Reviews

About the author

avatar

Jeremy Crooks

Jeremy grew up in Sydney Australia. He has tertiary qualifications in business, training, and Bible. With experience in both church ministry and corporate human resources, Jeremy has a strong interest in how faith is demonstrated in our homes and workplaces. You can contact Jeremy at jeremy@teaminfocus.com.au.

17 Comments

  1. avatar

    david milson

    Thanks for the post, you have given me food for thought. One criticism, and no it is not a complaint about the photo!A slight correction. Homosexuality probably didn’t appear at the fall, from what I understand of it, it probably didn’t arrive until there were at least two of one of the sexes?

    Reply
  2. avatar

    Jeremy Crooks

    Thanks for your feedback David. Yes, homosexuality in practice could not have occured with Adam and Eve. However, under the banner of sin entering the world at the fall, sexual perversion, including homosexual desires, came at the fall.

    I bet there will be discussion about this.

    Reply
  3. avatar

    david milson

    Indubitably!

    Reply
  4. avatar

    Greg

    As much as I have yet to decide on my own personal stance about gay marriage, I do have to say I disagree with this article. Mainly because Reasons 2 and 3, I believe, are completely false.

    Gay marriage has yet to receive proper social and cultural validation (in a word that only a small percent of us are TRUE Christians, rather than just ticking the box at census time, gay marriage still struggles to get passed anywhere).

    Furthermore, I have yet to see any sign that “gay marriage” is any “plan” to “destroy” anything. Yes, marriage is being destroyed, that being the label that we once had for a lifelong partnership under the eyes of God between Man and Woman. But homosexuals did not do that. Easy/lax marriage and divorce did that, as well as the legalisation of marriage (one of your few comments I DID agree with) and the point that society, in some ways is becoming more honest by not following God’s guidelines UNLESS they truly want to follow God.

    Reply
  5. avatar

    Jason Harris

    I agree with Greg. The heterosexual community has long since destroyed marriage, and (if you take a developmental view of homosexuality) created much of the homosexual community.

    Marriage within Christianity is a faint but fractured reflection of Christ’s relationship to the church. Marriage outside of Christianity cannot hope to be more.

    If heterosexual marriage reflects God’s relationship to the church, but deeply imperfectly, cannot homosexual marriage do the same (albeit even more deeply imperfectly)?

    Reply
  6. avatar

    Jeremy

    No question that the hetrosexual (christian) community has not lived up to God’s plan for marriage in practice. I agree with you 100% on this. I will think more about whether the breakdown of hetrosexual marriages has created more homosexuality.

    The key point is that ‘gay marriage’ redefines marriage so that there is no longer one groom and one bride. Through out Scripture, the church is referred to the bride of Christ redeemed by our beloved groomsman. How is that Biblical symbol is reflected in a homosexual union?

    Reply
  7. avatar

    Kez

    @ Jason, so is it okay for homosexuals to marry? Seeing as we can’t reflect a perfect picture of Christ’s relationship to the church through heterosexual marriage anyway? If we were born with that orientation?

    @ Jeremy… I was under the impression even in homosexual relationships there is one of each gender role… As in an active and passive role between two men or two women…So in a marriage between a same-sex couple there would be a bride role and a groom role… Am I mistaken in that?

    Reply
  8. avatar

    Jeremy

    @Kez: Some homosexual couples may role play different genders. I don’t think we can say that all gay relationships operate the same way. Whether they role play or have a gender operation, one can’t totally change their gender. (e.g. you can take a man, remove a penis and add breasts, but he still can’t procreate with another man)

    Reply
  9. avatar

    Jason Harris

    @Jeremy, Good thought. I suppose it raises the question “Is the gender difference the dominant, or even a significant, part of what is being illustrated in marriage?” If so, then would you feel that the church plays a distinctly feminine role in relation to Jesus Christ?

    Certainly the union of two people with major differences is a key part of the picture, but wouldn’t there be major differences in a same-sex marriage?

    @Kez, I think everyone on the thread would agree that homosexual activity is sin, and therefore that homosexual marriage is sin. The question addressed here, in my understanding, is whether homosexual marriage should be legally allowed.

    As far as being born with that “orientation,” this is a view which would stand in contrast to the developmental approach I mentioned earlier. There is no psychological proof that anyone is born with a particular sexual “orientation,” though various evidences have been put forward to support this theory. It is an important question to wrestle with because it has profound implications for how we deal with and counsel those with same-sex attractions.

    Reply
  10. avatar

    Jeremy

    Some good thoughts Jason. There seem to be some strong feminine tones around the church throughout time. Here are a sample

    – Eve was made out of Adam, for Adam and subject to Adam. (Gen 2)
    – Christ is described as the second Adam. (Romans)
    – Gods people (Israel/church) are described as an adultress who has been unfaithful to her husband (Hosea 3:1)
    – Christ is head of the church (husband head of the wife) (Eph 5)
    – The Church is described as the Bride of Christ, joined to Christ for eternity at a marriage supper.

    On this principle, we could rightly say that bad hetrosexual unions, male chauvinism, and the feminism movement also deface the mystery of the gospel in marriage. But I will leave those angles to another post.

    Finally, like in all illustrations, we want to be careful about taking them too far.

    Reply
  11. avatar

    Greg

    The key in this debate, I found was the label “marriage” which is no longer used by the wider community for what we as god-fearing Christians also label “marriage”. If homosexuals wish to give themselves that first label, I have no issue with it. But if they try to believe that they can have the second, I am afraid that is not possible.

    Reply
  12. avatar

    Robert Apps

    Jason,

    Would you mind clarifying your position here?

    You raised this question ‘ If heterosexual marriage reflects God’s relationship to the church, but deeply imperfectly, cannot homosexual marriage do the same (albeit even more deeply imperfectly)?’

    was that a teaser or your own views?

    Just wondering if you think there is a scriptural warrant for suggesting that a same sex relationship, let alone ‘marriage’ can bear any reflection on the true Gospel?

    I think the author of this post gave a clear, scriptural defence of his thesis, that is, gay marriage is an attack on the Gospel.

    Reply
  13. avatar

    Jason Harris

    @Rob,

    It was neither. It was a question. I think Jeremy gave a reasonable response.

    Reply
  14. avatar

    Alen

    The fact is marriage in today’s society doesn’t belong to Christians, or any other religious group. It has transcended the confines of what any particular group believes it to be, to a watered down concept that we all accept as being a sign of commitment.

    This general idea is a must for modern society to operate. Married couples do get more benefits to those that aren’t (and there are negative sides as well) and it’s because of this that the government needs to regulate it.

    So, to view this in a proper context, one needs to understand that its this transcendent concept of marriage that is being changed, not Christianity’s.

    Aside of this, the wrong questions are being asked. It’s not “Why should we allow same sex couples to marry?” but “Why should we prevent them?” even then, I agree with you that the state shouldn’t have any control over marriage because that right shouldn’t be withheld from anyone.

    I was mentioning this in another comment of mine, but this is a good example of demonizing the victim. Does no one consider the fact that same sex couples want to get married for the same reason heterosexual couples do? They love their partners and want to express their love and commitment in a way that everyone recognizes to be the greatest symbol of this: marriage.

    As for destroying marriage, heterosexual couples have already completed the task. With ~50% of marriages ending in divorce, I find it hard to try and take the sanctity of marriage route..

    Reply
  15. avatar

    Jeremy Crooks

    Alen – I agree with you that marriage has already broken down from what God intended. The same-sex redefinition, takes this breakdown to a whole new level.

    It seems the same-sex agenda is more than ‘you must allow us to marry’. The motivate is to challenge and change social values to where hetro-sexuals not only accept, but celebrate homosexuality.

    Reply
  16. Pingback: O-B-E-D-I-E-N-C-E » InFocus

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2005-2016 by InFocus. Powered by WordPress. Effective News theme by Themelions Team.