The issue of gay “marriage” is sweeping the Western world. Recently the Republic of Ireland voted overwhelmingly in favor of what was called “marriage equality”—which is being interpreted as gay “marriage.” This made news headlines around the world. Now, in Australia, a Member of Parliament has introduced a bill to change the marriage act to say two people instead of man and woman.1
In the USA, the gay “marriage” issue is sweeping the nation—and there’s no doubt that the current President of the United States, Barack Obama, has been a driving force behind this movement not only in the USA but also in other parts of the world. As one news report stated, “Ireland was not ready for the massive influx of gay activist funding from America. Sadly, from President Obama down, America has been an aggressive force for normalizing homosexuality, and without American funding and vision, it is doubtful that Ireland would have voted so strongly for such radical change.”2
But here is a question that needs to be asked: Why only two? Why legislate to define marriage as two men, or two women—as long as there are two? Where did the idea of two come from? In fact, where did the idea of marriage come from in the first place?
There are many articles that have been published using animals to justify homosexual behavior in humans. After all, if humans are just evolved animals, then why shouldn’t one look to animal behavior to justify what the human species does. For instance, an associate professor of anthropology at Duke University is the coauthor of an article from 2014 that states,
But in the debate over whether gay marriage, or any other non-reproductive sexual relationship, is “natural,” no other animal holds more importance.
Homosexuality in bonobos is not cultural . . . and wild-born bonobos in captivity—over the past two decades has demonstrated that bonobo sexuality is just part of who they are.3
Another article appeared on LiveScience.com in 2011 with the heading “Female Lemurs Benefit from Multiple Mates, Study Suggests.” The article stated the following:
While it may not be as socially acceptable among humans, a female choosing to take multiple mates is a common phenomenon in the animal kingdom. But why the practice of polyandry (a female having more than one male mate at a time) is so prominent is still a mystery in most species.4
So why not use this behavior to defend a woman having multiple men in a relationship? It’s called polyandry.
In 2013, LiveScience.com published an article about polyamory with the headline, “New Sexual Revolution: Polyamory May Be Good for You.” The article states,
These consensually nonmonogamous relationships, as they’re called, don’t conform to the cultural norm of a handholding couple in love for life. They come in a dizzying array of forms, from occasional “swinging” and open relationships to long-term commitments among multiple people. Now, social scientists embarking on brand-new research into these types of relationships are finding that they may challenge the ways we think of jealousy, commitment and love. They may even change monogamy for the better . . . people are increasingly thinking of relationships as build-it-yourself rather than prepackaged.5
And in 2012 LiveScience.com published an article titled, “Are Humans Meant to Be Monogamous?” The article states,
News of politicians’ extramarital affairs seems to be in no short supply lately, but if humans were cut from exactly the same cloth as other mammals, a faithful spouse would be an unusual phenomenon.
Only 3 percent to 5 percent of the roughly 5,000 species of mammals (including humans) are known to form lifelong, monogamous bonds, with the loyal superstars including beavers, wolves and some bats . . . Evolutionary psychologists have suggested that men are more likely to have extramarital sex, partially due to the male urge to “spread genes” by broadcasting sperm. Both males and females, these scientists say, try to up their evolutionary progress by seeking out high-quality mates, albeit in different ways. The committed partnership between a man and a woman evolved, some say, for the well-being of children. “The human species has evolved to make commitments between males and females in regards to raising their offspring, so this is a bond,” said Jane Lancaster, an evolutionary anthropologist at the University of New Mexico. “However that bond can fit into all kinds of marriage patterns—polygyny, single parenthood, monogamy.”6
So now a question arises. Why has the Western world, until recently, been predominantly unanimous in supporting monogamous marriage between a male and female? According to the above article, one can’t justify that on the basis of evolution and animal behavior.
An article in Scientific American stated, “Are we humans (Homo sapiens) set up to be set up for life? Well, it’s complicated. One study found evidence that women pass along more genetic information to their offspring, suggesting that for much of our evolutionary history, men were fathering children with more than one woman.”7 So in this interpretation of supposed evolutionary history, monogamy would not be the best option. On PBS.org, a 2010 article stated the following:
In the animal kingdom, when it comes to mating, promiscuity is the rule rather than the exception. About 90 percent of mammals have multiple mates, and cheating on social mates is observed in almost all species. In fact, only 3 to 10 percent of mammals are even socially monogamous.8
There are, of course, many other articles discussing these topics, but the point is, according to evolutionists, monogamy is not the rule in the animal kingdom. And if humans are just animals in this evolutionary system, then why was monogamy in our Western world accepted as the norm until recently?
Actually, the very idea of marriage between a male and female comes from the Bible. It’s God who invented marriage in Genesis when He made the first man and woman, male and female (Genesis 1:27) and told them to “be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it, and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth” (Genesis 1:28).
In Genesis 2, we read the details of the creation of man and woman. God made the first man (Adam) from dust and put him to sleep to make the first woman (Eve) from his side. We then read about the first marriage that God, not man, invented: “Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they [two] shall become one flesh” (Genesis 2:24).
In Matthew 19, Jesus, as the God-man, in responding to a question about marriage, stated this:
“Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning ‘made them male and female,’ and said, “For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’?” (Matthew 19:4–6; emphasis added)
The very idea of monogamous marriage, of marriage being between a man and a woman, comes from the Bible—which is the absolute authority of the Word of God. Until recently, the Western world had primarily adopted this worldview of marriage based upon the Judeo-Christian basis.
However, the more generations that have been led to believe the Bible is just a story book—a book of fables—and that its account of origins is not true, the more we should expect to see people redefining marriage or abandoning it altogether. And since the 20s generation has been told by church leaders that they can take man’s ideas of evolution and reinterpret Genesis, why should they not now be consistent and take man’s ideas of marriage and reinterpret the doctrine of marriage in Scripture? The more the coming generations in our churches have been told Genesis is not literal history, the more the foundation for all doctrines (including marriage) has been undermined. Why should they not then abandon those doctrines if the foundation for them is shown not to be true history?
But one of the many inconsistencies I see happening in our Western world is this. Why is it that we currently see this push for gay “marriage”—involving two men or two women? If there is no absolute authority, and if man determines what is right and wrong, ultimately why should there be any limits? Why not three people? Why not four? Why not adults and children? Why not anything anyone desires? And I do not believe it is being alarmist to say that this is what, over time, will happen. Once the door has been pushed open a bit to say man can define marriage, then ultimately that door will be pushed open wider and wider. And if humans are just products of evolution, then why not polyamory, polyandry, polygamy, or, whatever? It’s a reminder of what we read in the book of judges:
In those days there was no king in Israel; everyone did what was right in his own eyes. (Judges 21:25)
Now one of the greatest tools Satan uses is that of deception. We read of him:
So the great dragon was cast out, that serpent of old, called the Devil and Satan, who deceives the whole world; he was cast to the earth, and his angels were cast out with him. (Revelation 12:9)
One of the major ways he deceives is by counterfeiting what God has done—as is being done with marriage. He takes that which is true and then imitates it in such a way that many people are deceived (2 Corinthians 11:14). He wants to be like God (the temptation he gave to Adam and Eve), and so a common ploy is to counterfeit what God has done. The only way you won’t be led astray by this is to judge what is happening against Scripture. “Test all things; hold fast what is good” (1 Thessalonians 5:20–21). And Timothy warns us what will happen in this world: “But evil men and impostors will grow worse and worse, deceiving and being deceived” (2 Timothy 3:13).
The only way we are going to be able to recognize truth from error is to check everything against the absolute authority of Scripture. And therein lies a major issue in the church today. Most of our Christian leaders and most people in our churches have really undermined the authority of God’s Word beginning in Genesis. Many think what they believe about Genesis is a side issue and that it doesn’t matter if one reinterprets it to fit in millions of years and other evolutionary ideas. But once one unlocks that door to reinterpret God’s Word using man’s fallible ideas, subsequent generations open the door further and further. Now we are seeing the 20s generation even in the church pushing that door open wide and rejecting the doctrines of Christianity based on the Bible. Nowhere is this more obvious than with the doctrine of marriage. Even the latest research American’s Research Group conducted for us shows that 50% of the 20s generation in the American church either agrees with gay “marriage,” or they say they don’t know.
God’s people need to return to God’s Word and raise up generations who stand uncompromisingly on the authority of the Scriptures.
The point we need to grasp is that gay “marriage” is not the problem! It’s just one of many issues that consequentially comes out of a different worldview that has a man-devised foundation. We need to return to the foundation of the never changing Word of God instead of the ever changing word of man.
Forever, O Lord, Your word is settled in heaven (Psalms 119:89).
Answers in Genesis is an apologetics ministry, dedicated to helping Christians defend their faith and proclaim the good news of Jesus Christ.