Last week’s post was dedicated to Kevin DeYoung’s second reason that Godly marriage requires one man and one woman, that the way men and women are designed presupposes two persons joined together in the human sex act.  At the end of that post, I mentioned today’s topic, that procreation adds further support to DeYoung’s argument.  By design, same sex couples cannot have children.  Of course that means that God designed opposite sex couples for procreation.

In this post, I will explore DeYoung’s ideas further.

The crux of his argument is founded upon the idea that there is a purpose for marriage and that purpose is to create offspring.  God says in Genesis that He intends for everything He created to multiply:  vegetation, trees, fish, birds, and every living creature “according to their kind.”  Likewise, God created man and woman deliberately so they could be fruitful and multiply.  Detractors might say that procreation is not mentioned in an explicit manner in Genesis but it is commanded [says DeYoung] “in Genesis 1 and specifically mentioned as affected by the fall in Genesis 3.”    DeYoung cites the Hebrew words for man and woman to bolster his case.  The Hebrew for “man” is ish and “woman” is ishah, the two intended to fit together to produce offspring from a Godly union.  DeYoung is willing to admit that all might not go right in every case [as everyone knows].  Some married men and women are not capable of having children because of some biological dysfunction.  Does that mean they don’t fulfill their purpose for marriage?  Of course as humans age, heterosexual couples must find new purposes for marriage, but DeYoung states “if all the plumbing is working properly—children can be conceived.”  And God is pleased.

Of course, procreation is important.  Practically, if people failed to procreate, humanity would eventually cease to exist.  Spiritually, one can turn to Psalm 127: 3-5 to read of the rewards of having children:  “Children are a heritage from the Lord, offspring a reward from Him.  Like arrows in the hands of a warrior are children born in one’s youth.  Blessed is the man whose quiver if full of them.”

Procreation says DeYoung “is the natural outworking of the marriage covenant.”   Procreation in a Christian family gives parents the privilege of raising their own flesh and blood.  Ephesians 6: 4 says “fathers bear the primary responsibility to bring them up in the training and instruction of the Lord.”  The “ideal” among Christian parents is that teaching children the ways of Christ is an honor and a privilege. 

All this sounds perfect as Christians point to procreation as a sign that marriage is a Godly covenant.  Some argue that inability to procreate is a sign that same-sex unions are not blessed by God.  Of course gay couples point out that they can procreate but not as a couple, having to use artificial insemination and surrogacy.  In addition, same-sex couples can adopt.  But Christians will counter that biological children from a heterosexual couple are given better care than adopted children and nothing can bond a couple more than the birth of a biological child.  All these statements are so general, with notable exceptions abounding; some heterosexual Christian couples are disastrous parents and some gay couples are wonderful parents [to surrogate children or adopted children].  It all hinges on the idea that Christians feel they know what is ordained by God: He is on their side.

For Christians, the one man and one woman marriage blessed by God is the best scenario for the family and some think it is the only acceptable scenario.   In that setting, people in the family can grow in righteousness and serve the Lord. 

For individuals who want to pursue same-sex relationships and want to have children, their concerns might not even be the pursuit of righteous living and serving God.   Maybe they are just pursuing love, friendship and companionship within a different context.  Are Christians willing to admit that or would we rather judge?

When DeYoung writes “only two persons of the opposite sex can fulfill the procreative purposes of marriage” he is stating what he prefers.  But he is doing more; he is stating what he believes God prefers.  He is trying to mirror the word of God in the Holy Bible.  As Christians we need to be careful not to be overly zealous in our condemnation of others who do not choose to live within the bounds of Christian values, especially when it comes to the pursuit of meaningful relationships.

Marriage has many functions across all kinds of people and just because a Christian pursues marriage in a “faith framework” does not negate the value of marriage for others.  Marriage provides life structure for people [regardless of faith].  Marriage provides sexual gratification for people [in a faith context or out of a faith context].  Marriage can provide a way to divide labor among couples or divide mutual expenses [regardless of faith].   Marriage can be an opportunity to grow together as a couple into maturity, to learn to work as partners in life [regardless of faith].  What many Christians have problems with is admitting that same-sex couples can do all of this and they value the opportunity to do so.  They can love another person sacrificially. They can serve their partner.  They can fulfill their needs for affection and companionship [regardless of faith].

My personal note is that I am troubled by Christians who think that the Christian faith framework is the only way for any relationship to thrive.  In my way of thinking, it is not.  We are discussing personal needs and it does not bode well for Christians to condemn others and put themselves up as self-righteous role models.

Is DeYoung right as he argues that two persons of the opposite sex can fulfill the procreative purposes of marriage? Of course he is right.  Is he wrong if he says that God ordained it this way and other options are wrong?  We can think this, we can believe this, but we must be careful when we say that the standard of procreative ability negates companionship, love and mutual support that all people feel for each other. 

The Christian faith framework is my personal choice for my life and my marriage and I am so happy to be a father of a son by my wife, but I am not going to say that personal private feelings that another person may have for someone else are invalid.  Nor am I willing to say that a relationship is invalid because procreation cannot happen.

This is a different standard from the idea that God created woman as a complement to man (Genesis 2: 18-22).  This is a different standard from the idea that God created man and woman to become “one flesh” in the act of human sex.  This standard presumes that same-sex couples cannot find happiness because procreation must be the purpose of their relationship.

Recently many Christians were saddened by the death of Pat Robertson, a great man of God who was a media mogul, religious broadcaster, political commentator, presidential candidate and Southern Baptist minister.  Robertson did great good in this world in the name of Jesus Christ but at times he also went too far in his expression of ideas.  I recall a time in the 1980’s when he commented that “AIDS is God’s way of weeding His garden.”  I cringed when I heard this, that a major Christian leader could express something so hurtful.

As Christians, we don’t want to be hurtful in the expression of our ideas. 

That can happen when we make broad declarations like the purpose for marriage is procreation.