Four More Thoughts on the Supreme Court Decision Regarding Same Sex Marriages

Blog »  
Four More Thoughts on the Supreme Court Decision Regarding
Same Sex Marriages
Wednesday, July 1, 2015
Jeff Lampl

 

(Jesus said) “Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's;
and unto God the things that are God's”
Matthew 22:21 (KJV)

1.  Sam Hinkie, the brilliant General Manager of the Philadelphia 76ers Basketball team which will contend for the NBA championship next year, stated just before the 2014 college draft when he found out that Joel Embid had an injury, "I sense an opportunity."
I feel the same way about the SCOTUS ruling.  Christians now have an opportunity to display surprising and unexpected support of and genuine love for those who fully expect condemnation from Christians.  Christians can shock the country with their refusal to engage in heated, angry, judgmental anti-gay rhetoric.  Christians who oppose gay marriage can do so in a shockingly different way from how most people voice their disagreements over issues.  Sam Hinkie didn't even know how wise he was being!  There's a new opportunity for witness to the love of God for all people regardless of their behavior!  Remember that loving doesn't imply condoning.

2.  At my basketball small group, one of the players read from the book of Samuel where everyone was begging Samuel to let them have a king so that they could be like all the other nations who had a leader to lead them in protecting their national interests.  They wanted a king to replace God as their leader.  It occurred to  me then that American Christianity has in some ways probably been relying on American Government to adopt, codify, and enforce its worldview.  Looking back on this it seems (at least to me) that this is not only a wrong thing to expect, it is also impossible.
The state and the church are two different things and every time they get mixed up things get messed up.  No state can ever be given the responsibility of implementing and maintaining the worldview of the Church.  Nor does the existence of Church and its worldview depend on the state.  The state codifies but the church offers and then seeks a freewill response.
One lesson of the last two thousand years of Christianity is that when it gets into positions of political power the church doesn't do very well.  In terms of the SCOTUS decision, even though the church will always seek to be an influencer of society and its government, it cannot allow itself to stoop to believing that the state is its protector, nor can the Church expect the State to do through law what only the church can do.  We can be glad when a law reflects a Christian worldview which reflects a national consensus on a matter, but we should not be surprised that the state cannot "hold the fort" for the Christian worldview for very long.

3.  All those people and people around the world who hold a different worldview are not the enemy.  They are simply people who believe in equal rights for all (an idea that Thomas Jefferson got, whether he knew it or not, from Jesus who introduced this radical idea to the western world).  They hate excluding people.  Noble sentiments I think.  So where does that leave the Christian who thinks gay marriage is not a good thing?  It leaves us exactly where Christians have always been, with God's heart to offer God's best to a hurting world, but with a broadly unreceptive audience, at least when the Christian message conflicts with that audience's worldview.

4.  There are two things to do.  First see #1 above.  Second be able to articulate why you believe what you do.  Do not simply say "because the Bible says so".  In today's world that won't fly with anyone except with those who already agree with you.  But being able to explain why the Bible says something can help some people.  So a simple place to start is to know that gay marriage is one thing.  Traditional marriage, biblical marriage is another thing.  They are two different things.  The former defines love one way.  The latter defines love another way.  The former has one view of procreation and the place of children in marriage, the latter has a very different view.  The state has adopted the former view and we begrudge no one equal rights under the law.  Yet the Church will maintain the latter view because Church's view is one that is good and essential for a stable society where kids need a mom and dad who are committed to each other and to their children's welfare forever.  Of course reasoned objections exist, but sometimes simple explanations (not preached but explained) like this (though some will still label it hate speech) might at least help some people think thoughtfully about what you have said.

 
Comment    

For more:   follow on Twitter @jefflampl