Biblical Views On Drag Culture And Same Sex Marriage
The Bible presents a consistent view of marriage as a union between one man and one woman, established by God at creation [8]. This understanding is foundational to both Old and New Testament teachings regarding sexual ethics and family structure.
The creation account in one tradition states that God "made them male and female" at the beginning, a point Jesus himself references when discussing marriage [8]. This original design is understood to establish the "normal, or divinely constituted relation of the sexes" [3]. The seventh commandment, "You shall not commit adultery," is interpreted as forbidding all impurity in thought, speech, and behavior, and it underscores the sanctity of the family relation as essential for the well-being of society and the church [3].
Throughout the Old Testament, marriage is highly esteemed. Women were not intended to be nuns but mistresses of families and mothers of children, as seen in passages like Genesis 30:1 and Psalm 113:9 [4]. While polygamy was tolerated in certain periods under the Mosaic law, it is noted that after the exile, monogamy became almost universal among Jews, and this was largely the case by the time of Christ [6]. The New Testament continues this high regard for marriage, declaring it "honourable in all" (Hebrews 13:4) and instructing "Let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband" (1 Corinthians 7:2) [4]. Paul also encourages younger widows to marry and bear children (1 Timothy 5:14) [4].
Early Christian thinkers affirmed this view. Tertullian, for instance, argued for monogamy as the foundation of the ecclesiastical order, suggesting that this rule must first apply to laity from whom the clergy are drawn [2]. Augustine, in discussing the marriage of Mary and Joseph, highlighted that "the entire good... of the nuptial institution was effected" in their case, encompassing offspring, faithfulness, and the marital bond, even without sexual cohabitation [7]. He also discussed the historical development of marriage laws, noting how early generations, due to necessity, married close relatives, but as populations grew, such practices were limited [5].
The concept of "drag culture" or gender fluidity, where individuals adopt clothing and personas traditionally associated with the opposite sex, is not directly addressed in biblical texts. However, biblical principles regarding gender roles and distinctions are relevant. The Old Testament law in Deuteronomy 22:5 states, "A woman shall not wear a man's garment, nor shall a man put on a woman's cloak, for whoever does these things is an abomination to the Lord your God." This verse is often interpreted as prohibiting cross-dressing or the blurring of gender distinctions, which were seen as part of the created order [1]. Charles Hodge notes that the reason for such prohibitions is not specific to the Jews but is based on "nearness of kin" or fundamental principles that apply universally [1].
Regarding same-sex marriage, the biblical framework consistently defines marriage as between a man and a woman. There is no biblical precedent or affirmation for same-sex unions. Passages in both the Old and New Testaments describe homosexual acts as contrary to God's design for human sexuality. For example, Romans 1:26-27 speaks of women exchanging "natural relations for those that are contrary to nature" and men committing "shameless acts with men." These passages are understood to condemn homosexual practices as deviations from the created order. The emphasis on male and female in creation and the consistent portrayal of marriage as a heterosexual institution form the basis for the traditional Christian understanding that marriage is exclusively between a man and a woman [8].
Sources
- CCEL (Reformed (Old Princeton)) “Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, Vol. 3, section 49: that question, that it always has been regarded as obligatory by the whole Christian Church. 2. The reason assigned for the prohibition contained in that law, has no special reference to the Jews. It is not found is their peculiar circumstances, nor in the design of God in selecting 411 them to be depositaries of his truth to prepare the world for the coming of the Messiah. The reason assigned “is nearness of kin.” This reason has as much force at one time as at another, for all nations as for any one nation. There was nothing peculiar in”
- Schaff ANF/NPNF (Patristic) “ANF Vol 4: Tertullian IV, Minucius Felix, Commodian, Origen — CHAP. XI.--FURTHER REMARKS UPON ST. PAUL'S (part 2): to the beginning in Christ?[2] If he wills us to iterate conjugal connections, how does he maintain that "our seed is called" in the but once married Isaac as its author? How does he make monogamy the base of his disposition of the whole Ecclesiastical Order, if this rule does not antecedently hold good in the case of laics, from whose ranks the Ecclesiastical Order proceeds? [3] How does he call away from the enjoyment of marriage such as are still in the married position, saying”
- CCEL (Reformed (Old Princeton)) “Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, Vol. 3, section 49: § 11. The Seventh Commandment. This commandment, as we learn from our Lord’s exposition of it, given in his sermon on the mount, forbids all impurity in thought, speech, and behaviour. As the social organization of society is founded on the distinction of the sexes, and as the well-being of the state and the purity and prosperity of the Church rest on the sanctity of the family relation, it is of the last importance that the normal, or divinely constituted relation of the sexes be preserved in its integrity. Celibacy. Among the important ”
- CCEL (Reformed (Old Princeton)) “Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, Vol. 3, section 49: woman, according to the Old Testament Scriptures, which are the word of God, was not to be a nun, but to be the mistress of a family, and a mother of children. ( Gen. xxx. 1 ; Ps. cxiii. 9; cxxvii. 3; cxxviii. 3, 4 ; Prov. xviii. 22; xxxi. 10, 28 .) 3. The same high estimate of marriage, characterizes the teachings of the New Testament. Marriage is declared to be “honourable in all.” ( Heb. xiii. 4 .) Paul says, ” Let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband.” ( 1 Cor. vii. 2 .) In 1 Timothy v. 14 , he says: “”
- Schaff ANF/NPNF (Patristic) “NPNF1 Vol 2: Augustine — City of God, Christian Doctrine — CHAP. 16.--OF MARRIAGE BETWEEN BLOOD-RELATIONS, IN REGARD TO WHICH THE PRESENT LAW COULD NOT BIND THE MEN OF THE EARLIEST AGES. (part 3): in the course of generations diverge, and become distant relationship, or cease to be relationship at all, religiously endeavored to limit it by the bond of marriage before it became distant, and thus, as it were, to call it back when it was escaping them. And on this account, even when the world was full of people, though they did not choose wives from among their sisters or half-sisters, yet they p”
- CCEL (Reformed (Old Princeton)) “Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, Vol. 3, section 49: ; xxxi. 10 ff. ) The apocryphal books contain clear evidence that after the exile monogamy was almost universal among the Jews; and it may be inferred from such passages as Luke i. 5 ; Acts v. 1 , and many others, that the same was true at the time of the advent of Christ. With regard to the toleration of polygamy under the Mosaic law, it is to be remembered that the seventh commandment belongs to the same category as the sixth and eighth. These laws are not founded on the essential nature of God, and therefore are not immutable. They are”
- Schaff ANF/NPNF (Patristic) “NPNF1 Vol 5: Augustine — Anti-Pelagian — CHAP. 13.--IN THE MARRIAGE OF MARY AND JOSEPH THERE WERE ALL THE BLESSINGS OF THE WEDDED STATE; ALL THAT IS BORN OF CONCUBINAGE IS SINFUL FLESH.: The entire good, therefore, of the nuptial institution was effected in the case of these parents of Christ: there was offspring, there was faithfulness, there was the bond.[11] As offspring, we recognise the Lord Jesus Himself; the fidelity, in that there was no adultery; the bond,[11] because there was no divorce. [XII.] Only there was no nuptial cohabitation; because He who was to be without sin, and was sen”
- Matthew (Baptist/Reformed) “John Gill on Matthew 19:4: And he answered and said unto them,.... Not by replying directly to the question, but by referring them to the original creation of man, and to the first institution of marriage, previous to the law of Moses; have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning, made them male and female? This may be read in Gen 1:27 and from thence this sense of things collected; that God, who in the beginning of time, or of the creation, as Mark expresses it, made all things, the heavens, and the earth, and all that is therein, and particularly "man", as the Vulgate Latin, ”