Like Button

Friday, November 14, 2008

Amending Marriage II

Back in October I commented on a couple of the prime things at stake when "marriage" is amended to mean something it doesn't. One of the key things I omitted I left out because, well, to most it isn't likely an issue. If you are not a Christian or if you don't particularly care what we believe and don't particularly mind if our beliefs are negated, this isn't something that would be of interest to you. To Christians, however, this is of paramount importance.

Marriage is a biblical concept. It is, in fact, one of the very first concepts established in the Bible. "For this cause a man shall leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and they shall become one flesh" (Gen 2:24). Marriage, in this scenario, is the union of one man and one woman. (It is, in fact, that union that causes real difficulty with the polygamy concept. But that's not my point here.)

Marriage is interwoven throughout the Bible. It is, of course, a common and ongoing event. It is, on the other hand, very often an illustrative event. In other words, God uses it more than once to explain deeper concepts. Several times in the prophets, for instance, God compares His relationship with Israel as that of a husband and wife (e.g., Isa 54:5; Jer 3:1-14). In fact, the entire book of Hosea is written using Hosea's marriage to a prostitute as a comparison to God's marriage to Israel. When Israel follows other gods, He compares it to adultery instead of merely idolatry. He even speaks of divorcing Israel. (Note, by the way, that every parallel requires "husband" (God) and "wife". There is no other option.)

In the New Testament we have a well-known concept. The Church is the Bride of Christ. Part of the instruction set to husbands is built on this concept.
Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up for her; that He might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, that He might present to Himself the church in all her glory, having no spot or wrinkle or any such thing; but that she should be holy and blameless. So husbands ought also to love their own wives as their own bodies. He who loves his own wife loves himself; for no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ also does the church, because we are members of His body. For this cause a man shall leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and the two shall become one flesh. This mystery is great; but I am speaking with reference to Christ and the church (Eph 5:25-32).
The parallel is unavoidable. Husbands are to love their wives "as Christ also loved the church." Paul even speaks of the mysterious union of husband and wife as a great mystery, as it parallels the even greater mystery of the union of Christ and Church. And let's not forget the grand "Marriage Supper of the Lamb" in Revelation 19 where Christ and His Bride, the Church, are finally united.

Marriage in the Bible is delineated at the union of one man and one woman for the purpose of procreation. Further, it is a common picture instituted by God as a parallel with God's relationship with His people. When you start changing that concept in the common understanding of the people, you start changing God's picture. And when you start changing God's picture, you tread on very dangerous ground. Just ask Moses. He was told to speak to the rock to get water after it had once been struck, a perfect illustration about how Christ, our Rock, was struck once and then provides as needed living water. But Moses destroyed the image in his anger and struck the rock again. Oh, they got the water they wanted, but it was this act of destroying a God-instituted image that cost Moses entry into the Promised Land.

Those who are not believers care little about our beliefs. If what we believe becomes twisted, what do they care? I wouldn't expect this to be an argument to persuade unbelievers. Those who are believers, however, ought to take this into account. The biblical image of Church and Bride, of the union of Christ and His own and of the final Marriage Supper of the Lamb are too precious and too important to allow to be tossed aside by those who don't care. It isn't a small cost.

(As an update to my original post, some might have thought I was being too melodramatic when I warned that it was an assault on Christianity itself. If you read the responses of many rights groups, you'll find I was, if anything, understating. One homosexual atheist wrote that regardless of Prop 8, his goal was to see the annihilation of Christianity from the public square. He wasn't alone. I don't think I overstated that concern.)

No comments: