Fol­low­ing Je­sus’ ex­am­ple

The Saturday Paper - - Letters & Editorial -

Thank you for pub­lish­ing my let­ter, which ex­plained that the bib­li­cal and hence Christian view of mar­riage, in­fers that it is al­ways be­tween a man and a woman. So while I sup­port the “No” case on bib­li­cal grounds, my read­ing of “Yes min­is­tered” by Mike Sec­combe (Septem­ber 9-15) makes it clear that some oth­ers ad­vo­cat­ing the “No” case are ma­nip­u­lat­ing sto­ries of “per­se­cu­tion” to scare oth­ers to sup­port their ar­gu­ment. By do­ing so, they are not be­ing loyal to ei­ther the Bi­ble’s or Christ’s teach­ing. In my view, bib­li­cal teach­ing and com­mands are ad­dressed to the be­liever, and the be­liever is told to re­spect au­thor­ity and the laws set down by the civil govern­ment, un­less they con­tra­vene the laws of God. Our mar­riage laws are for sec­u­lar union, not Christian. If the public votes to change the present def­i­ni­tion, Chris­tians can still be legally mar­ried in the eyes of the state with­out con­tra­ven­ing God’s law. They can then, if they choose, be mar­ried in the pres­ence and with the bless­ing of the God they wor­ship in the com­pany of fel­low be­liev­ers. In the de­bate go­ing on at present, we as Chris­tians must re­mem­ber our hearts are be­ing changed by our love of Je­sus; He has given us a de­sire and com­mand to love and re­spect all peo­ple, in­clud­ing those whose views and con­vic­tions dif­fer from ours, and we should at all times seek to live like that.

– Antony Ault, Rose Bay, Tas

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Australia

© PressReader. All rights reserved.