• Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.

Alistair Begg controversy about attending gay weddings

B

Bartato

Seasoned Member
Real Person*
Male
I don't know if you are familiar with this controversy, but it's causing quite a stir within the "conservative Evangelical" world.

Pastor Begg is a well known and much loved preacher in the "conservative and reformed Evangelical" world. He has pastored a large church in Ohio for around forty years. His sermons are broadcast on the radio program "Truth for Life". He is involved with the "Gospel Coalition" and is a regular conference speaker along with guys like John MacArthur, John Piper, Steve Lawson, and the late RC Sproul.

I've not listened to him a whole lot, but have generally liked, appreciated, and benefitted from his teaching. He is gospel-centered, and seems like a nice guy.

Anyway, it recently came out that he recommends Christian family members (grandmother in this case) attend the gay and or transgender "weddings" of their unbelieving family members.

Begg has always taught against LGBTQ practices, and still does. He doesn't approve of gay "weddings" but thinks attending them, and taking a gift to one is a proper way for a believer in Christ to show Christian love.

I, and most other conservative Evangelicals believe this is a serious compromise, and that it flows from mere sentimentality, and cultural accommodation, not Biblical truth. It also feels effeminate. I think Begg is showing a shocking lack of Biblical discernment.

God defines marriage and family, and a LGBTQ "wedding" is an abomination. A "gay wedding" is a celebration of an immoral relationship, and the only reason for a Christian to attend is to cry out against it.

If the grandmother attends, and takes a gift (like Begg suggested), she is giving her approval (even if she says otherwise). Begg seems absolutely blind to this obvious fact.

A ton of people have attempted to correct pastor Begg, including Doug Wilson, Justin Peters, Jon Harris, and many others.

Begg has now doubled down, is insisting that he is right, has nothing to apologize for, and is basically accusing other Christians of being ungracious Pharisees.

American Family Radio (a network of 178 radio stations) has removed "Truth for Life" from their programming over this. Begg is also no longer a speaker of John MacArthur's upcoming Shepherds pastors conference.

It is a sad situation
 
Bartato said:
I don't know if you are familiar with this controversy, but it's causing quite a stir within the "conservative Evangelical" world.

Pastor Begg is a well known and much loved preacher in the "conservative and reformed Evangelical" world. He has pastored a large church in Ohio for around forty years. His sermons are broadcast on the radio program "Truth for Life". He is involved with the "Gospel Coalition" and is a regular conference speaker along with guys like John MacArthur, John Piper, Steve Lawson, and the late RC Sproul.

I've not listened to him a whole lot, but have generally liked, appreciated, and benefitted from his teaching. He is gospel-centered, and seems like a nice guy.

Anyway, it recently came out that he recommends Christian family members (grandmother in this case) attend the gay and or transgender "weddings" of their unbelieving family members.

Begg has always taught against LGBTQ practices, and still does. He doesn't approve of gay "weddings" but thinks attending them, and taking a gift to one is a proper way for a believer in Christ to show Christian love.

I, and most other conservative Evangelicals believe this is a serious compromise, and that it flows from mere sentimentality, and cultural accommodation, not Biblical truth. It also feels effeminate. I think Begg is showing a shocking lack of Biblical discernment.

God defines marriage and family, and a LGBTQ "wedding" is an abomination. A "gay wedding" is a celebration of an immoral relationship, and the only reason for a Christian to attend is to cry out against it.

If the grandmother attends, and takes a gift (like Begg suggested), she is giving her approval (even if she says otherwise). Begg seems absolutely blind to this obvious fact.

A ton of people have attempted to correct pastor Begg, including Doug Wilson, Justin Peters, Jon Harris, and many others.

Begg has now doubled down, is insisting that he is right, has nothing to apologize for, and is basically accusing other Christians of being ungracious Pharisees.

American Family Radio (a network of 178 radio stations) has removed "Truth for Life" from their programming over this. Begg is also no longer a speaker of John MacArthur's upcoming Shepherds pastors conference.

It is a sad situation
Click to expand...
Wow, that surprised me. I hadn't seen anything about this, so thanks for bringing it to my attention. Cheers
 
I wonder how a seemingly solid guy like Begg could come to compromise on such a clear issue as this.

I think a lot of it is the cultural zeitgeist. Every center of cultural power and influence is pushing LGBTQ acceptance, and the temptation to try to "go with the flow" is intense.

I also wonder about something else.

I think Begg (and almost everyone else) compromised the truth long ago on the topic of Biblical marriage and sexuality. For example, I've heard him say that monogamous marriage between a man and a woman is the only acceptable setting for sexual activity.

That's almost, but not quite true. The God of the Bible also clearly permits polygyny.
Our culture simply will not permit pastors to admit this. A small compromise on this issue may lead to additional compromise down the road.
 
I agree with @The Revolting Man. Not how I would handle it but not indefensible especially if the gay family member does not consider themself a Christian. This passage has helped stay my hand of judgment in my adult years after being a bit of a zealot in high school. Dudes kissing dudes is gross but even if they were straight, without Jesus they are lost.

1 Corinthians 5:9-13 NASB95 — I wrote you in my letter not to associate with immoral people; I did not at all mean with the immoral people of this world, or with the covetous and swindlers, or with idolaters, for then you would have to go out of the world. But actually, I wrote to you not to associate with any so-called brother if he is an immoral person, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or a swindler—not even to eat with such a one. For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Do you not judge those who are within the church? But those who are outside, God judges. REMOVE THE WICKED MAN FROM AMONG YOURSELVES.
 
NS4Liberty said:
I agree with @The Revolting Man. Not how I would handle it but not indefensible especially if the gay family member does not consider themself a Christian. This passage has helped stay my hand of judgment in my adult years after being a bit of a zealot in high school. Dudes kissing dudes is gross but even if they were straight, without Jesus they are lost.

1 Corinthians 5:9-13 NASB95 — I wrote you in my letter not to associate with immoral people; I did not at all mean with the immoral people of this world, or with the covetous and swindlers, or with idolaters, for then you would have to go out of the world. But actually, I wrote to you not to associate with any so-called brother if he is an immoral person, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or a swindler—not even to eat with such a one. For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Do you not judge those who are within the church? But those who are outside, God judges. REMOVE THE WICKED MAN FROM AMONG YOURSELVES.
Click to expand...
You are making a common error here. I think it is the same one Begg initially made.

We aren't talking about associating with immoral unbelievers. We are talking about celebrating and affirming their particular sin. We may not do that.

I'm certainly not suggesting that grandma cannot or should not maintain an active loving relationship with her grandchild (or even the grandchild's sodomy partner). Invite them over for dinner. Eat dinner at their house. Celebrate birthdays, Thanksgiving, etc.

If the grandchild professed Christ as Lord, and then defied His rule by living in sodomy, it would be different. Then, grandma probably shouldn't even do those things.

Affirming the fake wedding by acting like it is a real wedding is over the line for the man or woman of God. That is what attendance requires, and means. We are acting like something legitimate is going on when it isn't.

Jesus ate dinner at Zacheus house. He didn't go to a tax collector party where they were celebrating the fact that they were ripping off their countrymen.

Jesus ate with prostitutes, but obviously didn't hang out with them on the street corners cheering them on as they plied their trade.

In the parable of the prodigal son, the Good Father threw a huge party when the prodigal son returned in humble repentance. The Good Father didn't throw the rebellious son a "happy rebellion party" when he left home. Likewise, the Good Father never attended the riotous parties of the rebellious son, celebrating his debauchery as he squandered his inheritance.

After forty years of expositional preaching, a man like Begg should know the difference.
 
Let's flip the situation around a little.

Let's say I have a non-Christian friend who decides to cast off the wife of his youth, divorcing her without cause, so he can replace her with a new younger and prettier wife.

He asks me to celebrate his good fortune with him by attending his wedding. I will refuse, because he is acting wickedly.

I imagine pastor Begg (NS4liberty, Revolting man, and FollowingHim) would probably do the same.

Ironically, this situation is actually FAR less grievous than the gay "wedding".

This is still a real marriage (man and a woman), and we here at Biblicalfamilies believe a legitimate marriage since polygamy is lawful. Nevertheless, we understand that he is acting wickedly by casting off his first wife. I can't celebrate that.
 
Last edited:
Let's try another one. Let's say grandma has a teenaged granddaughter that gets pregnant outside of marriage. She asks Christian grandma to take her to the abortion clinic so she can get rid of this clump of unwanted cells. Grandma can't do that. Likewise, grandma cannot go to a party to celebrate the abortion after the fact.

Grandma should still love the granddaughter and try to help her even if she does murder her child.

Totally different categories
 
Last edited:
Let's keep going. Let's say my non-Christian neighbor invites me to dinner. I will certainly go. While there, he starts bragging to me about the fact that he stole the food we are eating. I cannot continue to eat that food. Doing so gives my approval of his shoplifting.

1 Corinthians 5:9-13 has nothing to do with it. I can associate with the man, but cannot give approval to the theft.
 
The Revolting Man said:
That’s not how I would address the issue but it’s not a completely indefensible position.
Click to expand...
It is a completely indefensible position, because it involves bearing false witness against your neighbor by pretending a genuine marriage exists when it actually doesn't. It is also indefensible because it involves the celebration of immoral activities.
 
Begg...doesn't approve of gay "weddings" but thinks attending them, and taking a gift to one is a proper way for a believer in Christ to show Christian love.
Click to expand...
Given that logic, I'm looking forward to attending some joyous abortion ceremonies, and maybe a few sacrifices to Molech, too. Great time to 'witness'.
 
Last edited:
Bartato said:
Let's try another one. Let's say grandma has a teenaged granddaughter that gets pregnant outside of marriage. She asks Christian grandma to take her to the abortion clinic so she can get rid of this clump of unwanted cells. Grandma can't do that. Likewise, grandma cannot go to a party to celebrate the abortion after the fact.

Grandma should still love the granddaughter and try to help her even if she does murder her child.
Click to expand...

Not me. I'd say, "I love you and I care about you but your choice also comes with my choice. And until you get right with God you won't be sitting at my table or sleeping in my house."
 
God made man and woman and He made marriage. To mock marriage is to mock God and is therefore an abomination. To join in the celebration of something which openly mocks God is not something any child of His should participate in. To sit down with a sinner (prostitute, tax-collector or even a politician!) eat a meal with them and present the truth of salvation is consistent with the example of Jesus Christ. He never joined in and celebrated of something that mocks the truth!
 
I'll add to my comment above; the separation and distinction of the sexes by God is clear from the first chapter of Genesis. He made them male and female and He then commanded against the confusion of the identities of men and women saying, “A woman shall not wear anything that pertains to a man, nor shall a man put on a woman’s garment, for all who do so are an abomination to the Lord your God (Deut. 22:5).

Just as I would never encourage a believer to celebrate sinners dressing in drag - because thats celebrating an abomination, I'd never encourage a believer to celebrate those who were cross-dressing mocking the marital union God created for a man and a woman. To do that is to mock at sin, and it is written, Fools mock at sin (Proverbs 14:5). Why would any child of God want to be a part of celebrating fools indulging in an abomination??
 
Bartato said:
It is a completely indefensible position, because it involves bearing false witness against your neighbor by pretending a genuine marriage exists when it actually doesn't. It is also indefensible because it involves the celebration of immoral activities.
Click to expand...
No it’s not indefensible. It’s not right but it’s not indefensible. If I’m reading Begg right then he is taking a stand against the immorality of the behavior. He is maintaining that he he behavior is a sin. His contention is that we still have to love the sinner and he believes the best way to do that is to stand against the sin but still acknowledge the aspirations of the sinner.

Now I’m not going to try and prove that his application of that idea is right, I don’t think that’s the best way to handle the situation. But it’s not an indefensible position assuming that it has been clearly communicated that the homosexuality is a sin.
 
Not coming at the issue via the same filter, I see all of it as a maladaptive mental illness. So did every sane person before the western world's Achille's heel of misplaced compassion and far far worse...tolerance.

I see a world that has gone to hell in a handbasket. A world where if we meet the right lad(ies)y I would love to bring in a dozen new children. I have no interest in promoting this world's destruction or helping to poison it for the next generation.

I am scrupulous about my manners so I am not discourtious to these people. I however have no obligation or desire to validate their noncery.

I can not change the world in this respect but I absolutely have no obligation to participate in the destruction of civilization by pretending I am good with that crap
 
Would Yeshua have miraculously provided wine for an abomination?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top