N T Wright on Same-Sex Marriage

Summary

In this transcript, the speaker addresses the challenges the church faces due to the redefinition of marriage in modern legislation. They discuss the significance of language and its power in shaping cultural ideologies, particularly with regard to the concept of marriage, traditionally understood as a male and female union. The speaker argues that changing the meaning of marriage undermines its deeper theological and societal implications, which are rooted in creation and biblical teachings. The speaker also reflects on historical moments when public consensus, despite its authority, failed to align with moral truth, emphasizing the importance of teaching the true significance of marriage.

Takeaways

• 😀 The redefinition of marriage presents significant challenges to the church and Christian teachings.
• 😀 Changing the meaning of key words in society can have dangerous consequences, as seen in historical examples.
• 😀 The word 'marriage' historically has always referred to a union between a man and a woman, despite some cultural variations.
• 😀 Redefining marriage to include same-sex unions radically alters the understanding of male and female complementarity.
• 😀 The Christian perspective on marriage is rooted in the creation narrative in Genesis, where God creates male and female as complementary beings.
• 😀 Marriage between a man and a woman symbolizes the relationship between Christ and His Church, reinforcing its sacred and divine purpose.
• 😀 Redefining marriage undermines the deeper, theological meaning that has been passed down through biblical teachings.
• 😀 A shift in the definition of marriage reduces it to a mere social or sexual arrangement rather than a divinely ordained union.
• 😀 The downgrading of marriage is not a new phenomenon but has become more evident as societal views shift on the subject.
• 😀 The church has failed to effectively communicate the profound mystery and importance of marriage, which contributes to the current cultural shift.
• 😀 Societal changes in values, such as redefined marriage, are akin to governments trying to alter objective realities, like changing the color of black to white.

Q & A

What is the speaker's main concern regarding the redefinition of marriage?

The speaker is concerned about the changing meaning of key words, particularly the word 'marriage'. They believe that redefining marriage to include same-sex unions radically changes a concept that has historically meant a union between a man and a woman.

Why does the speaker mention the use of language in historical contexts?

The speaker highlights how the manipulation of language has been used in various historical contexts to enforce ideological changes, such as in Nazi Germany and post-revolutionary Russia. This is used to warn about the potential dangers of redefining key words like 'marriage'.

How does the speaker relate the concept of 'complementarity' to the Biblical narrative?

The speaker refers to the concept of complementarity, which is based on the idea that male and female are created to work together, as illustrated in Genesis 1. This complementarity is not just biological but is central to understanding marriage as a signpost of God's original creation and His plan for the new heavens and new earth.

What is the speaker's view on the potential consequences of redefining marriage?

The speaker believes that redefining marriage to include same-sex unions undermines the original purpose and sacred meaning of marriage. It suggests that marriage is merely a social arrangement, rather than a profound, divinely ordained institution.

What historical example does the speaker use to argue against changing definitions?

The speaker uses the historical example of Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, where words were redefined to serve ideological purposes. For instance, in Nazi Germany, certain words had specific meanings that served the regime's goals, and in post-revolutionary Russia, people were labeled as 'former persons' to justify their persecution.

What concern does the speaker have about how society views assisted suicide?

The speaker expresses concern about the changing language around topics like assisted suicide, where the term 'suicide' is avoided to reduce the moral implications of the act. The speaker finds this shift in language chilling, as it could make morally questionable practices seem more acceptable.

What is the significance of the speaker's reference to 'Genesis 1' in their argument?

The reference to Genesis 1 emphasizes the Biblical idea of a divinely ordained complementarity between male and female. This foundational belief is integral to understanding marriage as a sacred institution, not just a social or sexual arrangement.

Why does the speaker describe the shift in marriage definitions as 'a nonsense'?

The speaker believes that the redefinition of marriage, especially to include same-sex unions, disregards its true meaning and purpose as a divine creation. They liken it to a government decree that changes the color of something from black to white, asserting that such a change does not alter the fundamental reality.

How does the speaker view the role of the church in addressing the changing definition of marriage?

The speaker suggests that the church has failed to adequately teach the true and profound nature of marriage, as a result of which society is now seeing a downgrading of its meaning. The church should emphasize the spiritual and doctrinal significance of marriage as outlined in the Bible.

What does the speaker mean by describing the redefinition of marriage as a 'social and sexual arrangement'?

The speaker is arguing that redefining marriage as something other than the union of a man and a woman reduces it to a mere practical or functional relationship, stripping it of its deeper spiritual and moral significance as a divine institution.