Some websites only present one side of the story. That's where we help out...

3: Why Matthew Vines’ Assessment of Being Alone, is Cherry-picking

In building his argument that the Bible has elements that conflict with the idea that homosexual relationships are sinful, the presenter then points to Genesis 2:18, saying “the Bible teaches that it is not good for the man to be forced to be alone, and yet now, we are teaching that it is.” But are we? Or is the church merely saying that being single is just the better of two imperfect options?

And as insightfully pointed out by John F. Haettich, it’s controversial whether the Bible actually says that that it’s not good for a man to be alone. Many popular modern translations, (EG NIV, NASB, NSRV) actually word the passage to say that it was simply not good for Adam to be alone. Interestingly, the presenter does not make this clear to his audience, instead promoting an argument that is convenient to his goals.

The presenter claims that teaching that Christian homosexuals must remain single rather than having homosexual relationships, is a contradiction of that Genesis passage. But the presenter is also cherry-picking the sections of the Bible that suit his desires. Verse 18 is part of a broad narrative that continues on to describe how god made a female partner for man, and at verse 24  it says “That is why a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife …” Genesis 2 raises a problem (being alone) and then offers a solution (a man uniting with a wife). The presenter wishes to embrace the problem as valid, while rejecting the solution. Is it reasonable to embrace one verse, but not the whole passage? It’s easy to understand the presenter objecting here, with him saying that the solution of verse 24 doesnt work for him, since he’s not attracted to women. Well, this would appear to be addressed in the New Testament. In Matthew 19:3-11, it is raised that marriage may not be suitable for everyone. At this point, Jesus then responds by referring to eunuchs, including those who are “eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven.” This Matthew 19 passage is rather open to interpretation, but one possible straight-forward interpretation might be that if marriage to an opposite sex partner is not going to work for you, consider staying single. Affirmation for being single is also given in 1 Corinthians 7:8, so long as being single does not result in you burning with passion. Burning with homosexual lust is addressed later in the video and in this response, but based on the additional passages I have raised, I suggest the presenter is incorrect to imply that advocating being single, is to contradict the Bible overall.

Next topic in the Matthew Vines series

Stasis Online Contents Page for Matthew Vines

Advertisements

One Comment on “3: Why Matthew Vines’ Assessment of Being Alone, is Cherry-picking”

  1. bk13 says:

    You said “, I suggest the presenter is incorrect to imply that advocating being single, is to contradict the Bible overall.” and but you said it as if he did not also say a similar statement as your statement: ” Affirmation for being single is also given in 1 Corinthians 7:8, so long as being single does not result in you burning with passion.” To keep it brief. 1. His statements on the New vs Old Testament, BC vs AD. 2. Good point on the Gen 2:24


Share your thoughts

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s