False slavery argument and homosexual marriage
 |
| English: Kevin Rudd, 26th Prime Minister of Australia. (Photo credit: Wikipedia) |
Kevin Rudd supports homosexuality on a false basis. As homosexual behavior gains wider acceptance in our culture and the biblical view of love and sex is increasingly marginalized, believers are criticized for not embracing homosexual acts as good and holy, even though most Christians today would never own a slave. Although In the New Testament slavery is akin to house or business managers even work contracts, sometimes in charge of the house finances. This is substantially different to that of modern day slavery and 1800 century slavery in the USA as hinted at by Kevin Rudd?
How is it possible, unbelievers ask, for believers to have “grown” in their understanding so that they repudiate slavery and yet refuse to grow in their view of sexuality and stop calling homosexuals to repent?
There are many answers to this question, but we will focus on this point: while Scripture does not repudiate slavery directly, it is not inconsistent for Christians to seek its abolition, since the Bible never forbids us to work for slavery’s end.
In fact, as the book of Philemon reveals, the biblical view of humanity inevitably leads Christians to abolish slavery and find other ways to deal with debtors and prisoners of war, two of the main categories of enslaved people in the ancient world. To infer that Paul fully supported, endorsed even championed slavery is conceptually incorrect. This is a homosexual argument used to pervert Paul's character and to infer he was wrong on slavery therefore he is also wrong on homosexuality.
Kevin Rudd tried this false argument against a pastor on national television. Rudd inferred we as a society have moved on, repudiated such social practices as slavery, therefore we should also move on our view of homosexuality. If we were to take his viewpoint as truth, then imprisoning asylum seekers on Manus Island fulfils his criteria of slavery of which he supports. Rudd is according to his argument is inconsistent and a liar.
Slavery might have been tolerated for a time in the ancient church because of many complicating factors, but once slavery is abolished, it is basically inconceivable that Scripture would encourage its reinstitution.
The apostles and prophets had to work with the hand they had been dealt — slavery was foundational to the ancient economy, it could not be unilaterally abolished without making life worse for countless people, and the church did not have the power to end it anyway. Their focus was not social change, but salvation change. Principles consistent with Jesus’ teaching had to be put forth to help believers live with slavery even though it was not the ideal.
On the other hand, nothing in Scripture allows us to stop calling homosexuals to repentance. The Bible never endorses any sexual behavior other than that which occurs between a husband and wife. Even liberal scholars who are honest with the evidence will say that the Bible’s view of homosexuality is uniformly negative, even if they hate what Scripture says about it (Lev. 18:22;Rom. 1:18–32; 1 Cor. 6:9–10).
Paul’s epistle to Philemon repudiates Rudd's false argument on homosexuality. Claiming to be a Christian, claiming to be godly, Rudd has shown himself to be totally false, ignorant of scripture and truth.
