A Note to Christians Opposing Gay Marriage: Get Over It

Get Over ItRemember how the Bible used to say, “Slaves, obey your masters” (Col. 3:22; 1 Pet. 2:18; Eph. 6:5)? Remember that? Remember how it used to say, “I do not permit a woman to teach or have authority over a man” (1 Tim. 2:12; cf. 1 Cor. 14:34; Col. 3:18; Eph. 5:22)? Remember when the Bible used to say that? Remember how the Bible used to instruct people not to divorce, and those who divorced not to remarry (1 Cor. 7:10-11)? Remember when the Bible used to say all of that?

Now, I know what you’re saying, and you’re right: it still does say that. And yet, we got over it! The Bible never stopped saying, “Slaves, obey your masters,” and yet, we got over it and rightfully abolished slavery. We got over it just like we rightfully conceded the equal rights of women. We got over it just like we rightfully allow people to divorce and allow divorced people to remarry. Simply put, we got over it.

In the same way, we will soon get over the way we treat homosexuals – Christians and non-Christians alike. Despite the Bible’s explicit moral injunctions to slaves, women, and divorcées, we have learned that these social injunctions were the product of the social environment in which the Bible was written. In the same manner, so too will we get over what we are doing to gay individuals today.

Just like the army got over the integration of black soldiers into white battalions, the army will get over the integration of openly gay soldiers into its combat forces. We got over the integration of women into traditionally “male” positions in the workplace. We got over the integration of African-American children into segregated schools. We got over insisting that abused women remain in their abusive relationships because “no unchastity had been committed” (Matt. 19:9), and we got over the stigmatization of divorced people trying to put their lives back together.

We got over it. And, we’ll get over using the Bible and ambiguous notions of “traditional marriage” to deny gay Americans the privilege of a state-recognized marriage. We’ll get over it and will one day look back and shake our heads at how we’ve treated gay Americans, just like we look back and shake our heads in disgust at how “those people” treated slaves, African-Americans, women, and divorcées.

We are “those people,” and we need to get over it.

For more by Dr. Cargill on this subject, see: “It’s OK for Christians to Vote No on Prop 8
and “Full Text of Dr. Cargill’s Remarks at the Pepperdine GSEP Panel Discussion on Racism and Homophobia.”
See also the classic West Wing segment on YouTube.

UPDATE: See also the news today that a U.S. Judge has ruled the Federal Gay Marriage Ban Unconstitutional.

57 Responses

  1. God and Jesus say they do not change and the Bible
    is the word of God. So it cant be rewritten to suit current social trends.
    The laws in the old testament on how to treat slaves
    (another name for worker) were very civilised and were
    fairer than any other country at that time . In fact they
    are preferable to Chinese factory workers who are jumping out of factory windows committing suicide – worked to death.
    The high divorce rate has a terrible often lifetime effect
    on the children.

  2. Dr. Cargill– Thank you very much for articulating the need for Christians to move beyond their hatred of gays and gay marriage. It’s admirable (and rare) for a Christian to acknowledge that Christianity has indeed moved well beyond the Bible’s barbaric views on slavery, gender roles, and other patently outdated societal constructs.

    Mr. Allan– I take great exception to your erroneous equation of “slaves” with what we would today understand as “workers” or compensated employees. The Bible’s promotion of outright slavery is unequivocal in passages including but not limited to Leviticus 25:44-46, Exodus 21:2-6, and in Exodus 21:7-11, which is especially abhorrent. You consider this civilized and fair?

    The high divorce rate indeed has a negative effect on families, but where were these self-appointed pro-family crusaders (i.e. the Family Research Council, American Family Association, et al) in the decades leading up to a divorce rate >50%? There is no demonstrable causality whatsoever between the desire of gays to marry and the propensity for married heterosexual couples to divorce, so I fail to see the relevance of your closing statement to the issue at hand.

  3. Robert – I have just read those passages and they
    are amazingly kind to slaves – more kind than what is happening today to ordinary workers in the many countries.

    But the slave traders before Wilberforce were much
    more cruel than the readings you have given. So were
    many Victorians to their servants .

    Also in these days the Spartans would just kill some of their slaves for no reason but to keep them under fear .

    What about the Romans – you had no chance as a slave.

    God’s design is that children have a mother and father
    who do not divorce other than for infidelity.

  4. Bravo once again, Dr. Cargill! (and you, too, Mr. Wilson!) Thank you!

  5. […] an excellent blog post entitled A Note to Christians Opposing Gay Marriage: Get Over It, impressively-credentialed Christian academic Dr. Robert Cargill eloquently outlines how […]

  6. Mr. Allan, I shall endeavor to be polite in my response to your latest reply…

    The Bible’s endorsement of the practice of slavery is despicable enough on its own. That it goes on to outline the specific means for the perpetuation and administration of slavery is shamefully evil. The manner in which slaves may or may not have been treated by their owners is utterly irrelevant and in no way excuses the grievous tragedy that is slavery.

    Your comments regarding the immutability of the Bible and your failure to repudiate the practice of slavery in general suggests that you believe that God’s design includes the ownership of others. Do you indeed believe that slavery as described in the Bible should still exist?

    Further, your description of God’s design for the family does not take into account divorce due to domestic violence, abandonment, or other appreciably reasonable causes. I’m not especially surprised by your position, given your implied support of the Bible’s subjugation of women as property.

    With apologies, having this conversation with you is like speaking to a relic of an unfortunate past…

    As a gay American, I genuinely hope Dr. Cargill is right in his prediction that “we will one day look back and shake our heads at how we’ve treated gay Americans, just like we look back and shake our heads in disgust at how “those people” treated slaves, African-Americans, women, and divorcées.”

  7. Robert
    Jesus certainly did not teach that women were property
    – read the Bible – He gave them freedom from harsh
    treatment and had many female disciples.
    Domestic violence and abandonment were condemned in the Bible. Eg A man who abandons his
    offspring or family is worse than an unbeliever (Paul).

    As I said there is more slavery in the world than ever now – workers are committing suicide. Children are being sold as sex slaves to perverts.

    African Slavery was stopped by Wilberforce – a dedicated Christian.

    Abraham’s slaves ( servants) (employees) were well treated – you are confusing the translation of the word slavery. The Old Testament gave slaves ( workers) under Jewish law more rights than any other country at that time.

    I am totally against slavery – especially the kind where
    parents are selling their young children as sex slaves in places like Thailand.
    Young children are abducted in Africa to be used in camel races in some Arab countries. They can never
    find their way back home when they are dumped at age 5.

    So worse – much worse slavery – is happening right now before your very eyes all over the world. You can free a child from this abuse for a donation – there are many Christian organisations helping child slaves.

    I think gay Americans are treated very fairly in America -they have all sorts of rights . How would you be treated in an Islamic country ????
    It is Christians who seem to be attacked and have lost
    their rights.

    If we don’t stand up for Christianity Islam will dominate
    the world which is its stated aim . Then you will have
    to live under Sharia Law.

  8. […] Robert Cargill on Gay Marriage July 9, 2010 — Craig Yesterday, Dr. Robert Cargill posted an interesting article, “A Note to Christians Opposing Gay Marriage: Get Over It“. […]

  9. We have to keep in mind, when reading Mr. Allan’s comments, that he exemplifies something Jesus said about those who uphold the letter of the law and not the spirit of the law. They don’t understand.

    People who hold that view are will be swept away and marginalized just as they have marginalized us gays. For those people I say, read Matthew 7:1-5.

  10. Charles Allan says:

    “I think gay Americans are treated very fairly in America -they have all sorts of rights . How would you be treated in an Islamic country ????
    It is Christians who seem to be attacked and have lost
    their rights.

    If we don’t stand up for Christianity Islam will dominate
    the world which is its stated aim . Then you will have
    to live under Sharia Law.”

    The melodrama and hyperbole of these statements is simply beyond belief and unworthy of anyone desiring serious discussion, or to be taken seriously.

    1. This is not an Islamic country, so this point is absolutely irrelevant. Btw, the US is not a Christian country either. It is a country OF Christians only by virtue of numbers, but it is a secular nation.

    2. Gays have been treated unfairly and discriminated against in hiring, renting and leasing apartments, serving in the military; gays have been harassed and physically assaulted and shunned for decades. The list goes on; there is not enough room here.

    3. Christians have lost no rights. The First Amendment of the US Constitution still states: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech…”.

    4. See point #1.

  11. I agree with Frank.

    Any person who asserts that gay Americans have been treated “very fairly” and claims that “slave” is just another term for “worker” or “employee” is a person clearly not connected with reality and thusly unworthy of continued dialogue.

  12. And then we will get over people marrying more than 1 person. We will look back and shake our heads about how we viewed theses “cults”. We will get over arguing about “traditional marriage”

    Then we will get over people that want to marry children. I mean some married women in the Bible were more than likely pre-teen. Who are we to stop that?

    Then we will get over people who marry siblings, or goats, or the internet.

    We will shake our head at how foolish we could be to think that something the Bible calls “detestable” could be sinful!

    I agree we treat the gay community horribly. I wish it wasn’t so. However marriage should not be amended to accept that lifestyle.

  13. bob,

    your response is a common comeback to this argument. the problem with it is that it re-introduces issues of exploitation that are found in the bible against which we have legislated.
    think about it: in all three cases – slavery, subjugation of women, and marginalization of divorcées – we exploited people. we have rightfully moved away from this. no more slavery, women have equal rights (but still not equal pay), and women (and men) can divorce and remarry legally for reasons other than infidelity (think abuse). we’ve moved away from exploitation.

    in the ‘slippery ‘slope argument you present above, you essentially try to scare folks by arguing that if we allow gay marriage, we’ll soon have people marrying goats and children. seriously. that was your argument above.

    the problem is, while i’m certain someone will attempt this just to make a point, none of it will become law. here’s why: in spite of the fact that much of human history has involved polygamy (including nearly every patriarch in the bible), we’ve moved away from polygamy because most understand it to be a means of the exploitation of women. it’s difficult to manage multiple wives without favoring one or mistreating one. (as an example, i give you… every single polygamist relationship in the bible.) the u.s. agreed that polygamy exploits women, and the new testament, while it for whatever reason maintained an endorsement of slavery (and encouraged proper conduct within it instead of paul standing up and giving an ‘i have a dream’ speech), moved to the ‘one wife’ model, that is, moved away from polygamy. and while big love offers a dramatization of polygamy, i don’t think we’ll revisit it as a political issue any time soon.

    the same goes for your other examples of what today would be considered pedophilia. of course the bible has all sorts of examples of pedophilia, and even rape. but we have seen fit to move away from the exploitation – especially the sexual exploitation – of children. so no, that won’t be coming back anytime soon.

    as for your examples of incest (marrying siblings), we have moved away from that as a society because it has been shown to be undesirable genetically. there is some line around the second cousin stage that has become the new demarcation of incest, but we’ve moved away from the close tribal familial relations mentioned in the bible.

    as for bestiality (marrying goats), again, if you’d like to lead a campaign to legalize bestiality and marry your pet goat, be my guest. just be forewarned that some people might see that as exploitation of animals. others will ask whether the animal can legally consent.

    and did i read that correctly? you argued that people will marry the internet??? if that what you were saying, perhaps i stand guilty as charged. but seriously, if your argument against gay marriage has to reach into the absurd to a point where you compare it to people marrying inanimate objects, then it betrays the lack of foundation of your argument. rather than arguing the merits of the case at hand, you’re appealing to slippery-slope arguments and equating ridiculous worst case scenarios to people wanting to get married. most people recognize the difference between two consenting adults wanting to get married and your wanting to marry your goat. so no, it’s not a valid argument.

    however, you did say one thing with which i agree: if you do marry your pet goat, i will indeed look back and shake my head.


  14. Moreover, since the US is not a theocracy based on biblical law, marriage in the US is a civil contract that can only be entered into by consenting adults of a certain degree of non-consanguinity.

    A man or woman and a goat do not meet those criteria;
    A man or woman and a child do not meet those criteria;
    A man or woman and the internet do not meet those criteria;
    A man or woman and a parakeet do not meet those criteria;
    Two unrelated gay men or two unrelated gay women certainly do meet those criteria. Why unrelated? Because kinship is already established. Marriage licenses trump all powers-of-attorney (which cease upon death) and wills.
    No marriage in the US is valid without a state issued civil license. No one is clamoring for religious marriage for gays.

    So there is no slippery slope; these arguments are simply fear-mongering and red herrings.

  15. I apologize if my remarks come across as “fear-mongering” and I wasn’t trying to”scare” people. (Although I do admit the idea of someone marrying a goat does scare me).

    I am aware that the slippery slope argument isn’t a favored one or a very valid one if you really look at it.

    I suppose my attempt at humor fails. I think my point was overlooked- and I didnt except people to take the easy route and attack my silly arguments but my main point that the Bible calls it “Detestable”.

    I think when Galatians talks about neither Jew nor Greek. Slave or Master, Male or Female that its showing we are all equal in Christ. The fact that it doesnt say slavery is wrong does bother me but I think the point is that No one is better than another. We are equal in Christ and should be treated fairly (which means NO slavery, and yes there should HAVE been Women’s rights earlier)

    You can’t control if you are Jew, Greek, Male, Female or slave.

    But to say as Christians we should allow the government to confirm people who are willingly living in sin bothers me.

    Now if your argument is that we arn’t a Theocracy based on Biblical Principals and that we should allow gay marriage because the morality of the Bible doesn’t have a place in American politics. OK I see your point and to some point I will agree.

    But if your argument is that Christians should accept gay marriage because its Biblcially acceptable- I would just simply dissagree. I can see where we were wrong on slavery, divorce, and women’s right- but I can’t see how gay marriage is acceptable for us as Christians.

    I do honestly apologize if I came across as a “fear monger” or anything. I didn’t think my poor humor is what you guys would come at. I am kind of dissapointed that you attack me on that and no one addressed the issue of homosexuality being “detestable”

    I love having dialogue with fellow Christians and would love to hear your thoughts!

  16. bob,

    thanx for your thoughtful reply.

    question: when you said above: ‘But to say as Christians we should allow the government to confirm people who are willingly living in sin bothers me,’ were you referring to divorced people or homosexuals? both are explicitly forbidden, and while jesus never mentions homosexuality, he does mention divorce. and yet, there is no constitutional amendment prohibiting people from divorcing or prohibiting divorced people from getting remarried (both prohibited).

    my point is: why are some asking the state to constitutionally prohibit one ‘sinful’ activity, and not another? this is precisely why the ‘yes on 8’ folks won’t come out and say ‘biblical’ marriage: it’s a failed argument. they argue ‘traditional’ marriage, hoping voters will read into it ‘biblical.’ my job is to demonstrate that political action against gay marriage is based on nothing but fear, tradition, and/or one’s religious leanings.

    if a church or congregation interprets homosexuality as a sin, ok. if they refuse to preform gay marriages, ok; jews, muslims, mormons, catholics, etc. all have their own definitions of marriage and do not recognize those marriages performed outside of their faith tradition an should not be forced to do so. but as for the state, the state should recognize all of the above, including gay marriages, as state-sanctioned agreements to live in a marital relationship, and should grant all of the rights, honors, and privileges thereto appertaining to the couple.

  17. Unfortunately gay marriage opponents are conflating civil and religious marriage. No one is asking for any religious denomination to be forced to perform a gay wedding. We are only asking for civil marriage to legally protect what we have earned and built as couples. No marriage in the US is valid without a civil license.

    Are atheists who don’t get married in church not married? Is any couple who doesn’t get married in church, only in front of a judge, not married? Where is it stated that marriage in the US is a religious institution and valid and legal on its own? Nowhere.

    But without a civil license, no marriage in the US is valid, no matter how many clergy officiate at the wedding ceremony. Clergy are authorized by the state to validate a marriage license only as a nod to tradition and courtesy. However it is not required. The civil wedding could have been finalized in a municipal hall.

    If any religious denomination wants to perform gay marriages (and there are a number of them) it is their choice to do so; they are not required to go against their beliefs.

  18. The Bible’s endorsement of the practice of slavery is despicable enough on its own. That it goes on to outline the specific means for the perpetuation and administration of slavery is shamefully evil. The manner in which slaves may or may not have been treated by their owners is utterly irrelevant and in no way excuses the grievous tragedy that is slavery.
    — Robert J Wilson

    Remember something. Up until the 18th and 19th Centuries AD, Slavery Was Normal. In many societies (including today’s Sudan), Slavery Was Universal. A fish doesn’t know it’s wet.

    And Torah was given to a Semitic tribal people some 3500 years ago, when and where not only Slavery, but multigenerational blood feuds to the death and Honor Killings were Normal and Universal.

    A couple years ago, a Jewish friend explained to me the Wisdom of Torah regarding Slavery. It was Universal and Normal; if Torah had forbidden slavery (as we today would probably have written it), the people of that time and place (Semitic tribesmen of 3500 years ago) would just have blown it off and kept their slaves. If it had just allowed slavery, nothing would have changed. However (here is the Wisdom of Torah), Torah permitted slavery but heavily regulated it. To the point that if you followed all the regulations, hiring a free worker was cheaper and easier than buying a slave and having to put up with all the regulatory hassle. Not outlaw slavery, but make it impractical.

    Yet the ancient Jews, like everybody else, kept their slaves. And many of the Prophets took them to task for it — for not following Torah’s regulations in keeping and treating their slaves, regulations that added so much hassle as to make slavery impractical.

  19. And then we will get over people marrying more than 1 person. We will look back and shake our heads about how we viewed theses “cults”. We will get over arguing about “traditional marriage”

    Then we will get over people that want to marry children. I mean some married women in the Bible were more than likely pre-teen. Who are we to stop that?

    Then we will get over people who marry siblings, or goats, or the internet. — Bob

    This is exactly the shtick used in a series of commercials against a gay marriage proposition in one of the Midwest states (one of the Dakotas?) during an election a couple years ago. Commercial went like this:

    “I now pronounce you Man and Wife.” Then the camera pulls back to reveal in return:

    1) Two men (one wearing a bridal veil), who immediately start French-kissing.

    “I now pronounce you Man & Wife & Wife. You may kiss the bride.”

    2) One groom with two brides.

    “I now pronounce you Man & Wife. You may kiss the bride.”

    3) Adult groom, six-year-old bride.

    “I now pronounce you Man & Wife. You may kiss the bride.”

    4) Human groom, horse wearing bridal veil. (Normal four-legger horse, presumably mare.)

    “Vote NO on Proposition (whatever). Because We’re NOT California.”

  20. my point is: why are some asking the state to constitutionally prohibit one ‘sinful’ activity, and not another? — Dr Cargill

    Probably because the Activists are personally benefiting from the “sinful” activity they DON’T want to ban. Kyle’s Moms are always offended by the OTHER guys’ sin, never their own. “But that’s different.”

    “Homosexuality (I’m straight)? SIN. Smoking (I don’t)? SIN. Caffiene addiction? Suddenly my advocacy of Separation of Church and Starbucks increases dramatically” — can’t remember the authors name, but the book title is When Bad Christians Happen to Good People

  21. Dr. Cargill, how can you, someone fully schooled in the Bible with all of your degree’s and experience, actually try and compare slavery and homosexuality. Historically speaking slaves were treated exceptionally at least up to the point of Christ. Many slaves were actually educated far beyond that of their masters so that they could handle their affairs better. This is completely opposite to the pre and post colonial slavery that most people think to when someone refers to slavery. Joseph was a slave but he was 2nd in all of Egypt. Daniel was a slave but ended up second to Nebuchadnezzar.

    The bible both the old and new testaments as well as history show how slavery was actually not such a bad thing in fact it was a way of people paying off their debts and there was always laws in place to make sure slaves were treated fairly such as if a slave was to work for seven years to repay a debt the master could not tack on interest. As well as punishment had strict limitations, such as if a master was ever to beat a slave to where he was permanently injured then that slave immediately had settled his debt and earned his freedom. And those in poverty usually opted to sell themselves into slavery for a chance of a better life. This is completely opposite to the slavery we see in the colonial periods where most slaves came from Africans being kidnapped and forced into slavery against their will.

    As you pointed out in the Bible it does say slaves obey your masters and serve them like you are serving your heavenly master but then it also follows with masters treat your slaves fairly considering they too had a master in heaven. And in Philemon 1, 8-19 where Paul sends back a slave (Onesimus) that has turned to Christ and he says that he sends him back as more than a slave but a beloved brother in Christ and brothers and sisters in Christ were to be respected and treated in a certain manner especially as equals. Paul even says to receive him (Onesimus) as Philemon would receive Paul. so here are a couple examples just in the new testament where we see from Paul a possible move to denounce slavery by way of how can one be a slave and a brother in Christ and we see Paul acknowledge that.

    There were great evangelists throughout early American history all the way to the civil war as well as those after that still thought as dark skin people inferior to whites and that the white people had a responsibility to take care them, pre civil war this was in the sense slavery, because they would hurt themselves or others if they weren’t kept in control. Even though they always told others to treat their slaves kindly this is still wrong and they were wrong. People shouldn’t attribute the Bible to have ever supported slavery based on Africans being inferior in an intellectual sense as some of these evangelist tried to. They and others twisted the scripture because as i have already stated above, the treatment and respect attributed to slaves in both old and new testament are completely different from colonial period slavery that most people think of.

    So whats the point of all this information? (Which I’m sure you know and sorry to come across as lecturing in no way am i trying to do that.) The point is slavery in the old testament teachings was far different than the common idea of slavery and we even see in the new testament a turning from slavery. However, never in the bible is their a softening stance on homosexuality. Paul doesn’t send a homosexual back as a brother and there never is a case where this life style is tolerated. So to compare getting over slavery and getting over homosexuality is a stretch and one that I don’t see a biblical foundation for. As for the other comparisons the secular nature of the world is evil and full of sin and just because the world “evolves”, and as it always has, rebels against God’s will, doesn’t mean as true followers of Christ we should just accept the nature of this rebellion. One who is wise is cautious (Or fears [the Lord]) and turns away from evil,but a fool is reckless and careless(Prov. 14,16 ESV). The prudent sees danger and hides himself, but the simple go on and suffer for it(Prov. 22,3 ESV).

  22. justin,

    you appear to have spent 4 of your 5 paragraphs above defending the practice of slavery.
    so i’ll give you a second chance to clarify your earlier comments and ask for clarification:

    1) did you just spend a great deal of time and effort defending the practice of slavery?
    2) are you arguing that slavery – the ownership of another human being – in some forms (kind vs. tyrannical, educated vs. uneducated, etc.) is actually ok?
    3) did you just argue that the bible endorses slavery, so long as a master treats his slave with respect?

    if you answered yes to the above, then some of my readers may have some rebuttal comments for you.

    the fact that the bible does not banish slavery outright is evidence that it is tied to and written within a particular social context. why is it ok to rationalize and justify the practice of slavery – SLAVERY – and not other ‘unaccepted’ social practices like remarriage of divorced individuals, liberation and equal rights of women, and the rights of homosexuals to have a marital union recognized by the state?

    as for your last paragraph, i simply do not agree with your statement that ‘the secular nature of the world is evil and full of sin and just because the world “evolves”, and as it always has, rebels against God’s will’. i do not think the abolition of slavery is a rebellion against god, nor was it ‘evil.’ i do not believe the granting of equal rights to women is a bad form of social progress. these are good things. yes, they differ from the bible’s social teaching, but they are still good.

    you must concede that the bible does contain social customs and laws – given by god – that later generations have overridden. peter did this with kosher regulations in acts 11:4-10. xnty has eliminated the sabbath regulation – one of the 10 commandments (rightly or wrongly)! paul does away with the jew-gentile separations. jesus preaches against purity regulations. etc. etc.

    just because social regulations from 2500 years ago were reversed 2000 years ago doesn’t mean that some of the social regulations from 2000 years ago shouldn’t be reversed today. women have achieved equal rights (although they still lack equal pay) and slaves have been emancipated. these are good things.

    as xns, we are not called to condemn this world and wait for another, but to make this world better. allowing gay couples the same secular, state recognition that straights have is only one more step.

  23. I can see where it may have come off that I was defending slavery so let me start off by saying in no way shape or form was I trying to defend slavery. So to answer all three of your questions the answer is simply no. My point, and I’ll try to solidify my otherwise terrible excuse of a position paper, was to demonstrate the differences between slavery represented in the bible as compared to colonial period slavery and that towards the end of Paul’s ministry I do believe there was a turning from the idea that this was acceptable. As opposed to the fact that there is no where in the Bible, where like I said before, that we see a softening position on homosexuality.

    The statements I made in my last paragraph was more focused on homosexuality and other forms of immorality that the Bible is clear that we are to stay away from. By your own logic if in the future it was found out that the federal reserve had been stealing money from the U.S people for the past 100 years that that should be ok because even though the bible says not to steal it has become a regular practice among corporations so we should just get over it and accept that’s how the world is. Yes that is a gross over simplification and their is a difference obviously you will point out that that is hurting the public just like slavery, and homosexual rights does not hurt you or me. This may be true and it would be far to easy of me to say well God says to turn from evil look at Sodom and Gomorrah they practiced homosexuality and were destroyed, but something tells me that won’t be good enough. So let me concede that no physical harm may ever come to me by allowing homosexuals to marry. However, It is my firm believe that as I read and study the scripture that my understanding of this one view point, homosexuality, is wrong and despite 2500 years of social changes I still believe that God takes no joy from the acts of homosexuality.

    Personally I am thankful to live in a country that protects an individuals God given personal freedoms (although as of late they are not doing such a good job of it) as well as that we have largely moved passed social prejudices that began the horrific practice of slavery. I’m sure the next post will have something to do with life liberty and the pursuit of happiness isn’t being attained by the homosexual community but we’ll cross that one when we get to it but first lets touch on equality of woman. As far as the equality of women the Bible does not try and state that women can’t do anything but cook and make babies and clean house. I mean Deborah was a judge of Israel, Esther did great things in service to the Jewish people despite a forced marriage, and shows her to be strong woman but also humble (so there is no more confusion I am not saying I agree with forced marriage just stating an example of a woman in power that accomplished great things).

    The bible is clear about the respect to be shown to women such as how husbands are to love their wives and not be harsh with them in Colossians 3,19. Now I could be wrong but I am willing to bet there is no commandment or law stated in the Bible that says to pay women less. As far as equality I don’t think anywhere there is a statement that says something like a man is worth two women or any number of women. However, yes it says for wives to obey there husbands but that is because God has set man as the head of household. In a Godly marriage you should expect a God fearing husband to accept the council of a God fearing wife and both to be equal in prayer about decisions that govern that household. In the end though God has charged the man to make the decisions and his wife to respect and honor that decision. But it always circles back to the man. He has a great responsibility to be earnestly seeking the will of God and is to love his wife and not make decisions that would be negative to her. Again just like with slavery we see a twisting of scripture by earlier naive and ignorant men to try and raise themselves higher instead of having a spirit of humility and understanding of the respect to be shown to women.

    I fear God personally Yahweh is the creator of all things and I am just clay to be molded. The fact that I ever took a single breathe was by the mercy of my creator. I didn’t always believe in God in fact I went through many trials in my young life that made me very angry at God if he existed. I thought “how could God do this to me if he existed and loved me”. But through a series of events outside of my control I was led in a direction that was never clear to me while I was traveling it. And then one day it finally just clicked. I’m not God. I can’t even comprehend all that God is let alone do anything He can and it was a very humbling experience and something that my prideful and sinful nature still struggles against. It wasn’t easy either it
    wasn’t just instantly I was like yea! there is a power greater than me Who supersedes my will! It was a slow and still continuing dieing of myself and allowing God to try and work and speak wisdom into my life not to greater exalt myself but so that he may use me to do more than I could on my own. I am not perfect. I am not righteous. I sin all the time and I am imperfect and deserving of God wrath but because of His love we have a way through His son Jesus Christ who took on our punishment by his death and resurrection on the cross.

    I say all of this because I want to be clear, well im sure my writing structure gave it away but, I am no scholar. I am not someone whom I think people should take seriously. I am in fact simply no one. But I came across this blog by way of interest in your work Dr. Cargill and happened to read your post and felt moved to say something not even expecting to get a reply but just speaking my heart. I feel homosexuality is wrong. I won’t just “get over it” because honestly and with as much respect as I can say this I found the examples given to be lacking in anyway that can justify homosexuality on any level. It may be the way of the world to slowly accept and integrate things of an immoral nature and again to reiterate I am not saying abolishing slavery or gender/racial equality to be bad things. Simply the world will decline if you believe in the Bible and the prophecies in it from such books as Ezekiel, Daniel, and Revelations. I just can’t in good knowledge lay back and accept the change in a law that I believe would make a statement that homosexuality is ok.

  24. Get over it! When you are in hell, GET OVER IT! That is what is wrong with this world. To many people are simply getting over it, instead of standing up for what is right. If someone is gay, that is there business. But it is my business, when the world is telling my child that it is okay to sin. If you are gay, I couldn’t care less. I have friends that are gay. They don’t try to fool anyone into believing a lie to make them feel better.

  25. I don’t believe in hell. And I doubt God really cares who we love. He has more important things to worry about.

    And which is it… ?

    ” If someone is gay, that is there business. But it is my business, when the world is telling my child that it is okay to sin. If you are gay, I couldn’t care less. ”

    Kind of contradictory.

  26. Robert – I think you would benefit from reading Richard Hay’s position on homosexuality from his The Moral Vision of the New Testament. It is very balanced and compassionate, though you may not like his conclusions.

    I think that many Christians today do not have a problem with homosexuals (this is not a theocracy) having equal rights, but they have a problem with redefining marriage. It does not seem fair. If they called it “gayridge” or something else (I do not mean to be disrespectful, I am just giving an example of a possible name) that would be fine. At least that is how I feel.

    I do not think that your analogy with divorce/remarriage works. That is still viewed (or at least it should be) as undesirable and as a sin (if I may say that on this blog) by most churches. However, divorce/remarriage is not viewed (and of course should not be) as “the unforgivable sin” and churches do well to deal with kindness and love with people who are divorced etc.
    On the other hand, it seems to me that you suggest that homosexuality is NOT a sin anymore. We should get over it. Even the analogy with slavery has flaws…It is not a good analogy to say the least.

  27. thanx for your response. you mentioned flaws in my analogies to divorce and slavery, but did not expound. how are they different? if the bible says something or not to do something, why do we allow some and not the others?


  28. […] I shall continue doing my part (here and here and here and here and here and here and here) to combat the discriminatory hatred that continues to be […]

  29. […] I advocated so strongly against California’s Proposition 8 (here and here and here and here). And while I don’t let petty, false accusations and/or what other people might call me […]

  30. Don’t you love all these so-called “Christians” who claim to know the mind of God? They believe that all knowledge of God is limited to the Bible, and that no other information can possibly be interpreted as “divine.”

    Did God stop communicating with humans 2000 years ago?

    We, as humans, have the ability to learn. Time and experience teach us many things. This was true in pre-Biblical days, as it is true today. To say that no other knowledge may ever be added to the “Word of God” is to act as if you are God himself. How can any human presume to know everything there is to know about God?

    Ann Druyan has pointed out the difference between scientists and religious fundamentalists — scientists are always searching for new knowledge, better knowledge, while religious fundamentalists believe that new knowledge is evil and a sin against God. (I’m paraphrasing a bit there, but that was her basic idea.)

  31. Thank you for posting this. I had to share it with some other friends who are constantly bashing same sex marriage. This article makes me want to take one of your courses! Look forward to others.

  32. Happy to help. Thanx for the note. -bc

  33. […] of pesky facts and reason, so be prepared to think.) And if you still can’t get over it, try this. Share this:Like this:LikeBe the first to like this […]

  34. […] of pesky facts and reason, so be prepared to think.) And if you still can’t get over it, try this. Share this:Like this:LikeBe the first to like this […]

  35. Both Cargill and Frank are very wrong in their positions on same sex marriage. People shoul dnot be legitimizing what God has called an abomination and sin. Plus, the homosexual community’s rights are not being violated in any manner. They still are allowed to get married and have children BUT it must be with an opposite sex mate.

    The homosexual community has decided to reject the normal life when they chose to pursue their alternative sexual preerence. In that decision, they have also rejected the benefits that come with that normal lifestyle— marriage and children.

    The spoiled homosexual are trying to have their cake and eat it too and it is not right to allow them to do that especially when that privilage is NOT extended to the non-homosexual community. Homosexuality is not a race of people, is not a minority but a community made up of people from all walks of life who have made a sexual decision. At no time are they to be given special rights for not only is that unfair for those who obey the historical rules of marriage and God but it is showing favortism to a group of people God has rejected and given over to their lusts (roms. 1)

    We need to be rewarding those who obey not those who reject obedience for theirpreferred alternatives. We need to stop punishing those who obey and punish those who opt for sinful alternatives. {Those who say homosexuality is not a choice are wrong and deceived and theirposition will be ignored}.

    Cargill is quote wrong in his attempts to discuss biblical passages, his unbelief disqualifies him from commenting on what the Bible does or does not say. He does not have the Holy Spirit helping him to the truth and he misleads people away from that truth.

  36. Dr. Tee,
    I have no comment in response really. I just want people to read your critique.
    -bob cargill

  37. Dr. Tee,

    I don’t get it. What privilege is being extended to homosexuals that is not extended to the non-homosexual community? How is same-sex marriage a “special right” and how is it unfair to opposite-sex married people? How are “those that obey” being “punished”? People are getting married. So?

  38. Yes I have got the impression that Bob thinks the Bible is just a history book written by men and not the actual word of God – so how
    does Bob view the Resurrection of Jesus – does he believe it happened ????
    If he does not then he is not a Christian.
    Jesus – the same yesterday today and tomorrow with no shadow of

  39. mr. morgan,

    how does believing the bible is ‘just a history book written by men’ influence gay marriage? does not that same book also endorse slavery in both old and new testaments? are you to argue that because the ‘actual word of god’ endorses slavery, that it is ok?


  40. Bob no one could study the bible and believe God condones any gay
    A slave is just a name for an employee who have to obey their bosses
    to this day.
    The misuse of “slavery” as described in the bible by Christians and Non Christians would not be condoned by God and abuses occur even today in the west and east. Slaves were to be well treated under
    the old and new covenants.

  41. lee,
    what a relief for the slaves, to know that despite the fact they can be owned by another person, they will at least be treated well.

    and let’s make sure we’re clear on this point: you’re saying that slavery is ok – that is, it is ok to own other people – as long as you treat them well?

    and no, a slave is NOT ‘just a name for an employee who have to obey their bosses to this day.’ that’s why they had different names for slaves (עבד) and hired laborers (שכיר) in hebrew.
    lev. 25:6 even spells out the different kinds of laborers: “You may eat what the land yields during its sabbath—you, your male slave (עבד) and female slaves (אמה), your hired laborer (שכיר) and your bound laborers (תושב) who live with you”.
    the masons and hewers in 2 chron 24:12 are not called slaves.
    and then there’s deut. 21:10-14, where foreign women captured in battle can be ‘loved’ so much, that they can be promoted from slave status to wife simply by forcing her into marriage.

    your reasoning above is the standard ‘excuse’ and the same tired, old, misinformed example of the non-factual mental backflips usually employed by those who try to argue on the one hand that the bible is the ‘inerrant, infallible word of god,’ and then on the other hand try to excuse the fact that slavery, the subjugation of women, genocide of entire cities at the command of god, planting different seeds side-by-side, etc. etc. are all endorsed in the bible by the unchanging, ‘same yesterday today and tomorrow with no shadow of turning’ god.



  42. Bob -The thing is you are arguing against the word of God. “you may eat what the land yields…….. says it all – many workers today are starving since their bosses refuse to heed the word.

    The wife belongs to her husband and the husband to the wife – is this
    slavery ? Surely you feel your wife belongs to you and vice versa.

  43. lee,
    you didn’t answer my question: is slavery ok as long as the slave owners treat their masters nicely?
    you didn’t acknowledge that slaves are biblically different from hired laborers.
    you are not acknowledging biblical evidence, not answering simple questions, and changing the subject.
    you are now officially dodging and avoiding the glaring misinformation you stated earlier, and contradiction corner into which you have painted yourself.
    which means i’ll leave you to think about these things for a while.
    cheers, bc

  44. There is no condemnation in the Bible on slave owners who follow
    the commandments in the old or new testaments in the treatment of their slaves. Slaves are different from labourers -so is an executive from the cleaner in Walmarts.
    Not sure where my misinformation is but I know that God is not the author of confusion.

  45. thank you for your ringing endorsement of slavery. i hope your employer doesn’t read my blog…

    btw, you said: “but I know that God is not the author of confusion.” quoting 1 cor. 14:33.

    which is nice, except:
    Gen. 11:7 Come, let us go down, and confuse their language there, so that they will not understand one another’s speech.”
    Gen. 11:8 So the LORD scattered them abroad from there over the face of all the earth, and they left off building the city.
    Gen. 11:9 Therefore it was called Babel, because there the LORD confused the language of all the earth; and from there the LORD scattered them abroad over the face of all the earth.

    lee, before you attempt to pass simple judgments on what the bible ‘says,’ it’s probably not a bad idea to read all of it instead of just picking and choosing the parts you agree with.

  46. This “confusion” was for the rebellion of Nimrod. So there is no confusion – God told us what He did and why He did it. There is no confusion in the Bible about what God thinks of Gay sex or about bad
    slave owners such as Pharaoh or good slave owners such as Philemon

  47. so god did create confusion or did not create confusion?
    and slavery is good, as long as you are a good slave owner?
    and it’s ok to force a conquered woman to marry you? (you forgot to address that one)

  48. Bob -God did not create confusion since he told us exactly what he was doing and why.
    If you mean a woman who was raped then she would be stuck with a child and no means of support – so should the man be allowed to walk
    away – it was called a shotgun wedding in modern parlance – why should the child not have a father and the wife her support.
    Yes slavery is acceptable .
    But the good slave after he dies enters paradise.
    If you are a Christian you are supposed to be a slave to Jesus – crucifying all the lusts of the flesh and dying to oneself in service to others.
    In eternity I would rather be a good slave than a cruel boss.

    However I as a Christian – if I lived in a slave culture- I would free the slave ( like Philemon) and would not conquer a woman (in the fashion described).

    So Christianity has freed the slave , penalised rape and forbidden men
    to leave their wives. Other religions/cultures cannot generally say the same.
    The duties of a husband towards the wife in the new testament could not be bettered.

  49. The closer my heart an d mind have been drawn to God and the further my heart and mind have moved from so called western church culture…. The more intimately i have run to the veil to be with God and torn free from my heart the cultural, ideological and political idols placed there by a flawed broken human church, the more my worldview has collapsed in on itself.

    Is homosexuality a sin? Strictly speaking yes, but so is lying, coveting (hello America), drunkeness, fornication, and idolatry (wzhich just in case anyone is wondering WE ALL HAVE IDOLS IN OUR HEARTS)

    Is there a heirarchy to sin? No. Homosexuality is not classified as level 8 sin where lying is just a level 3 sin… Actually God HATES a lying tongue.

    Two years ago when i was a scripture junky obsessed with orthodoxy, precision and critiqued by pastors sermons like a wine taster swishing it about in my mouth, i would have railed on gay marriage.

    As i have forsaken head knowledge of scripture and sought after God knowledge through experiencing HIM…. All these old human predjudices have fallen to the wayside.

    Should Gay people who love each other and want to spend their life together be able to enjoy the rights of inheritance, benefits of employment and enter into a binding marital contract issued by State government? Yeah, I now find my previous objections to not be built upon a deep rooted principle emanating from my love for God, i find them to have been ugly, petty human predjudices built upon idealistic Christian ideals stitched into me through culture, both church and worldly…..

    Those who would hide behind scripture to justify their prejudice and hate, dishonor the PERSON of the triune GOD, dishonor the heart and ministry of Jesus and ultimately need to put down your book, find a quiet place, close your eyes, cry out, enter in to the veil and seek HIM.

    Thank Mr. Cargill for taking a brave stance against churchianity.

  50. Lee,

    Do what you must to reconcile your fundamentalist theological beliefs.
    If that means stating, “Yes slavery is acceptable,” as you did above, then that’s up to you…


  51. Jacoby – I agree we have all sinned and come short of the glory of God (me especially) but this does not make any sin right .
    “Man cannot live by bread alone but by EVERY word which comes from the mouth of the Lord.”

    In other words we get to know God – his kindness and mercy but also his severity by studying the Bible – not by engendering vague emotions
    of how we want God to be. Jesus can free us from all sin but only if we are willing to believe His Word.

    Jesus fought off the devil by scripture so how much more must we do the same.

    These so called “human prejudices” are from God who lists the sins He
    is prejudice against.

    So I would get back to studying scripture and praying to God.

  52. and don’t forget getting back to arguing that slavery is an acceptable institution.

    Cheers, bc

  53. We are talking about a state issuing a certificate of marriage that provides gays with equal rights to protection under our states and nations laws…. I.e. inheritance, filing taxes, medical benefits, etc… This state issued marital contract doesnt absolve the homosexual anymore than anyone else in the eyes of God…. It does not provide legitimacy to their lifestyle in gods eyes. Just equal rights to protection under our nations laws.

    That is my primary point.

    But i would alsp put to you that only naive or foolish Christians believe they are living lives outside of sin…. Either jesus work was final, perfect and complete or it was not and we are all in deep shit… But you cant say yes jesus work was perfect final and complete ‘except for’ those people because they are choosing to live in sin….. I live in sin everyday… I covet after techno gadgets, a primary driving force in my life is my career which is to attain the loftiest of all idols, money, i have any of a host of sinful idolatry in my heart, sinful thoughts, selfishness, etc…. But i must be dead serious in my self inventory and realize i am utterly hopeless if not for Christ…. Luckily Christ work covers all sins.
    If we are really honest, really listen to our hearts, our anger and vitriol that rise up at the thought of gay marriage it has nothing to do with Jesus. I know we like to believe it is. I know i did.

    But for all Jesus railed against…. Selfishness, religious elitism, lack of sympathy, love of money, unforgiveness, putting money before God, judging others … He never spoke to homosexuality…. And if it bothered God so much why wasnt it a commandment? Its just my experience that as mr. Cargill has done with the issue of slavery, you can cherry pick whatever verses you want to support virtually any arguement…. But you have to move past that and consider the character and person of Jesus….My experience is that this arguement is being fought for human ideology born out of conservative and christian cultural predjudices and not for the sake of God’s honor….. Thats my experience having been on both sides of it.

    But ultimately we arent talking about legalizing something that therefore makes it acceptable in gods eyes… We are talking about equal human rights… 40 years ago it was illegal and punishable by state prison for a white person and black person to get married in 12 states…. God will have the final word and has promised us all a surprise ending… But ultimately this is about a state issued marriage license that provides equal protection under our state’s and nation’s law….. We do need to get honest about our motives and get over it.

  54. […] “A Note to Christians Opposing Gay Marriage: Get Over It“ […]

  55. […] through to the end, and you’ll see acted out what I’ve been arguing here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here for years […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: