If the essence of marriage implies a covenant relationship keeps the mutual gift of themselves, then two men or two women can achieve this goal as well as a man and a woman can. But one lifetime commitment between two sufficient to achieve basic adult Christian marriage? Or is there something unique about heterosexual sex preventing same-sex couples really show the love of Christ for the Church?
The first answer might be based on Ephesians 5 is that same-sex unions are necessarily excluded from the Christian basis for marriage because Scripture uses only heterosexual language when describing it. But considering the widespread homosexual behavior with an excess of luxury in ancient global partnership, it is not surprising that the biblical authors did not foresee the possibility of marriage between same sex. Our question is not whether the Bible speaks of the modern concepts of sexual orientation and gay marriage. We know that does not work. However, our question is: Can you translate basic biblical principles on marriage to the new situation without losing something essential in the process? We must determine, from a biblical point of view, if the essence of Christian marriage allows the inclusion of same-sex couples, or necessarily imply the union of a man and a woman.
We maintain the alliance is essential to Christian marriage. But a difference of sex between husband also essential?
The call to procreation
One reason that many non-Christians believe Affirming gender difference is essential to marriage is obvious: Only a man and a woman can procreate biologically. In Genesis 1:28, after verse 27 says that God created man "male and female", we read: "And God blessed them and said to them," Be fruitful and multiply, fill the earth and subdue it. "Since same-sex couples can not increase in number of biological procreation, prevents their relationships to meet the basis of marriage in the Bible?
From a strictly Old Testament view, this position has some merit. In Genesis 12-17, God established His covenant with Abraham. He promised to make Abraham a "great nation" and to bless them with offspring as numerous as the stars of heaven (see Genesis 24:02, 15:05). When God confirmed this covenant with Isaac (Genesis 26) and Jacob (Genesis 28), has stressed its commitment to physical descent again.
In the Old Testament, God was understood to extend his blessings to the alliance of Israel mainly by biological reproduction. The fear of seeing his name erased why begged David Saul: "Now I swear by the Lord that you will not kill my descendants or delete my name from my father's house" (1 Samuel 24:21). This fear also explains the reaction of the daughter of Jephthah in Judges 11, when he learned that he would be sacrificed. He asked his father two months to mourn with his friends. But she did not ask mourn because she was soon to die, but because she would never marry (see Judges 11:37 - 39). The emphasis on procreation has also led to the marginalization of women and eunuchs infertile. Eunuchs were actually forbade them to enter all of the Lord (see Deuteronomy 23:01).
But life, death and resurrection of Jesus ushered in a series of transformative changes, and one of these changes is essential to our conversation here: biological procreation no longer determines the accession of the Kingdom of God. Spiritual rebirth through faith in Christ.
Under the old covenant, that could only come from God's people. But as Jesus explained to Nicodemus, under the new covenant, "no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again" (John 3:3). In the words of John Piper, God's people now "product and not by physical procreation but by spiritual regeneration."
This change in the way the kingdom of God is built had lasting consequences that relate to our discussion on marriage between same sex.
First, marriage and procreation is no longer considered necessary means of the family of God.
Second, lifelong celibacy is a viable option for Christians, even though overall it was not for the ancient Israelites.
Third, the definition of family has changed for Christians.
Jesus spoke to the crowd when his mother and his brothers appeared, asking to speak with him. He responded by saying, "Who is my mother and who are my brothers" Jesus did for his disciples and said. "Behold my mother and my brothers For whoever makes the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother" (Matthew 12:46-50).
This change is reflected in understanding when we call a "brother in Christ" or "sister in Christ." Relationships in Christ are more durable, and the links between the members of the biological family. Jesus emphasized that shared by the spouses and biological family ties are temporary because they will not exist in eternity.
"The people of this age marry and are given in marriage," said Jesus. "But those who are counted worthy to participate in the next century and the resurrection from the dead neither marry nor are given in marriage, and they can not die. Because they are like angels They are children of God, because they are children of the resurrection "(Luke 20:34-36).
The New Testament emphasis on personal faith rather than procreation has another important consequence: even a single person can become a spiritual father to bring others to faith in Christ. Isaiah announced this development: "Sing, barren woman, you who never bore a child; burst into song, shout for joy, you who were never in labor: for more are the children of the desolate than of her who has a husband "says the Lord" (Isaiah 54:1).
Similarly, the eunuchs now have reason to rejoice. Isaiah quoted God saying: "To the eunuchs who keep my Sabbaths, who choose what pleases me and hold fast my covenant, I will give you my temple and its walls a memorial and better than the son and daughters of a name "(Isaiah 56:4-5). In Christ, the prophecy is fulfilled. 'S first Gentile convert to the faith was probably nothing more than an Ethiopian eunuch (Acts 8:26-39).
Is Procreation a Fixed Standard in Marriage?
You may be wondering: Even if procreation is no longer expected of the whole people of God, what is not expected of all marriages? Does sex in order to be moral, you need to at least offer the possibility of reproduction?
In the history of the original creation, procreation is not presented as the main purpose of marriage. While Genesis 1:28 says. "Be fruitful and multiply" Genesis 2 does not mention procreation to describe the first marriage Despite the importance of procreation in the Old Testament, sterile marriages are not considered illegitimate. marriage of Abraham and Sarah (see Genesis 18) and Elkanah and Hannah (see 1 Samuel 1) were valid even in the long years before they had a son. In the New Testament, Jesus may have made an exception to the prohibition of divorce, saying that a couple can divorce in the case of infidelity (see Matthew 19:09). But he made no exception for couples who can not have children. In understanding Jesus wedding, the engagement ring is essential. ability to have children is not.
Additional teachings of Scripture supports the understanding that procreation is not essential to marriage. The Song of Songs is an ode to the joy of erotic love and intimacy, very different from the concern for procreation. Track centers in the pleasures of physical pleasure, excitement and satisfaction that good exciting parts of God's creation. Recall, too, that in 1 Corinthians 7, Paul urged married couples to have sex "lest Satan tempt you because of your lack of self-control" (verse 5). Paul never suggested that sex was solely, or even primarily for the purpose of procreation.
From a theological point of view, marriage primarily involves maintaining a covenant relationship of mutual gift that reflects God's love for us. The evidence we have considered here indicates that marriage is only secondarily, and not necessarily in having any biological children. The inability of same-sex couples to procreate does not preclude complete basis for marriage in the Bible.
The issue of gender hierarchy
Although not mentioned in Ephesians 5 married couples with children, not to mention the hierarchy or at least assumed sex. He calls a man of the "head" of the wife as Christ is head of the church, and women are told to submit to their husbands in the same way the Church submits to Christ. But same-sex couples can not live this dynamic. The same applies to the hierarchical aspect of marriage as described in Scripture means marriage should be between a man and a woman?
This question brings us to this idea the big picture: It's a reflection of the Bible for Christian patriarchy, or merely similar to slavery Writing hosting way? We have seen that ancient societies did not just meet the different roles of men and women; that gave women a lower value.
Few, if any, Christians today would approve degrading views of women who have shaped the world of Leviticus. However, many Christians do have beliefs about gender relations could be summarized as "equal value, different roles." This is the kind of hierarchical complementarity between the sexes often reflected in differentiated gender roles in marriage. Centre this in mind, husbands act as leaders and women as followers. While spouses affirm the equal value of both sexes, we conclude that this approach to gender relations is consistent with the vision of the New Testament free relations patriarchy examine this issue.
In his letter to the Galatians, Paul wrote that three types of hierarchies disappear in Christ. The first two were the distinctions between Jews and Gentiles, and the differences between slave and free. The third is that of men and women. Paul's main concern was the end of the division between Jews and gentiles time, and Galatians 3:28 ET focused on our last state in Christ, not our current situation in society.
But in the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus tells us to pray that God's kingdom come "on earth as in heaven" (Matthew 6:10). In opposing slavery, Christians in the nineteenth century taken this message to heart. since there will be no distinction in the realm of slaves and free God, Christians have decided to abolish the inhuman institution of slavery in the West.
But what does this have to do with the requirements of marriage?
Simply this: Christians do not work for change, so that the slaves would be considered equal in value, while maintaining a subordinate position and role in society. Chosen to remove all subordinate position. Although slavery remains a tragic reality in much of the world, the church is now uniformly opposed.
Since Paul in Galatians connected the issues of slavery and gender hierarchy, and we should. The New Testament explicitly links the submission of slaves to the submission of women. First Peter 3:01 begins: "Wives, in the same way [that slaves should submit to their masters] be submissive to your husbands ..." Comparing the instructions in 1 Peter 2:18-25. Peter tells wives should submit to their husbands in the same way that slaves were invited to submit masters.
We see a similar in the words of Ephesians 5 and 6 parallel. Wives are told to submit to their husbands in Ephesians 5, and Chapter 6, the slaves should submit to their masters, "as you would obey Christ" ( Ephesians 6:05).
However, the two hierarchies disappear in Christ, and Jesus calls us to make this a reality now. Scripture lays the foundation for a reorganization of redemption of gender relations in the kingdom of God, if gender hierarchy can not be regarded as essential to marriage. Although, when a man and woman are married, do not have a hierarchical relationship, no one claims that their marriage is invalid on this basis. The acceptance of such marriages indicates that even with the opposite sex, gender hierarchy is not part of the essence of Christian marriage. In line with the objective of Ephesians 5, the essence of Christian marriage is to maintain the alliance with her husband in a relationship of mutual giving. This photo does not exclude same-sex couples.