The Law of Man vs The Law of God - August 2015 Yavoh
On Friday, June 25, 2015, the Supreme Court of the United States announced its long-awaited decision on gay marriage. They ruled by a 5 to 4 margin that gay marriage was the law of the land for all 50 states. The decision overruled 14 states that had banned gay marriage. Lower courts had already forced more than 30 states to recognize gay marriage. What had been a cultural war in this country, waged for many years, is now full civil rights for homosexuals. This opened a full schism in the very fabric of the United States with the potential to divide the country similar to the days leading to the Civil War. It won’t lead to violence with guns; it will be violent to the very heart and soul of the nation. What is at stake now is the following question: Will the Christians of the United States follow a law decided by mankind (five justices of the Supreme Court) or will they hold to the law of God that forbids homosexuals, specifically, limiting the definition of marriage to one man and one woman?
The decision of the court was met with wild jubilation by the homosexual and lesbian communities along with the liberal elements of our nation. Suddenly, rainbow banners and rainbow colors adorned product labels and public displays. Rainbow flags were waved by throngs of people in the streets and celebrations were in every major city. Even the White House got into the celebration by lighting up the exterior of the White House in rainbow colors and the President heralded the change as a “more perfect Union.” The parents of homosexual children also responded in a positive manner, believing that they and their children will no longer have to hide their lifestyle.
However, dismay hit the Christian communities in America of all flavors. Words of alarm and the fear of things to come were on the lips of many Christian leaders. Those who thought God was considering the idea of judging our nation shifted to expecting the judgment now. Some pastors and ministry leaders defiantly stood and said they would defy the law and not marry gay couples. There was an immediate consensus that persecution of Christians was coming. Many spoke that it would be more than bakeries forced to bake cakes for gay weddings. They spoke of individual believers being fired from jobs and tax-exempt statuses being removed from religious institutions and organizations. The anticipation is that the general public will now follow the militant gay community and be emboldened to oppress and challenge Christians everywhere.
In the days following the announcement, many have reported that friends and family members throughout the United States have found themselves more divided. Those who favor the Lord’s commandments are now considered bigots, racists, haters, and almost illegal; whereas, those favoring gay marriage are more open and light-hearted!
The Supreme Court’s announcement did more than declare gays can legally marry. It has endorsed the homosexual lifestyle as “normal” and has granted them full civil rights as if they were an ethnic group. Therefore, any disagreement with homosexuals in any way is now seen as discriminating against them. No longer can you say, “I only disagree with the behavior.” Instead, homosexuals seem to have gained “protected class” status. According to some sources, the goal of the homosexual community is to go even further. This may sound strange at first, but the goal of the gay community is to elevate the gay lifestyle to be preferred American culture and suppress the Judeo-Christian culture. They really want God and His law out of the public discussion.
For the sake of understanding the homosexual (gay) agenda and how we have gotten to this point, let us review a bit of history. Homosexuality has been around for a long time. This is why the Bible addresses the subject. For the most part, throughout history, the majority of citizens in all nations have frowned against homosexuals and regarded their activities as contrary to the definition of life and a basis for community and nations. A man and a woman produce children. Two homosexuals cannot procreate a child; hence, they cannot advance or maintain the citizenry of a nation.
In 1973, the subject of homosexuality began to shift in its definition from “deviant sexual behaviors” to “not deviant” here in the United States. It wasn’t socially normal but they didn’t want to call it “deviant” anymore. It became known as an “alternate lifestyle.” This came about because a leading psychologist began to observe that many established, educated, and professional men were acknowledging to him that they participated in homosexual activities. The original word “homophobic” was coined to classify men who were afraid that they might be homosexual. The present definition is now a slur against anyone being opposed to homosexuality and is an adaptation of the word from its original form. It is a derogatory term now. Those opposed to homosexuals are not afraid of them—they disagree with them. When this psychologist wrote a paper indicating that there were many homosexuals, particularly in the upper echelons of society, the American Psychiatric Governing Board rewrote its guidelines and definition for sexual deviancy, removing homosexuals and lesbians from the category. These were some of the earliest steps toward legitimacy and acceptance in the United States. The gay community then exploited this, saying that the medical community was endorsing their behavior and choices. This was not true, but state legislatures began silently repealing sodomy laws that had been used to arrest homosexuals.
The gay community has always known they were the minority when it came to the general public. They also knew that state legislatures and the Congress would not pass a law making them fully acceptable. State and national leaders knew this as well and very few of them wanted to endorse the gay community, even when they themselves were a part of the same community. The courts, therefore, became the path for the gay agenda to promote themselves and to try and change the nation.
The key to the gay agenda working with the courts was to elevate “sexual orientation” to the same level as race and make the issue one of civil rights. Politicians, because of the civil rights movement, had already endorsed and codified laws protecting civil rights. No one was permitted to discriminate against anyone on the basis of race, age, or gender. Sexual orientation was added to the list. But the general public still did not support the gay agenda and they did not accept it as “normal.” The general public didn’t have a problem with discrimination either. Discrimination was against them. They weren’t against them; they just weren’t for them.
For the general public, homosexuals were too closely aligned to men being attracted to young boys (pedophilia). The gay community had to separate themselves from that definition, even pressing the usage of the word “gay” to defuse the negative connotation of homosexual and classifying pedophiles as separate from them. They also had to change one particular element of American society: the age bracket that was most sexually active in colleges and the military. Colleges were easy; the professors willingly led the way. The military, on the other hand, required a little more effort and new standing orders and training were required. Every general and admiral knew that this undermined morale, but the President and his liberal advisors forced the changes. It went from “don’t ask; don’t tell” to it is fully tolerated and you can wear your uniform to a gay pride event. The gay community has been successful in defining themselves as acceptable and a shift in public opinion has taken place. For many years, polls have shown the number of persons agreeing with homosexuality has increased while the number of those opposed has decreased. The year 2014 became the first year that more people accepted than opposed. Across the nation, the efforts of the gay community and its public relations campaign using the mass media has successfully oriented the public to the idea of homosexuals in an acceptable way. Movies and television programs have begun to introduce gays into the storylines and presented gays in good and pleasant ways. There is no question that the producers of those programs were attempting to change the thinking of every American. Any voice against homosexuality was pictured as old, out of date, religiously bigoted and blatant discrimination. As a result, the American people got used to the idea of gays as being part of the national fabric. The largest group of people to accept this new orientation has been the post “baby boomer” generations. The “millennials” in particular, those now reaching adulthood, have pretty much trended with it for the most part.
The only persons who have not succumbed to this massive orientation effort have been Christians, especially those who know what the Bible actually says on the subject. Do you recall the controversy that Phil Robertson of “Duck Dynasty” went through with the A&E Entertainment network after he expressed his “Christian” point of view of homosexuals? They tried to ban him, but for financial reasons found it in their heart to allow him his “first amendment” rights even though he was a Christian.
The case that came before the Supreme Court had to prove that homosexuals were being discriminated against by the states forbidding gay marriage. They had to prove that the Constitution defined them as having “civil rights.” Despite many states granting gay marriage licenses, they wanted all 50 states to do so.
Before we go further, let’s talk about rights and the Constitution. There are God-given rights and there are rights that the government and citizens agree on. With regard to homosexuals, God has not given them any rights and this is evident in all religions. So the question is, will the government grant them civil rights.
The lawyers arguing for these civil rights had a host of examples of how there was systemic discrimination against homosexuals, especially in states opposing gay marriage. For example, married workers could get health insurance for their spouses through employer-provided benefits. But, homosexuals could not do the same for their partners. It also applied to policies for visiting someone in the Intensive Care Unit of a hospital when the hospital limited visitors to “immediate family.” A homosexual partner did not fit the definition of being family (family definition is based on marriages). For states that did issue gay marriage licenses, they argued that wedding chapels, bakers, and photographers were refusing to extend their services to gay weddings and events. At first blush, all of this does sound discriminatory. But was it illegal? Everyone discriminates on various levels, but it is not illegal. I prefer attending a Messianic fellowship over a Catholic service. I’m making a discriminatory choice. Is that illegal? Of course not. A religious man is not supposed to do anything contrary to his good conscience derived by the commandments and his faith in God. So, the argument was made that gays were being discriminated against by the majority. But if the majority of citizens are basing their position on freedom of religion, and we are a democratic society and nation, what is illegal about that?
The Constitutional argument made to the court was primarily about the “equal protection” definition of the 14th Amendment. The 14th Amendment came into the Constitution after the Civil War guaranteeing the right to vote for Black Americans. I am pretty certain that the politicians of that day never envisioned that their new Amendment would be argued in the future to give homosexuals any recognition as a group at all. However, this was the argument that was made. Because of the media orientation equating gay demands to civil rights, many of the judges were completely biased in their decisions about gay marriage. In fact, two of the Supreme Court justices (Kagen and Ginsburg) had previously spoken on behalf of the gay community and already performed gay marriages prior to judging the Supreme Court case. Did they disqualify themselves from that case because of personal bias? Of course not! Their minds were already made up, and they flaunted their belief that they were not impartial in their judgment. I point this out because both of these judges told the Senate at their confirmation hearings that they would use the law to be impartial in every decision brought before the court. They literally violated their own oath of office. If there was any political gumption among the leaders of this nation, both of them could be impeached for their actions and decisions. That would make the vote 4-3 against gay marriage. What can we do? They won’t follow the Constitution or their oath. No one has the will to impeach them.
But there were other elements in the argument presented to the Court. The Declaration of Independence begins with the words “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” They made the claim that the Constitution upholds the spirit of the Declaration of Independence, but while that is true, they twist the words through redefining terms and misrepresentations to include homosexuals deserving special recognition of their lewdness as happiness. The argument was made that a homosexual’s claim to “life” was they were born this way. No such scientific evidence supports that. They made the same point for “liberty” and their definition of the “pursuit of happiness.” The irony of this is these are inalienable rights (rights given by God) and we all know God didn’t give rights to homosexuals. Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness comes from God; the government can’t give you that right. At best, it can try to preserve this God-given right.
The best tactic by homosexuals has been to try to redefine God’s eternal purposes and goals, especially about love. “God only cares about love and loving one another, and we as homosexuals are really about love and loving one another.” But God defines homosexuals and their “love” as simply lust and perversion. There is a big difference between love and lust. Lust can never be satisfied; it is like a fire. A fire will never say, “Oh please no more logs, I am completely satisfied.” Instead, the fire will welcome more fuel so it can burn more. Sexual lust works exactly the same way. It leads to sexual sins. Love is keeping God’s commandments. “If you love Me, keep my commandments.” The greatest commandment is to love God. Homosexuality is transgressing God’s commandment and has nothing to do the love defined in the Bible. Those in the gay community who advocate that they enjoy love just the same as God gave to heterosexual couples are lying to themselves. Many people love their dogs, very much so, but they don’t marry them. The Supreme Court had no business deciding any theological or religious law on this matter whatsoever! Yet they did, in violation of the First Amendment.
The counter-arguments of the case put to the Supreme Court included the following items: Gay marriage is contrary to natural law and has no precedent in law to justify it. They argued that the Constitution said nothing about marriage, even heterosexual marriage, and therefore the matter must be decided by states, since the 10th Amendment states this separation between federal and state authority. If the United States Constitution does not address the matter directly, it is up the states to decide. However, the Constitution specifically forbids the government from “establishing or prohibiting the free exercise” of a religion or religious law. They did argue that defining “marriage” instead of civil unions would cause great complications for separation of church and state matters. These arguments however did not persuade the already biased judges in the matter. They tend to be godless anyways and consider religious law to be archaic and of no value.
Justice Kennedy, who wrote the majority opinion, addressed the conflict with religion but downplayed it, first stating that religious leaders could legally with “sincere convictions” and “by divine precepts” say that same-sex marriage is not to be condoned. However, the other justices cited concerns that this would not go well. Justice Kennedy did not address the “free exercise” portion of the First Amendment with religion. The “free exercise” clause of the Constitution is more than what Justice Kennedy seems to understand. Justice Thomas, one of the dissenting justices, referred to Kennedy’s explanation as a “weak gesture” that will lead to “ruinous consequences,” especially for businesses, schools, and other institutions founded on Christian principles or led by Christian leaders.
Even Justice Scalia, a dissenting justice, was perplexed by the purely legal part of the ruling, stating that the decision had no basis in law and the decision itself had no more value than the wisdom in a “fortune cookie.” In terms of legal dissent, this is about as raw as it gets. The majority of the court did what they wanted to do regardless of the law or logic. There is no question that it was a political rather than legal decision.
We now have the precept of five justices of the Supreme Court (the law of man) as the law of the land. Their decision, ironically, has no precedent in law. Now, let’s examine the law of God when it comes to the subject of homosexuality. As I said before, homosexuality has been around for a long time.
The Bible puts homosexuality with a group of other sexual misbehaviors including fornication, adultery, incest, rape, and worse. More specifically, homosexuality hits the category of being an abomination to God.
You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination. Leviticus 18:22
This commandment was given to us because other nations and peoples did these things, to their harm. The sin of homosexuality was what was practiced in ancient Egypt and Canaan.
You shall not do what is done in the land of Egypt where you lived, nor are you to do what is done in the land of Canaan where I am bringing you; you shall not walk in their statutes. Leviticus 18:3
Even before Egypt and Moses, we have the story of Sodom and Gomorrah, when God came down to see for Himself the “outcry of Sodom.”
And the Lord said, "The outcry of Sodom and Gomorrah is indeed great, and their sin is exceedingly grave. I will go down now, and see if they have done entirely according to its outcry, which has come to Me; and if not, I will know." Genesis 18:20-21
The story of Sodom and Gomorrah is not just a story of rampant sexual perversion. The outcry of Sodom was not just about homosexuality; that was only part of it. There is a much deeper element to God’s reason for the judgment that fell upon them. In parallel with the flagrant sexual misbehavior, the cities of that area were known for “corrupt judges.” They were biased against strangers and travelers and perverse in their judgments. This is concerning, because the same elements and parallels in the “outcry of Sodom” are found in the Supreme Court’s decision on gay marriage today.
Let’s look at the story of Sodom and Gomorrah a little closer. When the angels went into Lot’s house, the men of the city approached his door, demanding that the strangers be brought out so they could have relations with them. When Lot offered his own daughters, the men of Sodom rejected them and then accused Lot of acting as a judge toward them.
Before they lay down, the men of the city, the men of Sodom, surrounded the house, both young and old, all the people from every quarter; and they called to Lot and said to him, "Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us that we may have relations with them." But Lot went out to them at the doorway, and shut the door behind him, and said, "Please, my brothers, do not act wickedly.” . . .But they said, "Stand aside." Furthermore, they said, "This one came in as an alien, and already he is acting like a judge; now we will treat you worse than them." So they pressed hard against Lot and came near to break the door. Genesis 19:4-7, 9
Let me ask a question here. Whenever the Bible is brought out for a discussion of homosexuality and the Leviticus passage about homosexuality is mentioned, how many times have you heard this complaint? “You are judging me!” “You are not supposed to judge others!”
Isn’t it fascinating that the men of Sodom say the same things unbelievers say today? Or, have you heard this counter argument to the Leviticus commandment? “That’s the Old Testament, we follow the New Testament now.” This is an effort to fend off the guilt they immediately sense in being contrary to the commandment.
But let’s look at this “judging” thing more. It is true that the Messiah taught us not the judge one another, unless we were willing to be judged by the same measure. He said you can judge but you will be judged the same way. More specifically the Messiah said that we are to judge various things, but our judgments must be a righteous judgment based on the commandments of the Lord.
Do not judge so that you will not be judged. For in the way you judge, you will be judged; and by your standard of measure, it will be measured to you. Matthew 7:1-2
When a good judge renders a judgment, it is based on the evidence presented, with due process, and according to the law. He also has the authority to do so. The same requirements apply to us.
Do not judge according to appearance, but judge with righteous judgment. John 7:24
In the course of my ministry as an elder in the faith, I have had to render judgments concerning many brethren. I cannot make a judgment based on my personal biases for or against any person. I must make the decision based on evidence to render a true judgment.
The fact is that every one of us is being trained in the faith to be a judge. Consider what Paul said will be our future.
Or do you not know that the saints will judge the world? If the world is judged by you, are you not competent to constitute the smallest law courts? Do you not know that we shall judge angels? How much more, matters of this life? 1 Corinthians 6:2-3
So, let’s do some judging right now about homosexuality. Is homosexuality permissible as a sexual activity according to God and His Law? The answer is No. It is not permissible under any circumstances.
But what if the couple gets married, just like heterosexual couples by marriage do not commit fornication? Doesn’t marriage somehow sanctify the behavior? The answer is again No.
Marriage is to be held in honor among all, and the marriage bed is to be undefiled; for fornicators and adulterers God will judge. Hebrews 13:4
Marriage does not transform sexual sin and make it acceptable. Marriage has nothing to do with homosexuality, incest, pedophiles, adultery, or any deviant behavior.
Sadly, the church has, for the most part, walked away from the commandments of the Lord and substituted church teaching for the Law of God. I have heard many Christian teachers teach about the “moral law,” picking and choosing the commandments they want to bring into the church while leaving others out that are too “Jewish.” They have compromised their argument against homosexuality by doing so. Transgressors of the law don’t make good witnesses for the righteousness of the law.
Lately, I have heard of some churches trying to draw homosexuals into their doors with “love and respect,” not “judging” because of their outward behavior. However, this kind of gospel is at odds with the New Testament.
The letter to the Gentiles, drafted by the Apostle James and sent to the Gentile believers, specified that there were three essentials to being part of the faith and community of believers. One of those essentials is listed in Acts 15, requiring them to cease from fornication. This includes all sexual activity outside of marriage, including homosexuality, adultery, incest, and the rest. A church selling the idea that homosexuals can be part of the church is in direct violation of New Testament teaching. As a consequence, they have defined their own church as “outside” of the faith.
A practicing homosexual is a fornicator with men according to the Bible, every bit as much as a man who is a fornicator with women. He is acting on his sexual lusts; there is nothing righteous about it and marriage will not cover this sin.
Let’s continue with the New Testament and see what it says about homosexuality. Paul addresses the kind of sin that must happen before a person is given over to be a homosexual. He dismisses God and becomes foolish with the origins and purposes of the whole creation.
For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures. Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, that their bodies would be dishonored among them. For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. Romans 1:21-24
Did you know that idolatry, which includes distorting the definition of God and His commandments, sets the stage for a whole host of other misbehaviors? This is a pretty simple statement filled with truth. Homosexuals don’t like God or His rules. It is part of the reason why they are homosexuals.
For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error. Romans 1:26-27
This is a very hard truth for many to handle. Did you know that the growing acceptance of evolution parallels the growing acceptance of homosexuality? Look at how the government has handled the subject of environmentalism and the issue of homosexuality. The government has defined evolution as science and creation as religion. If you devalue God’s role in the creation and alter its genetic code, then it follows there are no rules from God for men and we can change the “natural” way into what we want…like marriage.
And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper, being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are gossips, slanderers, haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, without understanding, untrustworthy, unloving, unmerciful; and, although they know the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, they not only do the same, but also give hearty approval to those who practice them. Romans 1:28 -32
A depraved mind (or reprobate mind) is one that has lost the ability to judge rightly. It means a person is spiritually dyslexic. Everything is backwards. The prophet Isaiah defines this kind of mind and thinking.
Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness; who substitute bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes, and clever in their own sight! Woe to those who are heroes in drinking wine, and valiant men in mixing strong drink; who justify the wicked for a bribe, and take away the rights of the ones who are in the right!
Therefore, as a tongue of fire consumes stubble, and dry grass collapses into the flame, so their root will become like rot and their blossom blow away as dust; for they have rejected the law of the Lord of hosts, and despised the word of the Holy One of Israel. Isaiah 5:20-24
The New Testament is explicit that homosexuality will not be part of the kingdom of God.
Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God. 1 Corinthians 6:9-10
I have known homosexuals throughout my lifetime. I have worked with them and gotten along with them just fine. But they did not try to force me to participate with them. Nor did I try to coerce them and try to harass them with my religious tenets. Did they know I was obedient to God and did not agree with their lifestyle? Yes. If they wanted to explore my faith, would I have accepted and taught them? Yes. In fact, that did happen and some left that lifestyle and became believers. There is a promise that follows the verses above, and is evidence that homosexuality is a choice, but a person can change his or her choice. Verse 11 continues on to say:
Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Yeshua the Messiah and in the Spirit of our God. 1 Corinthians 6:11
Homosexuals, like other sinners in the past, have come to accept the Lord and their lives have been changed. But now, things have changed. The government has decided to weigh in and declare homosexuals to have civil rights and marriage. I have not changed my position on the subject, but the world has changed beneath my feet. If I and my fellow believers continue to do and believe in the commandments of God, then the government will declare us as criminals, racial bigots, haters, and illegal. What follows will be worse.
Once we are all considered criminals, then our fellow citizens will consider us a danger to them and want us removed from their midst. We will be defined as a cancer to the nation and be dehumanized. It is what the Lord said.
Then they will deliver you to tribulation, and will kill you, and you will be hated by all nations on account of My name. And at that time many will fall away and will betray one another and hate one another. Matthew 24:9-10
Have you ever considered what issue could be so powerful to cause your own family members and fellow citizens to hate you so much because you stand for the commandments of God? What would sweep up so many people that even good Christians would become apostate and go against God that strongly? Or, why would the hatred of God move so quickly against us that people would want us dead and gone? Homosexuality is that issue.
This Supreme Court of the United States went over the line in making law. They have now set their law above the Creator and the Law-Giver. The nation is accelerating toward godlessness and being haters of God.
And we know that the judgment of God rightly falls upon those who practice such things. Romans 2:2