“God Gives Me Unconditional Love….”
On August 6, 2015, at the Republican Presidential Debate, many fine comments were made by various candidates. However, Christians should take strong exception to those on one topic. John Kasich may be doing an admirable job in governing the state of Ohio, but he was offensive in the debate. Asked how he would explain his opposition to homosexual marriage to a hypothetical lesbian daughter, he answered: "Look, I'm an old-fashioned person here and I happen to believe in traditional marriage. But I've also said that the court has ruled … and I said we'll accept it.”
This is utter nonsense! Are we supposed to accept all the blunders that the Supreme Court has made? How ironic that questions were asked about abortion of certain candidates during the debate. Roe v. Wade is something that Christians have been fighting since the day it was legislated by the Supreme Court on January 22, 1973. Were we supposed to be quiet and accept that, too? When asked about the subject during the debate, candidate Marco Rubio said:
What I have advocated is that we pass law in this country that says all human life at every stage of its development is worthy of protection. In fact, I think that law already exists. It’s called the Constitution of the United States. And let me go further. I believe that every single human being is entitled to the protection of our laws whether they can vote or not, whether they can speak or not, whether they can hire a lawyer or not, whether they have a birth certificate or not. And I think future generations will look back at this history of our country and call us barbarians for murdering millions of babies. We never gave them a chance to live.
Rubio is entirely correct in his assessment of things, but should he have said so since the Supreme Court already ruled on that subject? And what about the rulings prior to the Civil War that upheld slavery? Was the Dred Scott decision correct just because the court said it was? Christians do not accept the ruling of the current Court because the Court was grievously wrong. They had no more precedent for homosexual marriage than they did for Roe v. Wade. Neither was based on law; they were, in fact, made into law by the Court.
One can only wonder why seven justices voted in favor of abortion in 1973 unless they were responding to lobbiests; most people had not even thought that much about the subject and were quite surprised when laws of protection for the unborn were struck down in 46 states. This last decision regarding the folly of homosexual marriage was the result of the popular culture influencing the Court. The Supreme Court may have spoken, but they are wrong, and that is not the end of the issue. Kasich’s comments were as disappointing as they were thoughtless.
Thinking Versus Endorsement
Presidential candidate Kasich was just getting started, unfortunately. Next, he played to the liberal news media by trying to sound “enlightened.” Many in the media thought that the following words were the quote of the night (guess they didn’t agree with Rubio). Kasich continued:
And guess what? I just went to a wedding of a friend of mine who happens to be gay. Because somebody doesn't think the way I do doesn't mean that I can't care about them or I can't love them.
When he says that, just because others do not think the way he does doesn’t mean we cannot love them or care about them, he is correct. Too often people are guilty of writing off others as having no value unless they believe the same things. By the way, isn’t that what liberals frequently try to do? Only they are not as kind as Kasich was; they resort to ridicule (remember the “bitter clingers” remark?) and try to destroy their opposition by manufacturing such ludicrous ideas as the totally phony “War on Women.”
Although Kasich’s view of tolerance is correct, his application of it is not. Governor, if you believe in traditional marriage, why are you attending a homosexual “wedding”? Do you believe in traditional marriage because God designed it and defined it or because you’re just an old fuddy-duddy? Is your position based on the inspired Word of God or just the way you were raised? If it is the latter, you really don’t have a valid objection to it, which may explain why you attended one. And how does that work out? You may now kiss the person who is the same gender as yourself? Yuck!
Anyone who opposes homosexual “marriage” on the grounds that God created a man and a woman and united them as husband and wife could not possibly attend such an event—even if one of the participants was his own offspring. A vast difference exists between loving and caring about someone and endorsing the sin being committed. Can anyone imagine Jesus attending such a wedding? Would He be present at a wedding if one was unscripturally divorced and not authorized to enter into another union? Can one picture John the Baptizer attending the wedding of Herod and Herodias? Would he say, “It is not lawful for you to have her,” and then offer them “best wishes on their new life together”?
We need someone to lead this country who is willing to stand for moral truth. If Donald Trump can be outspoken on social issues, why can’t those who claim to be Christians do the same thing on moral issues? Rubio did on abortion, but Kasich folded on homosexual “marriage.” Who do Christians now respect more?
Unconditional Love
The final quote from Kasich reveals a lack of understanding of the nature of both God and New Testament theology.
If one of my daughters happened to be that, of course I would love them and accept them because you know what? That's what we're taught when we have strong faith.... Megyn. I'm going to love my daughters. I’m going to love them no matter what they do. You know what? God gives me unconditional love. I’m going to give to it my family and my friends and the people around me.
Once again, loving someone does not mean agreement or endorsement. What does the Bible teach about God’s love for us? Romans 5:8 expresses it well: “But God demonstrates His love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.” Did God love us unconditionally? Yes—in one sense. He extends His love, His grace, and His mercy toward us without requiring anything of us first. In other words, He does not say, “If you will perform certain righteous acts, I will offer you My love.” The offer of His love has already been given. “For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life” (John 3:16).
Man, therefore, does not need to do anything to have the opportunity for salvation. It is already extended to us. God has shown us His love—male or female, to all races, to every nation, to every person regardless of what his educational status or social prominence, to prince or peasant. No one is excluded from God’s offer of salvation.
But our response to His unconditional love is significant. Kasich seems to indicate that we can accept or reject God’s love, and the outcome will be the same—which is not true. If it were, everyone would end up in heaven and the population of hell would be zero. Or consider it from another angle: Was God’s love unconditional when He destroyed the whole world with a Flood? Sure. He loved the antediluvian world enough to send Noah to preach to them that they ought to repent and turn to righteousness (2 Peter 2:5). But when they spurned His love, He destroyed them.
When God discovered that there were not even ten righteous souls in Sodom and Gomorrah, did His unconditional love disappear? No, but the warnings fell on deaf ears, and He rained down fire and brimstone from heaven and made them an example that all who reject His love shall suffer the vengeance of eternal fire (Jude 7). God did not say to those dwelling in Sodom and Gomorrah and Admah and Zeboiim, “Look, I’m an old-fashioned Deity Who believes in traditional marriage, but I’ll go to their homosexual weddings anyway just to show how open-minded I am.” Ungodliness is always punished.
God had shown His love for Israel by delivering them from Egypt and then giving them a land flowing with milk and honey. But God sent nations to take His people captive hundreds of years later. Did He lose His unconditional love for them? No, He could no longer tolerate their sinfulness. What most people in this age have lost sight of is that God is holy and also just. (Has anyone ever spoken about the unconditional holiness that God possesses?) Consider 2 Chronicles 36:15-16:
And the Lord God of their fathers sent warnings to them by His messengers, rising up early and sending them, because He had compassion on His people, and on His dwelling place. But they mocked the messengers of God, despised His words, and scoffed at His prophets, until the wrath of the Lord arose against His people, till there was no remedy.
God did not conclude, after seeing the unrepentant conduct of the people: “You know what? I’m going to approve of My people no matter what they do.” No! Actions have consequences. How we respond to God’s love, grace, and the salvation He offers ultimately determines His final disposition toward us. God judges us by the things done in the body, whether good or bad (2 Cor. 5:10). We cannot choose to live lives filled with sinful desires and deeds and then hear, “Well done, My good and faithful servant.”
No one should miss the fact from 2 Chronicles 36:15-16 that God sent warnings because of His compassion. He did not want to punish His people but their rejection of Him and His ways merited destruction. The only way to avoid it was to heed the warnings and repent! Nobody, Governor Kasich included, is doing any homosexual a favor by ignoring and/or endorsing that sin. His homosexual friends may call him broad-minded and slap him on the shoulder now, but they will appreciate him considerably less when they are sentenced to eternal punishment.
God clearly defines sins that men need to repent of (Rom. 1:21-32; 1 Cor. 6:9-11; Gal. 5:19-21; Rev. 21:8; et al.). His Word also defines what is acceptable behavior, and the writers encourage all to imitate righteousness (Phil. 4:8, e.g.). Man has always had the responsibility to react to Truth in a positive way. The entire history of mankind shows God’s attitude toward sin; anyone who blithely speaks of unconditional love as if God tolerated sin is fooling himself if he thinks God will overlook wickedness. “Therefore consider the goodness and severity of God: on those who fell, severity; but toward you, goodness, if you continue in His goodness. Otherwise you also will be cut off” (Rom. 11:22).
This is God’s disposition toward mankind. What He offers us in the way of salvation and eternal life probably transcends our ability to comprehend it, but heavenly riches do not come to those who despise and contradict His ways. Genuine repentance means forsaking sin—not continuing to walk in it. And Christians cannot in any way endorse ungodly behavior.
Those who do not know what they are saying shouldn’t be: