So-Called Same-Sex Marriage: The Institutionalization of Sin
In a 5-to-4 decision, the Supreme Court of the United States of America has ruled that states cannot ban same-sex marriage.
The Bible is not silent about such decisions. Alongside its clearest explanation of the sin of homosexual intercourse (Romans 1:24–27) stands the indictment of the approval and institutionalization of it. Though people know intuitively that homosexual acts (along with gossip, slander, insolence, haughtiness, boasting, faithlessness, heartlessness, ruthlessness) are sin, “they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them” (Romans 1:29–32). “I tell you even with tears, that many glory in their shame” (Philippians 3:18–19).
This is what the highest court in our land did today — knowing these deeds are wrong, “yet approving those who practice them.”
My sense is that we do not realize what a calamity is happening around us. The new thing — new for America, and new for history — is not homosexuality. That brokenness has been here since we were all broken in the fall of man. (And there is a great distinction between the orientation and the act — just like there is a great difference between my orientation to pride and the act of boasting.)
What’s new is not even the celebration and approval of homosexual sin. Homosexual behavior has been exploited, and reveled in, and celebrated in art, for millennia. What’s new is normalization and institutionalization. This is the new calamity.
Read John Piper’s full article.
ADVERTISEMENT
My word! It is almost as if the USA is not a Christian theocracy. What is next in this age of sin? Legalised marriage for divorced people? Legalised Hinduism?
@Donalbain,
You forgot to make the crack about shellfish.
Back to the point, you are conflating disparate subjects. This was previously discussed here.
Why should society allow people to do something as sinful as worshipping false gods?
To your question:
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…” — First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States
“If serving God seems undesirable to you, then choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve…But as for me and my household, we will serve the Lord.” – Joshua 24:15
Seems reasonable enough.
If you violate the covenant of the LORD your God, which he commanded you, and go and serve other gods and bow down to them, the LORD’s anger will burn against you, and you will quickly perish from the good land he has given you.”
Goodness gracious. Donalbain is still trolling here? It’s like you have your own personal band of trolls, JD. Maybe when he graduates, Wormwood will sent him to troll someone else.
Now, now. You never know what might convict the conscience of someone and draw them to Christ, or when that might happen. Donalbain is reading through Joshua, after all.
You might be surprised to know who some of the readers are here. Hopefully, everyone learns something — even if unintentionally.
JD wrote: “This is what the highest court in our land did today — knowing these deeds are wrong, “yet approving those who practice them.””
Knowing these deeds are wrong? According to whom? The Supreme Court does not enforce the laws of the bible. They enforce the US Constitution and the laws under it. It scares me to think that someone who wrote the above statement took an oath to “support and defend” the Constitution.
The lecture continues…
Unless homosexuality is somehow a special sin — worse than 1) believing in another god; 2) ignoring the Sabbath; 3) making graven images; or 4) taking god’s name in vain – the US government’s effort aimed at “normalization and institutionalization” of the rejection of Christian morals started a long time ago. In fact, that effort started and ended with the writing of the bill of rights which, in this country, makes many of gods commands illegal. Talk about normalization and institutionalization…
Let’s break down the First Amendment (my favorite):
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;”
This literally makes god’s first commandment illegal in this country. It says there can be no laws that require a person to follow the first commandment. It pretty much covers the “keep the Sabbath” requirement as well. No law can be made to require this.
“or abridging the freedom of speech,”
There goes graven images and taking the lord’s name in vain. I can make whatever image I want and say (and write) offensive things about god and anyone who advocates otherwise is essentially in offense of the US Constitution.
In a sense, the followers of Christ that promote the interpretation and enforcement of laws such that they are aligned with the bible and necessarily misaligned with the US Constitution are treasonous, by my count. To even hint at the idea that the Supreme Court should be following biblical guidance over the Constitution is an example of this. If you had it your way you’d demand the abandonment of the very things that makes the United States the country that it is.
And another thing… adultery is a “top ten” sin, clearly called out by god, and occurring in this country with a frequency that likely far exceeds the “sins” of homosexual acts. Why don’t you take up that cause, instead? Tell your Christian baker friends to stop making wedding cakes for adulterers. The outrage!
@MMurray
Actually, that would be JP, as in John Piper.
The Constitution does not make the Ten Commandments illegal. You’re probably just being inarticulate, but your point is not understood as a result.
Four justices on the Supreme Court did not agree that the US Constitution prevented the States from regulating marriage. It is not, as you say, a simple case of someone advocating the Bible over the Constitution. John Piper is a theologian and is naturally expressing a religious viewpoint, something the Constitution protects — despite your disagreement or characterization of such speech as “treason.”
“That cause”, in manner of speaking, has long been taken up. Drs. Mohler and Moore somewhat discussed that here. One point that Piper made, however, is “institutionalization and normalization.” Adultery, though it has lost its sting, is still not a protected class or behavior in the United States, and most people would still likely classify it as “wrong.” It has not been “institutionalized” nor “normalized” in society. Therein lies an important difference you appear to have missed.
You are obviously passionate, but you appear to be discombulated about what the Constitution does, what the Bible says, and the relationship between the two.