Your View: Guest Column - What’s your answer to the question?

Jan. 17, 2014 @ 09:09 PM


If you haven’t seen it, you may want to tune in to see how the former Australian Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, answered a very direct question concerning his promise to push for the legalization of gay marriage if re-elected. With said promise in mind, a local pastor asked Rudd the following question, “If you believe yourself a Christian, why don’t you believe the words of Jesus in the Bible (concerning marriage)…”   (,
Now, say what you want about the issue, but Rudd’s supposed answer was loaded with deflection and irrelevance. Taking a page straight from the American Handbook of Politics, he displayed his expertise in avoiding the entrapment of an actual answer. In fact, he used a typical diversionary tactic known as a “Red Herring.”  Hence, he raised the slavery issue, noting that “If you are going to have that view, then the Bible also says that slavery is a natural condition,” and then moved into a generic monologue about “love.” The problem, of course, was that he gave no real consideration to the pastor’s question at all. Rewind this scene to the original question! The pastor asked about neither the biblical view of slavery nor love, but rather, how he calls himself a Christian while standing opposite Jesus on this moral issue.
While Jesus said nothing about homosexuality or gay “marriage” as such, he did say something about sexuality and marriage, affirming, in fact, the very realities denied by the modern gay movement. Addressing marriage, Jesus said it this way, “Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female” (Matthew 19:4).
Yep, that’s what Jesus said to his viperous adversaries, “At the beginning.” His reference to marriage here refers to two realities with the first being divine creation itself and the second being the original and intended purpose for the sexes as complimentary partners in that creation. In this one passage, Jesus affirmed both creation and the divinely intended marital paradigm called into question in the world today. Simply put, marriage was created specifically for a man and woman and anything that threatens said paradigm strikes at the heart of God’s intended design and purpose for the sexes.
I’d like to pose this same question to those who claim to “follow” Christ in this country and, like the former prime minister above, still support a lifestyle and marital paradigm opposite the one Jesus stated as a matter of the created and historical record.
Don’t get me wrong. I understand why people don’t address the question concerning Jesus’ view of marriage head on when theirs stand in obvious contradiction to his. Who in their right mind wants to take a position opposite Jesus? What thinking man would dare place himself higher on the moral totem pole than the one who gave us the Sermon on the Mount? The answer, “No one!”  Yet, the acceptance of the new morality and the new marital paradigm actually declares Jesus’ moral compass obsolete simply because it is absolute.
This new morality denounces the divinely intended and complimentary distinction between male and female as well as the very model for marriage affirmed by Jesus. It is as the late Francis Schaeffer noted, a fight against “the order of God’s creation” (The God Who Is There, 37).
So, If you claim to be a “follower” of Christ, how do you justify supporting either the homosexual lifestyle or gay marriage, both opposite that which Jesus affirmed?
Just answer the question.

Tony Watts is a preacher and author of “Love Still Wins: Loving God, Eternal Hell, And An Answer to Rob Bell.” He lives in Thomasville.


The use of electronic cigarettes, or e-cigarettes, is becoming more popular — and controversial. Should the advertising and ingredients of them be regulated by government, as are cigarettes containing tobacco? In 30 words or less (no name, address required), email your thoughts to or go to under Opinion and post a comment.