From TODAY show interview:
Episcopal bishop Gene Robinson knows he is inviting death threats by entering into a civil union with his gay partner on the eve of his church’s biggest ecclesiastical conference. And he says it is worth it, because he is doing what God asks of him.
When God “asks” you to do something you need to test it in light of scripture. Otherwise, we could rationalize all sorts of evil. Of course, this is the main problem with cults and pro-gay theology: Abandoning the authority of scripture. (That doesn’t justify death threats, of course.)
We always need to remember Jeremiah 17:9: The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it?
Robinson claims that “The table that God invites us to includes everyone.” That is wrong, of course. God invites everyone who repents and believes in Jesus. Robinson is still in rebellion. It is repulsive to see him equate himself with Jesus and to play the martyr role, all the while helping to destroy his denomination and to bring discredit to the church.
He brings up the pork/shellfish red herring and other distortions:
It is called an abomination for a man to lie with another man as with a woman, but, he writes, the Bible also says it is an abomination to eat pork or shellfish, to wear clothing made of two different fibers, or to sow two different types of seed in the same field.
“We’ve often misinterpreted Scripture,” Robinson told Lauer. “We’ve used Scripture to justify slavery; the subjugation of women. And now we’re realizing that what the Bible initially seems to say about same-sex relationships is not actually what we’re talking about today — faithful, monogamous, lifelong-intentioned relationships between people of the same sex.”
That is what frustrates me the most. Anyone in his position should know better than to trot out the lame shellfish argument (actually, anyone with some basic Bible study skills should know better). Ironically, he is misinterpreting scripture at the same time he speaks of others misinterpreting it. In a media moment going mostly to unbelievers Robinson has perpetuated myth and arrogance about the Bible.
Actually, the eternal word of God was not silent on this topic. Consider these facts:
-
100% of the verses addressing homosexual behavior denounce it as sin in the strongest possible terms.
-
100% of the verses referencing God’s ideal for marriage involve one man and one woman.
-
100% of the verses referencing parenting involve moms and dads with unique roles (or at least a set of male and female parents guiding the children).
-
0% of 31,173 Bible verses refer to homosexual behavior in a positive or even benign way or even hint at the acceptability of homosexual unions.
I wish the best for Robinson and pray that he will one day repent of this rebellion. Too bad the article didn’t focus on what appears to be the root of his problems: His parents wanted a girl and thought he wasn’t going to live, so they named him Vicki Imogene and never changed the names. Do you think that might have caused him some identify issues? If the Episcopals wanted to provide him with free counseling, that would be great. But to make him a Bishop, especially after leaving his wife and kids? What a huge mistake.
Filed under: Bible, Politics, Sexuality | Tagged: Bible, civil unions, gay, God, homosexual, Politics, religion
Very insightful post.
The heart is indeed deceitful, even the heathen can know it.
Let’s make sure we have the facts straight:
We have a person that leaves their family and divorces their spouse in order to enter into an adulterous relationship with their lover. And they do this because this is what God is calling them to do. In addition, we are being asked to celebrate this relationship. And this is OK because people no longer have to refrain from eating shellfish.
What am I missing?
The “argument from shellfish” is so fatuous that the evidence against it shouldn’t need to be elaborated upon, especially in response to a man who has supposedly studied the Bible. But here’s the short version.
1) Rebellion against God’s intent for sexuality is explicitly prohibited in the Ten Commandments (i.e., the prohibition of adultery) but the Decalogue says nothing in particular about food.
2) The OT punishment for eating food that isn’t kosher is that the person is unclean for a couple days. The OT punishment for adultery and sodomy is, um, much more severe.
3) Food regulations changed multiple times in the Old Testament (i.e., after the Flood and after the Exodus), but God’s ideal for sexuality that was made clear in Genesis 2 was never changed, even if certain deviations were permitted as concessions to our hard-heartedness.
4) When Jesus came, sure He said that what we eat doesn’t defile, but He also tightened the restrictuions on sexual immorality, saying that mere lust is just as bad as the actual act of adultery.
5) Finally, there’s no indication that the Apostles thought food and sex were comparable. In the last chapter of Hebrews, in his list of moral do’s and don’ts, the author writes that we shouldn’t worrry about dietary regulations, but he insists that the marriage bed be kep undefiled.
On top of all this the argument from shellfish takes the tacky approach of literally comparing a person’s sexual partner to a piece of meat.
Bubba,
If your response was to my post I must apologize. I forgot to put a “smile” after my comment. I posted the way I did to emphasize how silly his argument is. Actual I think the word stupid is more appropriate.
Bubba said: “there’s no indication that the Apostles thought food and sex were comparable.”
Wasn’t there a margarine commercial with the tagline “Viva la difference!”
Roinson has totally fractured the Episcopalian church. My husband and I almost left the church. The only reason we didn’t is because our Bishop here in Texas is against the church having made Robinson a Bishop. I’m afraid however, that it’s only going to get worse!
Excellent post!
Hopefully, this will drive the African Episcopals mad, and make the archbishop sanction the American Episcopals.
I do think that it is fascinating that the pro-homosexual lobby is so intent on promoting their agenda that they will celebrate someone who divorces their wife and abandons their kids in order to follow their feelings. Appearantly they would have us believe that our committments matter less than our desires. It is a sad commentary on the “mainstream church” that this is accepted.
WOZ, just to be clear, I caught your sarcasm, smiley or no, and my response was not intended as a criticism of your comment. I know you and I are on the same page, and I was agreeing with you on the lunacy of the argument from shellfish.
Bubba,
Thanks. Believe me, I know we are on the same page after all the months of posting. I honestly wish I had your gift (and Neil’s) for explaining things as you do. I have even taken the liberty of copying some of your posts for reference on various issues.
As I’ve often told Neil, keep up the excellent work in defense of the faith.
Whoa! Neil let in a wiseguy! God didn’t “make us” anything. He simply made us. We come into this world imperfect creatures and no matter our proclivities are expected to live as He wants, not as WE feel.
Neil said: Hi Marshall – I deleted commet of the guy with the blasphemous name, but your point still stands.
The moment one says God asked me to…, told me to…, or God laid this or that on my heart so I must …. … beware and run!
When God is truly speaking to His child – one need not qualify the message with any reminders of such – scripture is authority enough.