Returning to our theme for two weeks ago (sorry; last week, God struck me down with the flu): I was discussing whether the condemnation of men sucking dick in the old testament is preserved in the new, or whether it effective drops by the wayside along with the condemnation of eating bacon cheeseburgers. And I’d made my way through the passage at 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, and found that it didn’t seem clear — seemed more likely to just be anti-circle-jerk as more generally anti-manly-cocksucking; and in any case, didn’t make man-on-man sex any worse than sex before marriage, getting drunk, or those that covet what belongs to others.

Today, a few words about the other two passages cited from the new testament that are supposed to keep the homo action forbidden: 1 Timothy 1:9-10, and Romans 1: 26-27.

…the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, for whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine… (1 Timothy 1:9-10)

For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. (Romans 1: 26-27)

Two obvious things here.

(a) None of these condemnations (these two or he on from Corinthians before) is attributed to the J-man himself, but to the mere mortals that followed. If Jay-Cee wanted to warn us from the gay sex action, why didn’t he say so? Maybe there’s more that whole eating of the body of Christ than meets the eye? Certainly would explain the vicious near-self-loathing that the Xian gay-bashers show. Yeah, eat me, you bad, bad, boy.

(b) Neither of these does any better than the Corinthians passage before in giving clear condemnation — in fact, the Romans passage is far worse, as it suggests that God is the one turning them (men and women, for once) over to their steamy gay lust. In fact, the immediately preceding passage says that the cause for which they were “given up unto vile affections” was that “professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things … who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator.” I guess this means they became some kind of animist or constructivist about God — I’m not sure which.