Comments for True North

Comment on Religious resources at the Mack Library by Andres Ramos

Andres Ramos — Wed, 19 Jan 2011 19:21:00 +0000

THANK YOU!!!!! I am a new student at NOBTS. I was browsing the internet on turabian template when I found you at a BJU website. Since x number of days, I have been trying to start a paper, but not a clue on how to….. Paper development is VERY intimidating. I will definitely use your wizard. Again, thank you so much. God Bless you!

Comment on If same-sex marriage is a right, so is polygamy by Duncan

Duncan — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 14:06:38 +0000

CG: I think your distinction about the legal issues is correct, but I don’t see how it relates to my point. My point is that same-sex marriage was recognized in Canada because it was viewed as a “right” under the Charter. If the polygamists argue that their practice is a religious “right” it very well may be decriminalized on the basis of the Charter (the implications of decriminalization could be dramatic, but I can’t say exactly what those would be). Yes, the legal nuance is different, but both are defended as rights of Canadians under the Charter for various reasons.

Andrew: Your first two paragraphs are exactly my point. Operating on raw logic, polygamy seems logically as acceptable as any other form of union that people consent to enter.

The reason I believe same-sex marriage as well as polygamy is sin before God is because the Bible offers a clear definition of an acceptable marriage (I mentioned this in my original post, but it’s worth mentioning again).

Ephesians 5:31 “Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.” (ESV)

The words for the participants in marriage here are pretty clear. This is a marriage union between one man (ανθρωπος) and one woman (γυνη).

Any sexual relationship that does not fit that definition is condemned in Scripture.

1 Corinthians 6:12-20
[12] “All things are lawful for me,” but not all things are helpful. “All things are lawful for me,” but I will not be enslaved by anything. [13] “Food is meant for the stomach and the stomach for food”–and God will destroy both one and the other. The body is not meant for sexual immorality, but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body. [14] And God raised the Lord and will also raise us up by his power. [15] Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ? Shall I then take the members of Christ and make them members of a prostitute? Never! [16] Or do you not know that he who is joined to a prostitute becomes one body with her? For, as it is written, “The two will become one flesh.” [17] But he who is joined to the Lord becomes one spirit with him. [18] Flee from sexual immorality. Every other sin a person commits is outside the body, but the sexually immoral person sins against his own body. [19] Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, whom you have from God? You are not your own, [20] for you were bought with a price. So glorify God in your body. (ESV)

This isn’t all the Bible has to say about this, but it’s enough for now.

Comment on If same-sex marriage is a right, so is polygamy by Andrew S.

Andrew S. — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 22:22:26 +0000

Not sure of how things specifically work over in Canada, but is it something like this: people over the age of 18 have the right to join in legal contracts with each other if they consent? In that case, for the specific legal bundle of rights that are marriage, it makes no difference if it’s one man and one woman or two men or two women.

But just the same, it also makes no difference if it’s a man and multiple women or a woman and multiple men or multiple women and multiple men if all of them are old enough to enjoin in legal contracts and all of them consent…but in particular, it shouldn’t be a religious argument at all. It shouldn’t be an argument from respecting religious freedom.

The problem is that people…generally don’t want to consent to polygamy but for religion. People just don’t “want” to do it without some kind of indoctrination or mental programming (whether benign or malicious).

Comment on If same-sex marriage is a right, so is polygamy by CG

CG — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 17:59:53 +0000

There is a key, hugely important difference here between the issue of polygamy and that of same-sex unions. In the case of same-sex marriage, the issue was whether the state should officially recognize such unions, whereas in British Columbia, the issue is whether polygamous “spiritual marriages” should be criminalized, not whether the state should recognize them. Big difference between not giving someone a license, or throwing them in jail when they “pretend” to be married anyways.

The analogy would be crimalizing two people of the same sex purporting to be partners. This sounds outrageous, but the way the critics have managed to spin this story makes it seem like official recognition of polygamy is what’s at issue, not it’s criminalization.

Comment on Inerrancy: a continental divide by Duncan

Duncan — Wed, 14 May 2008 12:21:14 +0000

the format of your blog looks suspiciously like someone else’s that I know…

Like over here? Yes — imitation, the sincerest form of flattery. Really, I adopted this theme because it was one of the few I’ve found that I actually like (notice that on my other blog I still use the WP default theme). Anyway…