruction.
2) You might not agree with orthodox theology with the teachings of the Bible, as often what is referenced in Levitican law, however, most Christian theological groups reject significant aspects of Levitican law as no longer having binding authority based upon what they believe to be the teachings of the New Testament and/or the early church.

In this case, I'd bet the issue you have is more likely 2 rather than 1 in this case. In which, the proper response is then engaging the theological authorities trying to prove their inconsistency.

"Whoever looks at a woman to lust after her has already committed adultery with her in his heart." There are some other passages that discuss the importance of intent rather than just actions, such as prayer and good works which should not be done simply to gain social approval.

If you get married by a Priest or Minister, then it can be said that God has joined you together. Most Churches have rules that dictate who can marry, and no one is trying to change that.

The same does not apply if you are married by a Judge, Justice of the Peace, etc. There is nothing religious about such a ceremony, it is merely a Civil Wedding. It confers the same legal rights as a Church Wedding, but does not say that God has joined you together.

It's a shame you cannot differentiate between the two. One is just a civil ceremony that confers certain legal rights and responsibilities. The other is called "Holy Matrimony." No one is saying that Gays must be afforded the status of "Holy Matrimony," only that they must be accorded the same legal rights as straight couples.

DOMA act defines marriage is strictly between a man and a woman.

Like I said elsewhere the problem is not in marriage as traditionally an union between man and woman.

If the government would give the same rights and privileges to other unions then this would be much less a discussion. Here in the netherlands we have this system where you can register co-habitation which then gives you the same rights and privileges as marriage under the law.

Even though mm and ff marriages are possible in the Netherlands most choose registered co-habitation. Even under mf couples most choose registered cohabitation over marriage.

Last edited by Meta on 08 Jul 2009, 5:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.

DOMA has just been challenged in court as unconstitutional, a violation of States' Rights.

Of course, that's not the case in civilized and tolerant countries.

Yes, and the DOMA is an attempt of one group to use civil law institutions to force their religious laws onto others. It is really no different than other 'blue laws' of old ... their interpretation of their religion is that stores shouldn't be open on Sunday, alcohol shouldn't be sold on Sunday, so they use the police power of the state to enforce that religious law since even their own followers were not really committed to obeying.

The government does not approve or disapprove of whether or not people get confirmed or Bar Mitzvahed, doesn't care if people take communion or go to confession. But by historical accident, there is overlap between civil and religious marriage, and people want to use that overlap to advance their religious views.

If you're a Christian, then you follow the NEW TESTAMENT, not the OLD TESTAMENT, which says NOTHING about marriage. The OLD TESTAMENT is also called the TORAH, which is the Jewish Holy Book.
Fact of the matter is, the OLD TESTAMENT is NOT THE BOOK OF THE CHRISTIANS, regardless of what they say, do or write. The NEW TESTAMENT is their book.

Bzzt.

"Think not that I come to destroy the law, or the prophets, I am not come to destroy but to fulfill. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the law until everything is accomplished." - Jesus Christ