Cal Thomas Column: Barack Obama's Other Gospel
It is one thing to talk about "fairness" when it comes to allowing gays and lesbians to marry; it is quite another to claim biblical authority for such relationships.
President Obama cited the "Golden Rule" about treating others as you would like to be treated, but in doing so he ignored the totality of Scripture and the Lord Himself, who alone gets to set the rules for human behavior.
The president says he is a "practicing Christian." It is difficult to be one while simultaneously holding a low view of the Bible, which his position on several social issues might suggest.
The same Book that informs him about the Person he told Pastor Rick Warren in 2008 is his "Savior," also speaks to the beginning of human life (he has done nothing to limit abortions), fornication between adults of the opposite sex (no word yet on his position on that subject), marriage, and adultery, which the Seventh Commandment and New Testament passages condemn.
I recently wrote that it is becoming increasingly difficult for people who believe the Bible is God's Word to impose their beliefs on those who disagree with them. But it is something altogether different for those who disagree to claim the Bible doesn't say what it says, in effect calling God a liar. President Obama apparently hopes there are sufficient numbers of biblical illiterates -- and he could be right about this -- that either won't notice his sleight of hand, or don't care.
Thousands of years of human history have sustained marriage between one man and one woman. Even human biology testifies to a natural order.
Genesis 2:24 says "...a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife. The two shall become one flesh." Jesus, Whom President Obama likes to selectively quote when it suits his earthly political agenda, honored traditional marriage at a wedding feast in Cana (John 2:1). He also reaffirmed the Genesis passage in Matthew 19:5.
Paul, the Apostle of Jesus, wrote in Ephesians 5 about husbands and wives, male and female.
Scripture teaches that the marriage union between a man and woman is an illustration of how Christ and the church are one (Ephesians 5:32). It also teaches that since God made us, conceived of marriage and created sex to be enjoyed within the marital bond, He gets to set the rules and establish the boundaries for human behavior, not because He is a curmudgeon who wants to deny us pleasure, but because He knows what is best for us.
Liberal theologians have tried to modify, or even change, what is contained in the Bible and there are those in our time who are following their example with the issue of same-sex marriage. People are free to accept or reject what Scripture says. What they are not free to do is to claim it says something it does not. In modern times that's called "spin." In an earlier time it was called heresy.
The Apostle John warns in Revelation 22:18-19 about the punishment awaiting anyone who adds to, or subtracts from Scripture. Deuteronomy 4:1-2 has a similar warning. The consequences aren't pretty. There are also warnings not to preach "another Gospel" (Galatians 1:8, 2 Corinthians 11:4, among others).
As he seeks to justify his position on same-sex marriage and other issues that are either questionable at best, or deny Scripture at worst, President Obama might be said to be preaching another gospel. This could possibly lead to a fissure in his solid support among African Americans, costing the president votes in November. It will also likely galvanize the culture warriors. Minorities mostly vote for Democrats, but they don't like their faith denied. That could cause some of them to stay home on Election Day, or even vote for Mitt Romney.
The negative reaction the president received from some of the African-American ministers he called last week after declaring his support for same-sex marriage should serve as a prophetic warning.
- Cal Thomas's blog
- Login to post comments


➚ O'Reilly last night
Saw a couple of black preachers on O'Reilly last night. Both swearing their undying love for their messiah, Barack Obama (regardless of homosexual marriage issues).
O'reilly didn't have the guts to ask either of them if they would stand before a same-sex couple and ask God Almighty to bless the marriage being performed.
My people perish for lack of wisdom.
other gospel??
Obeyme's other Gospel is Islam!
-Jon
delete
*
-Jon
The Golden Rule works both ways.
"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." Perhaps the Gays should practice this Rule as well? They sure do try to avoid it when it affect them negatively, don't they?
Look at it this way: if the Gays want to be included in a given group, like married people, and they demand that the law allows them to join, then that same group, married people, can insist that the Gays DON'T get to be included and they can also demand that the law PROHIBITS gays from joining. That's the Golden Rule in action.
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court
Or Anwar al-Awlaki.
You couldn't morally vote for Mitt Romney either on this issue
It is difficult for me to believe that Obama's support for same-sex marriage would drive a significant number of people away from Obama. The black power base is already working to make sure that doesn't happen. Different hip-hop artists have already come out in support of Obama in regards to this: not to say outright that they support same-sex marriage, but that it is a "personal issue" that "doesn't affect them".
Ultimately, I don't think that there will be a principled stand against gay-marriage from the African-American community. I imagine that you would somehow have to tie it into race to get any real resistance, like that white people are trying to force same-sex marriages on the black community in order to emasculate the black man, etc...
But even if there was a principled stand against gay-marriage, Romney couldn't really be your answer either. He is for same-sex families, so his stance is illogical: He is against same-sex marriage, but for same-sex families. If marriage is for the creation of the family, and you support same-sex families, then you should logically be for same-sex marriage. Romney might delay same-sex marriage, but he would be actually promoting it.