Is Alistair Begg Right?

1. You are basing your decisions in your feelings, not on scripture.

2. Obeying our Lord Jesus is key. He stated if you love Him, you will keep His commandments.

3. We are warned in Romans 1 against giving approval to those engaging in sin. Hom:sex:lity is specifically mentioned in that passage as an unnatural affection.

As for as everyone having sin, that is true. But what other group demand Christians approve of their sin and claim God approves of their sin?

peace to you

 

No truely regenerated Christian will condone nor approve of a gay wedding. It is simply not scriptural.

 

And here it is: The call to hospitality. You may not agree with their choice of lover, and you don't have to because you're not the one who's going to be sleeping with them. We're called simply to be a light. Remember that love bears all things!

Bible Gateway passage: 1 Peter 4:8-10 - New American Bible (Revised Edition)

Let it never be said of me that my positions are unbiblical. If I wasn't sick with the chronic ailments that I have, I may have taken a career path leading to the convent or to the seminary.

 

No. And the two situations are really not comparable.

God recognizes the union of a man and a woman whether or not they are believers.

peace to you

 

Your position is contrary to scripture. Using 1 Peter 4:8-10 to ignore what God has described as “vile”, “unnatural”, an “abomination” is to give license to debauchery limited only by our imaginations.

This issue is specifically addressed in Romans 1. Hom:se:uality is specifically mentioned unnatural and vile and those who engage in such acts or give approval to those engaging in those acts are condemned.

Please explain how Romans 1 does not apply to this situation?

peace to you

 

Human connection is more important than pointing out the sins of others. I Peter 4:8-10 shows us that God's grace covers a multitude of sins. And so, Begg is correct in prioritizing the building of bridges over taking some principled stand. For the principle of love is more important at a time like that than not acknowledging the important decision your family member has made. Maybe there will be opportunities for correction later on. But that day is theirs. Don't ruin it for them.

 

Every day belongs to God. By supporting same s:x marriage, the person is not building a bridge. The person is crossing a bridge and becoming a friend of the world. James 4 says to be a friend of the world, is to become an enemy of God.

The principle of Love would require the person to abstain from going, so these family members would understand that loving God and obeying His word is more important than the falsehood that God doesn’t care about g:y “marriage”.

peace to you

 

We should not endorse being unequally yoked. So a marriage between two lost people isn’t the same as a believer snd non- believer. The believer would be violating God’s command in that situation.

 

No where, that I can find in scripture, does it say God does not unite unbelievers in marriage.

It is simple. Man + woman + “know each other” = marriage. That is the biblical record. It is the uniting of a man and woman that makes one flesh (marriage).

That can happen without faith in God. It can happen with no faith in anything.

That cannot happen with same s:x couples. It isn’t “marriage” at all in the eyes of God. It is a vile, unnatural abomination and Christians are not doing these folks any favors by attending.

BTW, someone mentioned above that even if a man had surgery to become a woman, it was still sinful.

A man cannot have surgery to become a woman. That, too, is a lie straight from the mouth of Satan and we shouldn’t give it credence as a possibility even while denouncing it.

peace to you

 

How do we feel about Colossians 3:12-15?

Can someone explain how this does not apply to this situation? I far as I can see, Pastor Begg is following Colossians 3:12-15.

 

Colossians 3:12, . . . as the elect of God, holy . . . . would rule out honoring immorality and calling it it a marriage.

 

In Colossians 3:12-15, the Apostle Paul is speaking primarily of relationships within the church, not without.

It is not “kind” or “charitable” or “forgiving” to support g:y “marriage”. It is cruel and deceitful and harmful to the cause of Christ to support something God has described as “vile, “unnatural” and an “abomination”.

I have answered your question directly. Perhaps you will now answer mine directly.

Why does Romans 1, particular verses 21+, not apply to this very situation? Hom:sex:lity is specifically mentioned as “vile” and “unnatural”. God is said to give these folks over to their lusts. Paul then gives a warning to those who practice such things and/or support those who practice such things even though they know the judgment of God.

That is specifically applicable to this situation. How can that passage be ignored in this discussion?

pesce to you

 

With Romans 1, God's love is bigger than any sin we could commit. Even when God's heart is grieved, the love is still there. And that's the reason why we should go to the wedding. It's not to celebrate it and it's not to endorse it. It's to serve as a testimony of our faith that God's love is bigger than any sin. And that is a message of hope.

 

What about our OWN family though? You're not going to a brothel or a bar or an R-rated movie.

By going, your testimony is not that of support for something you disagree with but that of a testimony of faith that God is loving and bigger than any sin we can commit. That is a powerful testimony! That you believe homosexuality to be sinful but that you show up to the wedding anyway separates you in a peculiar way from other folks. And you never know what just being there can do. Years down the road, your family member might open up to you about the mistake they made in marrying the wrong person and BECAUSE you went to the wedding without judgement, this family member might trust you enough to open up to you. A wedding is just one day. As Christians we need to think long term.

You can tell me that the scriptures I'm posting have nothing to do with the topic all you want. But the truth is I'm backing up Pastor Begg's position with the scriptures. Here's another one that applies to the situation that you probably won't like because we love the passages that back up our position but don't want to look at the ones that support the opposing viewpoint. John 8:1-11 is about diplomacy. Under the pressure of potentially witnessing a woman getting stoned in front of him, Jesus resolves the situation by showing the Pharisees their own hypocrisy and guess what? It worked! No one got hurt. Pastor Begg is advocating diplomacy.

Put down your stones or one day the tables may reverse themselves and you may find yourself being judged for your sins perhaps by that very family member.

Go to the wedding.