SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Image Map
Discussion Forum : News and Current Events : Southern Baptists urged to reject any laws legalizing gay marriage

Print Thread (PDF)


Joined: 2002/12/11
Posts: 37636
"Pilgrim and Sojourner." - 1 Peter 2:11

 Southern Baptists urged to reject any laws legalizing gay marriage

Prepare for civil disobedience. That’s the message one prominent pastor is sending to some 16 million members of the Southern Baptist Convention.
Jack Graham, pastor of Prestonwood Baptist Church in Texas, said American Christians should be prepared for massive fallout if the Supreme Court legalizes same-sex unions.

“We want to stay in the system,” Graham told me in a telephone interview. “We want to work in the system. We want to support our government. We want to obey its laws.”

read more:


would be interested to hear what some of the saints on SI think about this and what would be your reaction if it was legalized in the USA?

SI Moderator - Greg Gordon

 2015/6/18 12:54Profile

Joined: 2004/7/7
Posts: 7497

 Re: Southern Baptists urged to reject any laws legalizing gay marriage

I have thought about this a lot: how will it impact your business if you employ lots of folks?

In my mind it appears to me the Believer may be stripped of any right to operate any business that employes others. Your right to train your children out of the public school system may be thwarted. In other words, one may find himself heading for the hills, the woods to homestead away from the grid of modernity.

Check out what is going on in Germany. It is frightening, at best. And it is coming this way.

Jesus says that unless he returns no man should be saved - meaning man will self-destruct. We used to think this referred to nuclear warfare, it may still but am inclined today it will refer to gov policy that will work to destroy the family, common sense, belief in God...

My thoughts.


Sandra Miller

 2015/6/20 18:54Profile

Joined: 2003/11/23
Posts: 4529

 Re: Southern Baptists urged to reject any laws legalizing gay marriage

would be interested to hear what some of the saints on SI think about this and what would be your reaction if it was legalized in the USA?

It is troublesome (to say the least). Last year, a Silicon Valley executive (Brendan Eich, the CEO of Mozilla) was pressured to resign because he personally opposed gay marriage and supported Proposition 8 in California -- which passed in 2008 but was later overturned by a homosexual judge. We have also seen how Liberals and homosexual activists reacted to the Biblical and moral views of Chick-fil-A's CEO Dan Cathy.

I have argued with local activists who support the redefinition of "marriage" to be extended to homosexual couples. The defense for their position typically revolves around a "equal access" or "equal protection" argument based upon the 14th Amendment.

Such activists argue that every adult should have equal access to anything in America -- irregardless of whether or not the majority view it as sinful. I typically counter that argument by pointing out areas in which "equal access" is not seen as a universal right -- such as 20-year-old adults and alcohol, incestuous relationships seeking marriage protections, adults under the age of 35 wanting to run for the office of President in the U.S., etc... More specifically, I point out that homosexual activists aren't seeking the rights and protections but, rather, the NAME and DEFINITION of "marriage."

I argued to one group that few Americans would have so loudly protested a civil contract between any two consenting adults. "Marriage" is, after all, one type of a civil contract that is distinctive by gender makeup (one man and one woman). Any one man can consent to marry any one consenting woman (and vice versa) as part of the "marriage" type of civil contract (unless they are blood-related). If the state ruled that a civil contract must be extended to homosexuals, it could have been referred to by a different term (other than "marriage") that would distinguish its makeup. However, homosexuals weren't happy with this outcome because they want the state to force everyone to recognize civil contracts between homosexuals. This is a concerted attempt to "normalize" homosexuals in the eyes of the people by having the state enforce it.

What are we to do?

First of all, we can pray that the courts will not overturn a state's right to define "marriage." Many states have already defined "marriage" as a gender-specific civil contract between one man and one woman. This is not a federal issue because "marriage" is not found in the Constitution. "Equal access" (well, "equal protection") is found in the 14th Amendment (originally intended for freed slaves), but interpreting "marriage" to be a "right" that can be defined by the federal government is a stretch. Of course, the courts are currently stacked -- which was the major consequence of the Obama victory in the last two presidential elections (since putting judges on federal courts is one of a sitting president's preeminent powers). States are also allowed to define terms (e.g., gender, etc...) and provide equal access without compromising the definition (e.g., women's restrooms, men's restrooms, boy's sports, girl's sports, etc...).

If Liberal judges or, ultimately, the Supreme Court rules that states must recognize "gay marriage," then it will be up to states to limit the application of such a ruling. For instance, states might pass laws that give individuals, organizations or businesses (since the courts define certain businesses [such as a sole proprietorship] as the same as the person). This makes a great deal of sense. A Christian organization should not be forced to violate their religious faith by partaking in something that would violate religious exercise. The same is true of any sole proprietorship. I would argue that a business should have the right to define its mission (e.g., "Christian organization") that would protect the business owners' exercise of faith. Otherwise, regular Christian businesses (e.g., religious bookstores, publishers, schools, etc...) as well as Christian-owned businesses (e.g., bakeries, plumbers, caterers, etc...) would be permitted to maintain their religious exercise in the same way that a non-profit organization enjoys such freedom.

If "marriage" is redefined by the courts, I would acknowledge the law exists but take proactive measures to protect the exercise of my own rights under the Constitution. The very first clause of the very first amendment to the Bill of Rights protects the religious exercise of Americans.

I would also point out to Christians that homosexuals are not the "enemy." Yes, their lifestyle is contrary to what is clear from Scriptures. However, God still loves the homosexual -- even if the lifestyle is sinful. We should show the homosexual the same love of Christ that we show to other individuals caught up in sin.

Unfortunately, this is one of the great hypocrisies of the LGBT movement in this nation. They want to use their "rights" of "free speech" to openly mock Christians but rule that anyone who questions homosexuals be judged guilty of "hate speech." They want the right to disrespect Christians and Christianity while limiting the rights of Christians to call homosexuality "sinful" or "unnatural." As believers, we cannot compromise and will, consequently, have fingers pointed at us. If we share the Biblical perspective, we will be confronted by activists who call good "evil" and evil "good." We must be willing to be true to Christ in all things.


 2015/6/20 20:26Profile

Joined: 2011/8/23
Posts: 1651
Tennessee, but my home's in Alabama

 Re: Southern Baptists urged to reject any laws legalizing gay marriage

I shared here a few months back what I truly believe is a scriptural response. I did call for civil disobedience, and repeat it now.

As I do repeat it, I respectfully submit that the question was asked what our thoughts are by brother Greg. I do not intend to circumvent SI rules on linking to our own blog posts, etc. Please forgive me if I am out of line by sharing this again.

From April 29, 2015 has created an online petition pledging civil disobedience to any order or law made by the United States Supreme Court which legitimizes the rights of homosexuals to enter into state-sanctioned marriages or which extends constitutional and legal protections to homosexuals regarding marital status. Among these “protections” would be the rights of homosexuals to force Christian-owned businesses to provide services that substantially equate to participation in ungodly marriage.

More than 25,000 signers have committed to the online pledge, including “luminaries” of conservative politics and evangelical churches/ministries.

Because the pledge on is based on secular rationale and not exclusively Christian, biblical reasons, and because the appeal to join the pledge is one that would place bible-believing Christians arm-in-arm in a cause with non-Christians for non-Christian reasons, I choose not to join that pledge.

I have already pledged publicly, as a licensed attorney, that I will not provide any legal service to any person which would require me to acknowledge – personally or professionally – the legitimacy of a same-sex marriage. I pledge publicly that I will, personally and professionally, resist and disobey any law that would require me to do so.

I propose an alternate pledge on solely biblical grounds for Christians to consider as opposed to the pledge. It is my view that the pledge of requires us to yoke unequally with unbelievers on grounds that are as soft and unreliable as that yoke.

Therefore, I offer for your consideration the following pledge, and that you will acknowledge your commitment to it by following this on WordPress, and by posting a link to it on social media, and expressing your agreement to it:

“As a bible-believing Christian, I pledge to resist, disregard and disobey any law, rule or regulation made by any branch of the United States government, or any State or subdivision thereof, in which the rights of homosexuals to enter into state-sanctioned marriages are established or protected; furthermore, my pledge extends to any law, rule or regulation which requires Christians, whether as business owners, officers, executives, managers, employees, or agents, or individually without regard to business or employment, to offer or perform services to or for any homosexual, transgender, or bisexual person and which service would, in the sole discretion of the Christian, be objectionable as an affront to his or her personally held beliefs.

“It is not the civil history of marriage that I seek to protect. Rather, my concern lies solely in the interest of the name of God the Father and His only begotten Son, Jesus Christ, and His sole authority to define what marriage is and who is eligible to be married as that institution is defined and portrayed in the Holy Bible.

“The reason homosexuals can never marry, biblically, is that marriage between one man, one woman, for life is the oldest and the singular joining of human flesh as an expression of the image of the triune God as revealed in the Bible. Marriage was designed explicitly to reflect the nature and image of God. God’s nature is only reflected in marriages that He designs. He has designed the male-female marriage for life as the exclusive vehicle for this particular expression of Himself. No statement about marriage in the Bible needs to expressly exclude homosexuals any more than it needs to expressly exclude marriages between humans and animals or humans and computers; the Bible clearly and thoroughly teaches that heterosexual, monogamous, lifelong marriage is the human expression of God’s nature as triune. This is true across both Testaments. It remains true today.

“The very first words of Holy Writ instruct, ‘In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.’ Genesis 1:1.

“This is fully revealed in the Person of Jesus Christ, as the apostle John wrote under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, ‘In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him, and without him was not anything made that was made. … And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.’ John 1:1-3, 14.

“As creator, God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ, being God Himself, as He reveals Himself in Scripture, is the sole object and recipient of worth. ‘Worthy are you, our Lord and God, to receive glory and honor and power, for you created all things, and by your will they existed and were created.’ Revelation 4:11.

“Anything that exists is because God sovereignly elected, through His Son, to cause it to be so for the sole reason of God’s own pleasure and the counsel of His own will.

“God sovereignly chose from the beginning to reveal Himself as Elohim. ‘In the beginning, God…’. (Elohim) This source of everything that is revealed Himself as a pluralistic name; then, this God created ‘man in his own image, in the image of Elohim created he him; male and female created he them.’ (Genesis 1:27).

“Thus, God created image bearers who were male and female. Initially, Scripture instructs that the male was alone, but God — still creating in His image as Elohim — said, ‘[I]t is not good that man should be alone. I will make a helper fit for him.’ Genesis 2:18. All else He had created was ‘good’ by His own pronouncements; therefore, it met His pleasure, as in Revelation 4:11. But, the image-bearing male, alone, was expressly ‘not good’. God then finished the creation of His image-bearing in the human race in a manner that instructs us in the pledge we should make today.

“First, God revealed Himself to the man by contradistinction; that is, God showed to the man what He is NOT. He ‘brought [all animals and birds, etc.] them to the man to see what he would call them. And whatever the man called every living creature, that was its name. … But for Adam there was not found a helper fit for him.” Genesis 2:18-20. So, Adam, still alone, saw nothing else in creation that was a bearer of God’s image like Himself.

“Then, God revealed Himself to the man by completion of His image bearers. ‘So, the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and while he slept he took one of his ribs and closed up its place with flesh. And the rib the LORD God had taken from the man he made into a woman and brought her to the man.’ Genesis 2:21-22.

“In Genesis 2, when the female image-bearer was presented to the male image-bearer, the creator God identified Himself by the name ‘Yahweh Elohim’ (‘LORD God’): the singular male noun and the pluralistic noun identified the Creator of humans and human marriage in the institution of marriage. This God determined that His image would be borne among humanity in the unity of two persons of opposite God-given sexes.

“This intention is made explicit. ‘Therefore, a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.’ Genesis 2:24.

“In a mysterious way that transcends the physical counting of persons, God has — from the beginning — elected to reveal His nature through His image bearers (male and female) who are joined together as one flesh, male and female. Two persons, yet one, joined together by One other, God Himself.

“The joining of two people of opposite God-given sex into a one-flesh marriage for life reveals still the mystery of the triune nature of God. Although we cannot fully understand how our one God exists in three persons, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, we are equally unable to fully understand how two people of opposite natural sex are ‘one flesh’ bearers of His image when they marry. Yet, our frail grasp on the mysteries of God do not negate them. He has said, in both testaments, ‘What God has joined together, let no man put asunder.’

“Marriage is, then a male and a female, made one flesh, as a reflection of the image of God in the world, and a personal testimony to His nature and personality as Father, Son and Holy Ghost, one God in three persons.

“The earliest Satanic device revealed in Scripture aimed to weaken that union, to mar and distort the reflection of God’s image in His creation. In Genesis 3:1-7, Satan approached the female image-bearer, Eve. He brought her to doubt the nature of her relationship with God and undermined her relationship with her husband. Satan tempted both of the image-bearers into open rebellion against God and their reflection of His image in them. Since then, Satan works furiously to mar the image of the biblical God in this world.

“From then until now, the marriage relationship of one man, one woman for life serves as the singular expression of the triune nature of God in human flesh. While Christ Himself is the express image of God and the fullest human expression of who God is, being God Himself, even Christ has a bride – and not a groom – in the Church. This bonding together of Christ and His Bride is intended not only for time (as the case of human marriage), but for everlasting to everlasting. Human marriage, in Christ, is thus a continuing display here and now of what the eternal shall be.

“When Jesus was asked by the Pharisees about divorce, it was far more than divorce at issue. It was the very nature of who God is that the Pharisees had rejected in the hardness of their own hearts. ‘From the beginning, it [divorce for any reason] was not so,’ Jesus said. ‘Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning made them male and female..?”’ Matthew 19:4. Jesus specifically cited Genesis 1:27 and the account in Genesis 2, complete with its revelation of God’s nature in and through the creation of marriage. He specifically quoted “male and female”. The issue was not just who can marry or the permissibility of divorce, but the very nature of God and how His people understand His nature.

“It is this essential of our Christian faith that we must pledge to live or die upon.

“We confess and repent of our light-hearted approach to God’s nature. Jesus said in Matthew 19:9, ‘I say to you: whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery.’ Fornication is an assault on the marriage that bears His image above all other human relationships. It is ‘sin against one’s own body’ (1 Corinthians 6:18) and, therefore, sin against one’s own bearer of God’s image. The flesh of male body and the female body united as one in God in marriage, for life, so witnesses to nature and identity of God that our fornication and adultery, in all forms, are physical denials the very God who made us. It follows, then, that homosexual conduct and homosexual ‘marriage’, or any other ‘marriage’ that is formed outside of one born man, one born woman, united in one flesh for life, is a physical rejection of God.

“It is our love and obedience of God, who transcends every duty of citizenship and state, that we willingly pledge. This necessarily means a pledge to disobey and resist any laws or rules of government as described hereinabove that would recognize, validate, acknowledge or in any manner legitimize any form of marriage as defined and governed by any state which extends to same-sex, transgender or bisexual couples the rights of marriage and its consequent privileges.”


 2015/6/20 23:33Profile

Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Affiliate Disclosure | Privacy Policy