Be Fruitful and Multiply: Why Gay Marriage Was Never a Biblical Option

Genesis 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. 28 And God blessed them. And God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it, and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth.

Matthew 19:4 He answered, “Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female.

There is a move today among the current administration, with President Obama taking the lead, to join with other liberals, the LGBT Community, and, unfortunately, churches like the ECLA and Episcopal Church to bring the notion of gay marriage into harmony with the words of the Scripture and pass it into law against the will of the people (see California where it was defeated by 61% the second time and the judicial branch overstepped its authority and overruled the will of the people.)

There is one young man, Matthew Vines, who delivers a “sermon” about how there is no contradiction between being gay and the Scripture (here). Then a friend of mine wrote a book about how every Scripture verse dealing with Homosexuality either had to do with prostitution, or had nothing to do with a loving same sex relationship or it was an Old Testament passage that is no longer applicable (here).

I have a major problem with these types of presentations or books. My first problem is that we have churches, people, and politics trying to interpret the Scriptures based on their experiences or their orientation. As most students of the Bible know, this is a major problem. The Scripture should interpret our lives, not the other way around. The second issue I find myself facing is that all of the pro-homosexuality stuff that tries to balance its ideas with the Scripture has failed to view its position in light of the most important thing: What was God’s original intent for marriage?

Matthew Vines tries and fails to argue that love is the intent and therefore if anyone fails to honor love that is an automatic disqualifier for being the proper interpretation. Let me, for a minute, get into the weeds, so to speak. As a Christian and a Pastor I am ashamed of the way most the church has in the name of Christ treated the LBGT Community. We have not operated in love and acceptance of people. As a matter of fact many of the jabs we take from liberals and those in the LBGT community we honestly deserve because we have not represented Christ well.

However, the LBGT Community is every bit as guilty in their treatment of the church. As a matter of fact, though they claim to be a group promoting love and tolerance, I oftentimes cant tell the different between them and far right wing nut jobs, which want to put up fences and put them to the stake. Ok, sorry; back to the subject.

The reason why Matthew Vines, my friend David, and many of the churches that are now teetering on the edge of apostasy have failed is because they haven’t considered God’s original intention for marriage as given in Genesis 1, that Jesus affirms in Matthew 19.

It is actually very clear what God’s intentions were; but in order to validate their position they are forced to over look this passage. In the beginning God created them male and female and said to them “Be fruitful and multiply”. Before you rush to conclusions let me say that, yes, there is absolutely more to marriage than pro-creation, but I don’t have time for that here.

The left and those seeking Scriptural affirmation for gay marriage are ignoring the weight of this statement. God’s original intention was that marriage would lead to the creation of life. Does that always happen? No, sin has infected the entire world and through it disease, death, poverty, destruction, miscarriages, and infertility have happened. However, that doesn’t change God’s original intention for marriage.

Later, Jesus affirms that in the beginning they were male and female, not male and male or female and female, that were joined together in marriage. One man and one woman joined together was God’s original intention for marriage. The word in the beginning holds the meaning that the creation account describes the originating moment of a relationship called “married” and it also says something significant about how the relationship is ordered and structured.

So, the question is not whether or not “Gay Marriage” should be allowed, but what was God’s original intent for marriage? I think that if we are honest, the comment God makes that we should be fruitful and multiply eliminates the question of whether or not the Bible supports gay marriage.

The real question is this: Does our Nation have the right to over turn the definition of marriage, which is and always has been the responsibility of religion? In every country and every religion gay marriage has never been allowed until the last 100 years. What gives our government the right to over turn that?

John Renken

About the author, John Renken: A self proclaimed “scrapper” since childhood, John Renken grew up with a burning interest in physical challenges and a strong competitive spirit which has led him to develop quite an impressive reputation in the professional fighting community. Reaching the pinnacle of his career, Renken now has over 68 professional mixed martial arts and boxing matches under his belt and many first place titles spanning three different continents. A former Satanist, Renken’s life has taken many interesting twists and turns along the way to redemption. He now pastors a church called Freedom Church and writes about topics of interest in our country. View all articles by John Renken

Like Clash? Like Clash.

Leave a Comment

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.

// If comments are open or we have at least one comment, load up the comment template.