I'm a Christian and I support the legality of same-sex marriage

[YeshuaFan1]

Should we uphold the law of Go

I support freedom and personal choice. I do not want to live under a theocracy. Therefore, religious doctrine should NOT be used to regulate another's behavior, such as same-sex relations or marriage. I DO support laws that protect being victimized by another. For example, murder, assault, abortion, etc. should be ILLEGAL because they adversely affect an innocent, third-party. Same-sex marriage does not.

Frankly, the government should NOT be in the marriage "business". Why should citizens have to pay a fee to the government to get a marriage license? State governments should get OUT. Then, two consenting, competent adults can get "married" within their private organization and they can tell us everyone they're "married" and we can choose to recognize it or ignore it. Courts can continue to deal with marital issues as they are the arbitrator for all sorts of contracts, including marriage.

As well, I will remind my Christian friends that, God gave us free will to make our own choices. Who are we to restrict another's free will by imposing laws against behavior that doesn't affect us in the slightest? While we're at it, I also believe that prostitution, drug use and gambling should also be legal.

Should we uphold the law of God or the the law of sinful man?

 

[bbyrd009]

So do you see a place somewhere in Scripture as disputing what is claimed in John 14:2-3 and Acts 1:10-11? :)

i suggest that deliberately obfuscating language is being used to hide wisdom from the wise there, and you gotta admit its at least interesting that "Jesus, Returning" cannot be Quoted anywhere; the closest we get when we search for that is Return to Me and I will return to you

so, disputing, no, but we have plenty of corroboration, the Apostles thought the kingdom was about to manifest as theywere entering Jerusalem, the many "sightings" of Jesus after the ascension, wherein He was walking or standing right next to them and "they did not recognize Him," the kingdom does not come by observation, why do you stand there looking up into the sky, on and on
i mean did they see Him come down the same way they saw Him go up, or no?
see Him as He is imo

 

[bbyrd009]

What Does the Bible Say About The Second Coming Of Jesus?
There were a lot of scriptures in this link....if you get time check them out.

yet not a single "return" in the bunch eh

see, what was written to be understood spiritually is now being taken literally, just like the authors anticipated and even wrote for, bc after all ppl who want to become immortals after they literally die are not too much interested in life, more abundantly today, are they? And good luck selling it too lol

so, we have a bunch of "believers" with, really, no actual "beliefs" at all right, evabody got a collection of Absolute Truths, none of which can be abrogated in the slightest, else their whole belief system falls into a hat. See Him as He is imo ok, and come walk on water the right way!

 

[bbyrd009]

Perhaps "pin down" was the wrong term to use. Maybe "put you on the spot?" WADR, I'll just say it. You're pretty esoteric, Dude. I caught wind of this in a post by Amadeus. But you seem like more of a seeker than the average person who is less than easy to understand. I find it terribly fascinating, myself. I don't think you hold anything back or even close to the vest, so to speak, but some of what you say seems over my head. Certainly nothing wrong with that, though. I think we could have gotten into a lot of trouble together had we met in my young and dumb days. Alas now I'm in my old and dumb days. Like the song says: "I was so much older then; I'm younger than that now." :):cool: That was fun.

yeh, im still bad lol, but i used to be completely insufferable lol
i used to know everything too!

 

[bbyrd009]

Gay marriages and homosexuality in general has caused families to fall apart, churches to divide, loss of faith in God, loss of salvation, loss of life, loss of jobs....how can you say it hasn't had any effect on anyone else?

then in that case "we" dont have to fight it at all, right?
It will implode of its own volition?

fwiw Empires in Decline/Decadence stages always go through this phase i think
but whatever you have a war on, that is what will grow imo

 

[bbyrd009]

Should we uphold the law of Go

Should we uphold the law of God or the the law of sinful man?

we arent supposed to be concerned with the things of the world at all, are we

 

[bbyrd009]

ok and just for the record i would love nothing better than a literal return ok

 

[Heart2Soul]

then in that case "we" dont have to fight it at all, right?
It will implode of its own volition?

As it is written....in the last days good will be called evil and evil will be called good....
As it is also written...
2 Timothy 3 (KJV)
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
² For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,
³ Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,
⁴ Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;
⁵ Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.
⁶ For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts,
⁷ Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.
⁸ Now as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the faith.
⁹ But they shall proceed no further: for their folly shall be manifest unto all men, as theirs also was.

…
¹³ But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived.

Can we evade what was prophesied? No...perhaps delay it but not prevent it from coming to pass.

 

[amadeus]

yet not a single "return" in the bunch eh

see, what was written to be understood spiritually is now being taken literally, just like the authors anticipated and even wrote for, bc after all ppl who want to become immortals after they literally die are not too much interested in life, more abundantly today, are they? And good luck selling it too lol

so, we have a bunch of "believers" with, really, no actual "beliefs" at all right, evabody got a collection of Absolute Truths, none of which can be abrogated in the slightest, else their whole belief system falls into a hat. See Him as He is imo ok, and come walk on water the right way!

How many know that they should be stepping out onto the water now? "Besides, look at all the 'good' things down there beneath the waves!"

Or the pathway they're walking now is not lukewarm because I have already been saved and nothing evil can touch me.

What fun is it to walk with God 24/7 on top of the water? "Anyway it's not possible". Didn't you ever take chemistry?

Who is brainwashed? Who is deluded? Who loves his his ability to taste "goodies" on both sides of the fence now instead of loving God all of the time?

"I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service." Rom 12:1

Do it now for after a while, the carnal portion you enjoy so often will all be gone! Unending Life with God does not really begin until the physical man dies, right?

Well now let's get this "time" with God over as there is a great football game to be watched. After the game maybe...?

 

[bbyrd009]

HA!
some uncomfortable reflections there, for a pillar of salt anyway :)

As it is written....in the last days good will be called evil and evil will be called good....
As it is also written...
2 Timothy 3 (KJV)
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
² For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,
³ Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,
⁴ Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;
⁵ Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.
⁶ For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts,
⁷ Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.
⁸ Now as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the faith.
⁹ But they shall proceed no further: for their folly shall be manifest unto all men, as theirs also was.

…
¹³ But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived.

Can we evade what was prophesied? No...perhaps delay it but not prevent it from coming to pass.

ok you know thats prolly an outline of "believers" right
"having a form of godliness"
"as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses"
etc; 2Tim2 kind of sets up 3 maybe

kind of a shame we dropped J&J i guess; used to be a Book or something? Im not sure tbh; all i ever read is references. Anyway they apparently predate the OT even i guess?

then again, maybe not :)
"
The name Jannes occurs only once in the Bible, namely in 2 TIMOTHY 3:8, where Paul refers to an otherwise extra-Biblical tradition of two individuals named Jannes and Jambres, who opposed Moses but whose folly was made obvious to all.

Where this story comes from isn't clear but it most probably formed via the same folkloric mechanism that gave us the Book(s) of Enoch, and emerged from a fanciful expansion of the account of Moses and Aaron'sshowdown with the Egyptian magicians (Exodus 7:10-12).

Several Targums entertain the Jannes and Jambres spin-off, which appears to have included details of their ranks and business at Pharaoh's court, their joining the mysterious "mixed multitude" that evacuated Egypt along with Israel (Exodus 12:38), their generously offered assistance in manufacturing the golden calf (Exodus 32:4), their identification with the two otherwise unnamed servants of Balaam (Numbers 22:22), and their miraculous escape from the venging sword of Phinehas (Numbers 31:6-8).

The Cabbalists of the Middle Ages went even further and reported Jannes and Jambres forcing an unwelcomed entry into certain levels of heaven, where they encountered and defeated Michael and Gabriel but finally met their demise at the angelic hands of Metatron (that would be Enoch).

Surprisingly numerous references to earlier versions of these tales occur in Jewish and Roman literature, but are mostly post-Paul. Still, the Jewish scholar Artapanus of Alexandria already referred to it in the 3rd or 2nd century BC (cited by Numenius of Apamea in the 2nd century AD and in turn by Eusebius in the early fourth). The Roman historian Pliny the Elder, a contemporary of Paul, mentioned a Jannes along with Moses and someone named Jotape among famous Jewish magicians (Hist.31.11), and the Latin-writing Numedian (modern Algeria) Berber Apuleius listed Moses and Jannes among the world's great magicians.

Paul's reference to the story is by no means proof that he believed it to be historical. But his obvious appreciation for Stoic allegory makes it likely that he regarded it certainly useful for point-making. After all, in the same letter to Timothy, he writes his often misquoted statement that "all writing" (πασα γραφη, pasa graphe) is God-breathed and profitable for teaching (2 TIMOTHY 3:16)..."
The amazing name Jannes: meaning and etymology

and Jambres is similar. Reflections by other authors appreciated, but im not finding too many relevant ones; in English anyway. I guess its mostly a Jewish thing, and ive lapsed contact with my rabbi source; it is interesting imo that they were never named in...Exodus? yet here in later Scripture they are! Prolly some message in that, Book of Jasher hmm. Be cool if someone brought it out :)

 

[bbyrd009]

Should we uphold the law of Go

Should we uphold the law of God or the the law of sinful man?

i hope you understand that i totally agree with you ok, as far as that goes
but the op is talking about Legal Marriage, via contracts and whatnot, and not really marriage marriage at all, eh? So we kinda have a thing here where a term that we deem spiritual in nature, "marriage," is being used in a similar but diff sense?

So iow you know they arent really married, and i know they arent, but really is it even worth it to convince them?

 

[marksman]

Well incest is one I do not worry too much about. Other than genetically transmitting familial diseases, there was no prohibition on incest until the Law of Moses!

But bestiality has already had a stamp of approval by many members of the American Psychiatric Association. We as believers need to do what we have always been commanded to do! Glorify the Lord, exalt His name, and encourage good laws be passes in the lands where people have a voice in govt. The darkness is going to get far worse, Scripture has told us that. The closer we get to the day the Lord recalls the church home, the worse we can expect it.

So all we need to do is what we always have needed to do, be about our Fathers business.

And what is our father's business? Making trite statements does not enhance in-depth discussion.

 

[CadyandZoe]

I support freedom and personal choice. I do not want to live under a theocracy. Therefore, religious doctrine should NOT be used to regulate another's behavior, such as same-sex relations or marriage. I DO support laws that protect being victimized by another. For example, murder, assault, abortion, etc. should be ILLEGAL because they adversely affect an innocent, third-party. Same-sex marriage does not.

Frankly, the government should NOT be in the marriage "business". Why should citizens have to pay a fee to the government to get a marriage license? State governments should get OUT. Then, two consenting, competent adults can get "married" within their private organization and they can tell us everyone they're "married" and we can choose to recognize it or ignore it. Courts can continue to deal with marital issues as they are the arbitrator for all sorts of contracts, including marriage.

As well, I will remind my Christian friends that, God gave us free will to make our own choices. Who are we to restrict another's free will by imposing laws against behavior that doesn't affect us in the slightest? While we're at it, I also believe that prostitution, drug use and gambling should also be legal.

You don't seem to understand that the primary concern associated with gay marriage wasn't the legality of gay marriage. The salient point at issue was whether or not gay marriage was a thing. Before gay marriage could be legalized, it had to be established whether the legal definition of "marriage" included the union of two people of the same sex. According to the Bible, the answer is no.

In our view, the role of the state is not to define marriage; the role of the state is to legally recognize who is already married. The question is, "whom did God join together?" The state's role is not to join two people together; the state's role is to document the fact that God has joined two people together.

Matthew 19:4-6
4 And He answered and said, “Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning made them male and female, 5 and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? 6 So they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate.”

The question at issue was whether the state should document the union of two people whom God did NOT join together. According to our Lord Jesus Christ, God joins a man and a woman in marriage. A man leaves his father and mother to be joined to a wife, "and the two shall become one flesh." According to Jesus, God joins male and female.

But do they become one flesh because the man joined with his wife? The union of a man with his wife is not a marriage unless God has joined them together. Has the state become God? Has the state taken the power and authority of God to itself, joining two people in holy matrimony? Has the state and God parted company?

 

[Grailhunter]

You wonder what people are thinking, but the reality of it is, maybe not.
The nice elderly lady in church that is going to vote for the politician that support murdering over 600,000 babies a year....she see no wrong with that.

The nice church going father that would vote for a politician that supports drug trafficking, he thinks that is all part of freedom. He does not think it will be his kids that are killed.

The nice mother in church that votes for the godless democrats that want to make this country communists. The lawlessness in the streets will not affect her family. History is boring, most do not know what happens in Marxist / Communist countries. Most do not know that once you lose your freedoms, it will take the blood and lives of your children to get their freedoms back. Most do not understand that the mixture of evil that are out rioting in the streets think that freedom is anarchy, and drugs, and gang rule. A Demon Utopia where no child is safe. You notice that in the democrat run cities that if anyone harms or kills one of these demon rioters, the swat teams in heavily armored SWAT trucks rush to the scene! But if these rioters destroy, burn, loot, assault, and murder...those trucks are kept in park. The same thing goes for abortion doctors, shoot one of them and the nation's law enforcement comes to bear. Your child gets shoot in your front yard...no big deal. "Sorry for your lose, ma'am."

And here the good Christians that see no wrong in gay marriages. The last line on a gay marriage license
should be," Happy damnation day! Hell awaits you!" Gay marriage is institutionalized habitual sin, no opportunity for forgiveness. No moment of repentance, no intent to stop sinning, so no forgiveness. If married Gay couple can go to heaven, the rest of us are covered! Throw the Bibles away and do whatever you want... free ticket to heaven. Anything goes! The sin that keeps on giving. They adopt children that are destined for hell. Raising children to be homosexual druggies and then there is abortion, none of this constitutes child abuse ....right? Anything goes! Do anything, do anything to anybody...Demon Utopia!

 

[YeshuaFan1]

You don't seem to understand that the primary concern associated with gay marriage wasn't the legality of gay marriage. The salient point at issue was whether or not gay marriage was a thing. Before gay marriage could be legalized, it had to be established whether the legal definition of "marriage" included the union of two people of the same sex. According to the Bible, the answer is no.

In our view, the role of the state is not to define marriage; the role of the state is to legally recognize who is already married. The question is, "whom did God join together?" The state's role is not to join two people together; the state's role is to document the fact that God has joined two people together.

Matthew 19:4-6
4 And He answered and said, “Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning made them male and female, 5 and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? 6 So they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate.”

The question at issue was whether the state should document the union of two people whom God did NOT join together. According to our Lord Jesus Christ, God joins a man and a woman in marriage. A man leaves his father and mother to be joined to a wife, "and the two shall become one flesh." According to Jesus, God joins male and female.

But do they become one flesh because the man joined with his wife? The union of a man with his wife is not a marriage unless God has joined them together. Has the state become God? Has the state taken the power and authority of God to itself, joining two people in holy matrimony? Has the state and God parted company?

How can we validate and sanction as a valid marriage relationship that God has not?

 

[CadyandZoe]

How can we validate and sanction as a valid marriage relationship that God has not?

I don't think we can. In fact, a majority of Americans voted against it. But alas, a few judges decided in favor.

 

[BarneyFife]

I don't think we can. In fact, a majority of Americans voted against it. But alas, a few judges decided in favor.

No, they did not. Have you read the decision?

 

[BarneyFife]

The Supreme Court of the United States has decided that if two human beings of adult age present themselves as petitioners for marriage together, denying them a marriage license is, in fact, denying each of the two petitioners, individually, their right to due process of law. Same-sex marriage is not any more legal than it was before the decision came down. It is only more accessible under laws already on the books. The Supreme Court has no power to make laws. They only decide the legality of cases in light of existing laws.

 

[amadeus]

You don't seem to understand that the primary concern associated with gay marriage wasn't the legality of gay marriage. The salient point at issue was whether or not gay marriage was a thing. Before gay marriage could be legalized, it had to be established whether the legal definition of "marriage" included the union of two people of the same sex. According to the Bible, the answer is no.

In our view, the role of the state is not to define marriage; the role of the state is to legally recognize who is already married. The question is, "whom did God join together?" The state's role is not to join two people together; the state's role is to document the fact that God has joined two people together.

Matthew 19:4-6
4 And He answered and said, “Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning made them male and female, 5 and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? 6 So they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate.”

The question at issue was whether the state should document the union of two people whom God did NOT join together. According to our Lord Jesus Christ, God joins a man and a woman in marriage. A man leaves his father and mother to be joined to a wife, "and the two shall become one flesh." According to Jesus, God joins male and female.

But do they become one flesh because the man joined with his wife? The union of a man with his wife is not a marriage unless God has joined them together. Has the state become God? Has the state taken the power and authority of God to itself, joining two people in holy matrimony? Has the state and God parted company?

The state and God have parted company. Early in the 1980's I was transferred to a Social Security field office in central California. While I had been working for the agency for nearly 10 years, I had only been interviewing people face to face for a few weeks when I picked up an interview slip and several of the other employees snickered for they knew who the women were and why they were there. I was the 'new kid on the block', at least in that office.

My interview was with two women. One of them was receiving Social Security Disability benefits based on her own work record. The other woman had a minor child living with her from a terminated marriage. The two ladies had found a Justice of the Peace in a small town in California, who married to them to each other. The woman on Disability had filed a claim with Social Security to receive step-child's benefits on behalf of the child of "her wife". Step children's benefits would be payable beginning 12 months after the relationship was legally established. The initial claim for benefits for the child had already been denied because California would not recognize as valid the marriage between two people of the same sex. The Justice of the Peace had the authority to perform a marriage ceremony in California, but he could not change California law and the ceremony was not valid. Without the marriage, there would be no step-child relationship.

I denied their first appeal. Social Security is subject to the local law having jurisdiction with regard to family relationships. We applied the law that way. Only a Court having jurisdiction could make a determination that a law was unconstitutional. I had no choice in the matter of the appeal, but it was the way up for the two women and the step child. By going through all of the appeal steps within Social Security once the claim had been denied at the highest level the person then had the option of filing an appeal with the local U.S. District Federal Court. In the Federal Court system it then might have been finally be possible to decide that the law used to deny the claim was unconstitutional. A Federal judge has that authority. My claimants did not win their case... but as we know the law has now been changed. Legal under secular law? Certainly, without regard for God's law.

 

[YeshuaFan1]

The Supreme Court of the United States has decided that if two human beings of adult age present themselves as petitioners for marriage together, denying them a marriage license is, in fact, denying each of the two petitioners, individually, their right to due process of law. Same-sex marriage is not any more legal than it was before the decision came down. It is only more accessible under laws already on the books. The Supreme Court has no power to make laws. They only decide the legality of cases in light of existing laws.

What does God think on this issue?