After looking at what I wrote I realized I didn't really explain how it is that I know God doesn't create homosexuality. The fact is people aren't born either gay or straight. We understand what God told the first human couple, "Be fruitful and multiply..." Most of the time we call God's command procreation. The world which rejects God's perspective may simply use, "The Sex Drive," but even atheist biologists know that humans have, not merely a sex drive, but a drive to propagate the species.
If you want to understand how biology sets us up for sexual expression we need look no further than how biology sets us up to learn and speak language. Genes dictate that we may develop spoken language, but our genes cannot dictate the language we will learn. Our genes set the stage for us to learn language, but the actual development of spoken language is far too complex for genes to dictate. For us to develop spoken language it takes interaction with other humans who can already speak.
Biology allows us to develop sexuality, but like language can never dictate how we will express that sexuality. Sexuality develops from our interactions in the family and extra-family social environments. When relationships breakdown healthy development of sexuality breaks down. The proper question is not "Are people born gay?" The proper question to ask is, "How is the Procreative Drive overcome so a person becomes gay?" If you want to find the culprit behind homosexuality and every other from of sexual deviance, start shaking the family tree. What drops from the family tree will show you where the problem lies.
Whew! Glad that's out of the way...
"On the third day there was a wedding in Cana of Galilee, and the mother of Jesus was there. Now both Jesus and his disciples were invited to the wedding."
I just made the worst mistake I could have made. I allude to the story of how Jesus changed water into wine, at a wedding. I don't know if it is the worst faux pas a theologian could make, but it has to rank up near the top of mistakes.
The wedding at Cana is a wedding between one man and one woman. As you know I've already argued that gay marriage is, in truth, nothing. So how exactly do I start with the wedding at Cana?? I start with the wedding at Cana for the very reason that I know it cannot be used to explain why Jesus would attend a gay wedding. The problem is how Christians approach gay marriage and how Jesus approaches gay marriage. Jesus never said anything about gay marriage, because it didn't exist. Still we can read the Bible and it is clear, that homosexuality is condemned, and no amount of religious ceremony will change that. When we think about marriage we see God's approval for the kind of marriage we see in Luke 2. God is pro-marriage between one man and one woman that is true. Was Jesus at the wedding in Cana to lend that marriage credence? Was Jesus' presence at the wedding God's way of saying, "This action gets 5 stars from God?" I don't believe God is saying anything about the particular wedding at Cana.
Set aside the wedding of Cana for a while. Let's begin with the right question: Why was Jesus here on the earth? We know Jesus didn't come to give the wedding at Cana the thumbs up.
17 and the scroll of the prophet Isaiah was handed to him. Unrolling it, he found the place where it is written:
18 “The Spirit of the Lord is on me,
because he has anointed me
to proclaim good news to the poor.
He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners
and recovery of sight for the blind,
to set the oppressed free,
19 to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.”
19 Jesus gave them this answer: “Very truly I tell you, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does.
But take heart! I have overcome the world.”
Jesus attends the wedding at Cana because he is called by Father, Father was working there, and Jesus went not as a way of approving the wedding at Cana, but because he overcomes the world.
The problem with Christians and gay weddings is they don't want to have anything to do with them. The Christian won't go to a gay wedding because they don't want anyone thinking they approve of such things (And of course as believers in Christ we do not approve of what God condemns!). The thinking looks kinda like this. "Jesus would never approve of gay marriage, so Jesus would never go to a gay wedding. Since Jesus would never go to a gay wedding I won't attend one." Certainly sounds like solid reasoning. The problem lies in the truth: Jesus doesn't think the way we think. Remember that the Jewish leaders leveled the accusation against Jesus, "How is it he eats and drinks with tax collectors and sinners?" (Mark 2:16).
The wedding at Cana is merely a red herring. So let me ask you the really important question: If Jesus knew he could/would overcome the world (utterly destroy all satanic power and control), and if Jesus knew there were lost sheep to be found there, and if Jesus was doing his Fathers work there, WOULD JESUS ATTEND A GAY WEDDING?
Are there not ears in need of the "good news" at a gay wedding?
Are there not blind eyes which need sight at gay weddings?
Are there not prisoners in need of freedom at a gay wedding?
Are there not the oppressed who need freedom at a gay wedding?
Are there not those who need the LORD's favor at a gay wedding?
If there are prisoners, the oppressed, the needy, the blind, and the need for God's favor at a gay wedding, then how could anyone believe Jesus isn't called there or that he would not go?
If, in your mind, Jesus would still not attend a gay wedding, why do you think that?
If you believe, according to Christ's teaching, he would attend a gay wedding, give some positive steps Christ followers could take in the right direction?