Bishop posts YouTube video in favour of gay marriage - Telegraph

"Scripture, the Church of England's doctrinal foundation, makes clear that homosexual desire and practice are sinful. The Government should not change the law and the bishop should teach what the Bible says or resign."  -- Duncan Boyd, Keep Marriage Special.

By Charlie J. Ray

The arguments for gay marriage are almost always based on an existential and subjective experience of individual persons rather than on the deontological and apodeictic moral law of God.  This is easily demonstrated here:

Rev Alan Wilson, the Bishop of Buckingham, suggested accepting same-sex unions could “potentially enrich” the institution of marriage. His comments further inflamed the debate between church leaders after he called on them to “get our head around blessing gay people’s relationships.”  Dr Wilson, who has been an outspoken advocate of the Prime Minister’s plans to legalise gay marriage, broadcast his message in a three-minute clip on YouTube.  The father-of-five recorded the video for the Out4Marriage campaign. He said: “It all comes down to how we see gay people and how we see God."  [See:  Bishop Posts YouTube Video].

The late Gordon H. Clark convincingly argued that in the Holy Scriptures the term "heart" is most often the equivalent of the "mind".  In other words, when Jesus said that particular sins like murder, hate, and adultery proceed out of the "heart" He was referring to premeditation and that forethought is motivated by the sinful nature:

"For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders, 22 "thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, lewdness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, foolishness. 23 "All these evil things come from within and defile a man." (Mark 7:21-23 NKJ)  [Cf. Jeremiah 17:9].

Notice here that the text says, ". . . Out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts . . ."  If the "heart" only refers to emotions, the heart could not have "evil thoughts".  The 1662 Book of Common Prayer upholds this view in the confession of sin in the Morning and Evening Prayer services:

ALMIGHTY and most merciful Father; We have erred, and strayed from thy ways like lost sheep. We have followed too much the devices and desires of our own hearts. We have offended against thy holy laws. . . .  [Morning Prayer].

Astonishingly, at least one advocate for biblical morality in the UK and the Church of England understands the Scriptures and the Anglican formularies when he remarked:

However, Duncan Boyd, chairman of the rival pressure group Keep Marriage Special, attacked the Bishop's remarks as "a disgraceful and disingenuous distortion” of the Bible.  Mr Boyd said:

"Scripture, the Church of England's doctrinal foundation, makes clear that homosexual desire and practice are sinful.

"The Government should not change the law and the bishop should teach what the Bible says or resign."

A Church of England spokesman said the Church was committed to marriage being a state that existed between a man and woman.  He said:

"Opening marriage to same-sex couples would add nothing to the rights and responsibilities that already exist within a civil partnership.

"But it would require multiple changes to law – with the definition of marriage having to change for everyone."

Let's be clear about this.  The issue here is not any alleged scientific proof that homosexuals and gender confused individuals are predetermined biological or psychological machines who cannot help themselves.  Human beings are made in the divine image and likeness, which includes sentience and the ability to reason morally.  The law of God is written into the heart or mind and no one is without excuse when they violate the revelation of God in creation.  (Romans 1:18-32).  Even if we examine the philosophy of science the late Bertrand Russell pointed out the error of induction in the scientific method:

 All inductive arguments in the last resort reduce themselves to the following form: "If this is true, that is true: now that is true, therefore this is true." This argument is, of course, formally fallacious. Suppose I were to say: "If bread is a stone and stones are nourishing, then this bread will nourish me; now this bread does nourish me; therefore it is a stone, and stones are nourishing." If I were to advance such an argument, I should certainly be thought foolish, yet it would not be fundamentally different from the argument upon which all scientific laws are based.  [See:  The Biblical View of Science].

Another philosopher, Paul Feyerabend said:

On closer analysis we even find that science knows no ‘bare facts’ at all but that the ‘facts’ that enter our knowledge are already viewed in a certain way and are, therefore, essentially ideational. This being the case, the history of science will be as complex, chaotic, full of mistakes, and entertaining as the ideas it contains, and these ideas in turn will be as complex, chaotic, full of mistakes, and entertaining as are the minds of those that invented them.  [Ibidem].

Basically, as a man thinks in his heart, so is he.  (Cf.  Proverbs 23:7).  The culture wars are essentially a propaganda war.  It would appear that so-called "Evangelical" Christians like Carl Trueman who agree with the platform of the political left would tacitly endorse that platform by his vote.  Biblical morality and the Gospel is at stake here.  [See:  Trueman Endorses the Left and Not Evangelical].  Although I am not a theonomist or a reconstructionist, it does not follow that theologically and morally conservative Christians should cower before the likes of Trueman who is a deceiver who indirectly supports gay marriage and abortion by pretending to be above the fray.  His false triumphalism and "tolerance" can be called nothing else but an approval of those who promote evil in world at large and in nations who owe their democratic foundations to a Christian heritage.  The end result of supporting socialism is that materialistic atheism and moral relativism dominates nations.

It is the duty of Christians to speak the truth and to challenge the false prophets who hide behind the two kingdoms theology to excuse their moral relativism.  Although the two kingdoms theology is correct to say that we are not to confuse civil religion with Christian theology, it is a non sequitur to say that it is OK for Christians to vote for and support a political left that is openly hostile not only to Christianity in general but to biblical theology and morality in particular.

 To read the original article click here:  Bishop posts YouTube video in favour of gay marriage - Telegraph