Monday, June 24, 2013

A NOT so Novel argument against Homosexuality

As a supplement to a novel argument on my Adult blog, I am now presenting a NOT so novel argument.  Not so novel because this argument has fatal implications.  That's why it is at this blog.

And not just fatal implications because of a statistical increase of morbidity among homosexuals in this life, but because of a certainty of morbidity among homosexuals in the life to come.  A morbidity revealed in numerous biblical passages in the Old and the New Testaments.  

A morbidity revealed in a mandate (to preserve that Jewish culture)- that homosexuals should be put to death in Lev. 20:13.  And revealed in a condemnation in 1 Cor. 6:9- to set apart an  unholy culture.

Now, before you accuse me of being a homophobe (and I again respond by accusing you of being a heterophobe- or worse yet, a genophobe) allow me to say that I am not afraid of homosexuals.  Not afraid of them despite being sexually assaulted by an adult homosexual when I was a child.  A phobia that I got over as a child (unlike others that seem to treasure their victim status).  So quit yer bitchin'.

Now let's examine the argument of 1 Cor. 6:9.  An argument that is suggested in other places as well.  An argument that insists that 'homosexuals will NOT enter the kingdom of God'.  A NOT so novel argument.   

A text that is best seen here.  A 2nd century manuscript held at The University of Michigan [get with the paleography program, Chester Beatty- update].  A fearful text with no real variants among the many manuscripts.
A text with an argument that is insisted on not once-- but twice in this pericope. 
An argument that is largely feared by "Christian homosexuals" (as indicated by this recent  census).  A less fearful argument for non-Christian homosexuals. People who even try to deny the biblical definition. 

Regardless, the argument reveals the reason WHY homosexuals will not enter the kingdom of God in verse 11 of this pericope.  It is because homosexuals are NOT washed, NOT sanctified, NOT justified by God.

Yet some homosexuals were actually washed, sanctified and justified by God in Corinth. The aorist "were" is used three times in this translated verse.  A verb that is translated into past tense very sparingly by this translation committee of the NET Bible.  Translated very sparingly by a largely Arminian committee of translators that are reluctant to grant such exhaustive sovereignty to God.  

However, even that committee agrees that this pericope addresses homosexuals that actually were washed and sanctified to desire something quite hetero.  Were sanctified to desire something quite opposite.  And were justified when their desires were changed.
An unholy people who were washed to desire a Holy God... even though they may still struggle with that unholy desire in Corinth.  A people that may still struggle with unholiness in this world- as do other people in the other categories mentioned in this text.

As a case in point, a friend that has questioned me on this several times over the years.  A friend that seems to struggle with one of these categories.
She seems to be convinced that homosexuality is no worse than any other sin.  And that 'her friend' is no worse a sinner than say- a false witness.  
Yet I keep insisting on 1 Cor. 6:9 with her.  That these are 'fatal categories' (more than morbid).  That these are largely categories of inordinate intimacy.  As this text goes on to say, categories of crimes against "the body".  Crimes against "the temple of the Holy Spirit".

Then I insist with her that this pericope also includes alcoholics in its 'fatal categories'- another fatal crime against "the temple". And I repeat my commitment to the truth revealed in that text.  A commitment that I would rather not hold to- because I don't like how it may relate to someone that I  loved.  Someone that I loved dearly.  

It relates to an alcoholic that beat his wife and was subsequently removed from his home.  An alcoholic that continued going to A.A. and continued drinking away from his home.  An alcoholic that several months later rear-ended a snow-plow with his truck.  
The truck was a write-off, yet he was fine.  And he was grateful to be fine. Yet,  three days later he wrote-off  another truck--- into a train.

Did my dad enter the kingdom of God at that point?  Did my father cease to be an alcoholic in those three days between write-offs?  Did his love for God exceed his love for alcohol in those intervening days?  Well, we don't know if he had been drinking when he crashed... an autopsy was impossible.  He was burnt to a crisp.

But that doesn't prejudice my interpretation of this pericope.  Doesn't cause me to introduce some modern-day theological novelty into this pericope.  Doesn't cause me to introduce the novelty that God will actually allow alcoholics etc. into the kingdom of God. And it shouldn't prejudice my friends interpretation regarding homosexuals either... not while she is still on this side of the kingdom. 

My friend should not be deceived.  She should know that her love for God should exceed her love for women (and I think that she does know that).  She should know that God is quite willing to give her over (Romans 1:26) to an unrequited love for women... to the exclusion of Himself.

And I expressed my faith in her God-given ability to give a far greater love to God than women.  My faith in a godly ability that is given to those that were actually washed by God.  

Indeed, I believe in that Holy Spirit ability and as I expressed to her, "I believe in you".

I still pray for her.  I don't believe that she is a train-wreck.  
Just another sinner struggling with ungodly desires.  Lord, help her godly desires.