As the marriage debate heats up we have been hearing many use Mathew 19:4 as a talking point to speak on Jesus’ behalf promoting discrimination and lies. This verse is a perfect example of how we neither should cherry pick bible verses nor take them out of context. “4 And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, 5 And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? 6 Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder. Mathew 19″
Finally, here is proof, Jesus stating that marriage is to be exclusively between a man and woman right? Not at all. You see to fully understand this verse in context we must read the one before it. “The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause? Mathew 19:3.” Jesus was simply responding to a specific question asked by the Pharisees. The Pharisees asked a question that involves a marriage between a man and a woman and Jesus responded to the question at hand.
In no way shape or form was Jesus even remotely asked about His views on same-gender love/marriage (and while we are on the subject there were MANY examples of such couples around in His day and never once did He himself condemn them). This would be like me calling my mother at work and asking if I can make brownies and she replying (and it were recorded) “Have I not told you that no brownies are to be made…..” If this were the case, we would see many today holding signs, “Jesus Against Brownies” and others demanding “Brownie Equality!”
JasonjDOTbiz 
Verse 4 and 5 refer us back to the two creation accounts of Genesis. “In the beginning” “made male and female” (first creation account) “And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and the two shall be one flesh?” is a quote from the second creation account. Thus He’s referring us to Genesis chapters 1 and 2 as giving authority over the meaning of marriage. He then goes outside the text and gives a basic principal that no one can dispute: “Therefore what God had joined together, let no man put asunder.” If He did not do this, He would have to deal with the Mosiac laws that condone divorce. By referring to the beginning, he shows that these other laws were given to humanity because “of the hardness of our hearts, but in the beginning it was not so.” Thus it is more like someone calling and saying “Hey, I’m baking some cookies. Am I able to exclude this ingrediant?” and she responds by reading off sections of the recipe and then giving you a basic baking principal that tells you that the ingrediant you wanted to exclude was an essential ingrediant (like flour) rather than say extra raisens.
I’d say the best argument about the gay issue is to recognize we live in a pluralistic society. Not everyone are Christians and our nation’s laws are not divine laws. Our nation’s laws are human laws that primarily cite the constitution and preexisting law and rulings. A lot also deals with the people governing themselves. How does the entire nation want to be governed?
In the Christian sense, gay marriage simply is not marriage. It does not meet the definition (though how heterosexuals approach marriage today, even some of their marriages don’t fit the Christian definition of marriage). Christ shows marriage not as a human invention we can redefine and invent, but a Divine institution that has existed from the beginning. It may have not existed with rings and weddings and all we’ve added to it, but its not presented as a human invention.
There are plenty of legal arguments to at the very least not panic about gay marriage. Values like tolerance though have to do with the fact that we live in a pluralistic society. But when it comes to biblical arguments, you simply can’t argue for gay Christian marriage.
Honest Catholic; I appreciate your logical, personal and peaceful input, thank you. Personally I am not comfortable with taking verses from one section and applying them to another (for the most part) as this just makes a Biblical playground and free-for-all based on ones interpretation. Not to mention I have discussed Genesis including Adam and Eve in a recent post (and how they were the first example, not only) – feel free to browse when you get a chance. I am a believer in Jeremiah 1:5 that Jesus knows He has gay children. I do agree however, whole-heartedly that this nation is not entirely Christian/Godly even (which saddens me on an entire other level) and indeed we could win equal rights and responsibilities based on our forefathers constitutional plan for America. God bless you.