Concerning the Definition of Marriage

A popular mantra amongst proponents of same-sex “marriage” is “Don’t limit the freedom to marry!”  Let’s think about that statement.

On the one hand, even if same-sex “marriage” becomes constitutionally recognized, there are still plenty of legal restrictions about who people can’t marry.  You can’t marry your sister, your dad, or your dog, for example, and you can’t have multiple spouses.

On the other hand, if you follow the agenda of proponents of same-sex “marriage” to its logical conclusion, you’re going to end up with unlimited freedom to marry someday.  I’ll make several foundational statements, and then build support for that claim on top of those statements.

Foundational statement number one: The definition of marriage as the union between one man and one woman has been clearly laid out in God’s Word, the Bible (here are just a few of many passages in the Bible that could be used in defense of this statement).  Christians believe that God defines what truth is.  Therefore, when Christians fight for the sanctity of the definition of marriage, they are doing so not because they have any right to “decide” what marriage is, but because God has the right to decide what marriage is, and He has, in fact, already defined it for us in the Bible.

Foundational statement number two: everyone assumes the existence of absolute truth, and lives in accordance with whatever they understand to be absolute truth.  Even postmodernists claim that there are absolutely no absolutes.  They have to.  As soon as you introduce the concept of absolute truth into postmodernism, the whole way of thinking falls on its face; therefore, postmodernists have to be absolutely rigid in claiming that absolutes are non-existent.  Postmodernists elevate human reasoning to the level of absolute authority by saying that as long as a particular view is right for an individual, it can coincide with a diametrically opposed perspective, and must be given equal recognition in society.  This worldview is fundamentally flawed, because it’s built upon an inconsistent definition of absolute truth.

Foundational statement number three: It is entirely inconsistent to claim that human reasoning absolutely defines what truth is in one instance (like the definition of marriage), and then not reorder the entire society to function with human reasoning as the ultimate source of absolute truth in every instance.  To do so is a contradiction in terms.  Absolute truth is a set standard that applies in every situation, to all people, at all times.  The agenda of same-sex “marriage” proponents is fundamentally postmodern, because it is built on the presupposition that people can define marriage however they want.  As such, this agenda will ultimately envelope far more than just marriage.

How, you ask?

Same-sex “marriage” proponents claim that no one can tell them who they can or can’t marry.  Not even God.  It would follow, then, that God does not have the right to make any truth claims.  As aforementioned, we can’t be OK with multiple absolute truths (God’s Word and human reasoning) functioning concurrently.  That doesn’t make sense.  But that’s the ultimate logical end of the same-sex “marriage” agenda: to strip God of His right to define truth, and to give that right to humans instead.  Who knows where a society that is governed entirely by human reasoning will be, just a short time from now?  Will we end up signing into law such currently unthinkable practices as bestiality and polygamy in the not-too-distant future?  Abortion was unthinkable fifty years ago, and look what’s happened in America since!  The mantra “Don’t limit the freedom to marry!” may well govern this nation soon.  It may well become, “Don’t limit our freedom!”

But, you may argue, I don’t want to throw out God and His truth.  I just want two people who love each other to have the freedom to get married!  Well, be logical.  Why is it that so many people who aren’t even gay hate the prospect of an absolute being defining marriage in absolute terms?  I believe it’s because innate in every human heart is the tendency to rebel against absolute authority.  We don’t just want to be like God… we want to be gods.  It’s dangerous for any society to become increasingly like that.

Believe it or not, that is the agenda that is being pushed in America today.  And that is why we cannot be passive concerning the definition of marriage.  This debate isn’t even mainly about marriage.  It’s about whether or not the people of the United States of America are willing to submit themselves to the rule of God, or whether they will build their lives upon their own truth claims.  God’s honor and glory is at stake.

That’s why we should care deeply about defending the Biblical definition of marriage.


About Joe Eaton

I praise God that my standing before Him has nothing to do with who I am or what I've done; it is found solely in the perfect life that Christ lived in my place, and His which atoned for my sin. "For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that IN HIM we might become the righteousness of God"..."There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus."

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: