The Paradox of Love and Hate, Gay and Straight

Today I read a blog that said, essentially, "If you're gay, I love you, and God loves you.  There's nothing wrong with being gay, just don't ACT gay and you'll be free from THAT sin, and then I can trust you around my kids."

She quoted the Bible, of course.  You may have heard this passage used as a weapon against gay people before:

1 Corinthians 6:9-11 Those who indulge in sexual sin, or who worship idols, or commit adultery, or are male prostitutes, or practice homosexuality, or are thieves, or greedy people, or drunkards, or are abusive, or cheat people--none of these will inherit the Kingdom of God.

Other than saying that this snippet of the Bible, taken out of historical context, is an incorrect interpretation, I'm not going to go into great detail here.  Those can be found in many places such as texts by biblical scholars, the detailed blog I'm Christian. I'm Gay. Let's Talk, and in this amazing scholarly interpretation of six Bible verses by the very brave Matthew Vines in Wichita, KS in 2012.

I'm going to say now that I agree with the scholarly interpretations that say that committed homosexual relationships are not condemned in the Bible because the scholars presented convincing evidence.  I firmly believe that what this calls for is a more universal acceptance of future members of "heaven."

• If Jesus was so opposed to homosexual relationships, why was he silent on the issue?  Maybe because it wasn't a big deal to him.    Were there no gay people in Jesus' time?  Highly doubtful, since there are references to homosexual acts.  But Jesus doesn't criticize, so long as we respect and love each other, and love God.  Who is this God he wants us to love?


• They say "God made man and woman in God's image."  Did God create everyone in his/her image?  If so, does God have a gay side?  There are other human diversities besides sexual orientation to consider.  There are gender identity and chromosomal issues that blur the lines of male/female.  A lot more people than you'd probably guess are born with sexual ambiguity.  According to the Intersex Society of North America, one in 100 people are born sexually ambiguous.  In fact, the number of people born without a distinctive XX or XY sex chromosome makeup is one in 1,666! (And it God said, "it was good.")  That's a lot of people, if you ask me.  Weren't they made in God's image, too?  According to the Bible, who can sexually ambiguous or trans people have sexual relationships with?  I'm pretty sure the science required for such conversations wasn't available when the Bible was written,  or when it was transcribed or translated.  Nor was homosexuality well defined or understood at the time.


• Aside from the androgyny of God, above all, it is said that "God is love."  Jesus said, "Love," more than he said much of anything else.  Love the poor, the enemy, the leper, the child, the woman, and so on.  He never said anything about NOT loving.  So who is supposed to love?  All of us.  And we do love those we are close to and who we understand.  If someone has a child who is born different in some way, they love the child, and wouldn't imagine spending eternity in heaven while their "different" child spends eternity in a fiery pit.  So a mother or father would INCLUDE their child in Club Heaven if given the choice.  Is their love stronger than that of the god who created them in his/her image?  Does the mother's or father's capacity for grace exceed that of their heavenly mother or father?  


• More love?  Why, yes.  The modern argument against same-sex life partners never seems to focus on the love they share with one another.  It always focuses on what they are doing with their private parts in the bedroom, which is one of millions of ways that partners express love for one another. Relationships aren't only about sexuality.  They're about who we love and how we treat those people.

• 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 was only translated to refer to "homosexuals" in the 1940s.  Within historical context, and translated more accurately, the original text was referring to prohibitions of economic and sexual exploitation, not prohibitions of homosexuality.  If society continues to say that the LGBTQ community has to stop acting so gay and go about procreating in opposite-sex marriages, is no one being exploited? Exploitation means "to make use of, selfishly or unethically." Let's say for argument's sake that I'm correct that consensual same-sex relationships are ethical and that population increase shouldn't be the only goal in a committed relationship.  Wouldn't requiring those who are attracted to the same sex to only have relationships with the opposite sex be both selfish and unethical?  Forcing anyone to go against their own natural desires would be exploitation.


• Finally, since when did condemning people become OK? "I love you, and God does too.  But I thought I'd give you fair warning that you're going to perish for being your true self."  What a paradox!  It's not loving to tell anyone that the way they were born is going to send them to Hell if they act on their god-given nature.   Gay people weren't sent to the earth to be the bad example for everyone.  They were made in God's image, too.  If another, more historically accurate and contextual interpretation of scripture says NOTHING about condemning God's LGBTQ children, why not embrace the more loving translation?  What's the payback for so much disdain, fear, hate and moral posturing?  Who, then, are the sinners -- those who chose to love, or the select heterosexuals who condemned the lovers?  

Hopefully by the time those sinners make it to Club Heaven, they will have worked on their manners around gay people.

The miracle of turning to dust

A supernova remnant about 20,000 light years from Earth. 
(Smithsonian Institution)

Every single day, I leave little pieces of me behind.  Parts of my body are shed as it creates new life within me.  Skin cells, hair, mucus, and yes, even the excrement that was once inside of me, leave me and return to the earth.  These bits and pieces that I leave behind are a tiny fraction of the recycling of life that occurs on the planet each moment of every day.  And the dust that I become is a resource for other life.  Small creatures like dust mites consume the dead skin that I shed, and microorganisms thankfully break down the waste I produce.

Without the help of detritivores and decomposers we would be quickly consumed by piles of our own dust and waste, and that of the other creatures we share the planet with.  It's quite beautiful how it all works out so that we can carry on.

Dust mites feed on organic detritus such 
as flakes of shed human skin and flourish
 in the stable environment of dwellings. 
(Wikipedia)

Each particle of dust that we shed, taken alone, is incapable of thought or feeling.  And, if we lose a larger part of ourselves through accident, that part can't stand alone and philosophize about the meaning of life or the promise of afterlife.  The bodies we occupy one day will turn to dust entirely.   And each particle is entirely incapable of doing anything more than occupying the earth as matter, energy.  The matter remains "alive" in that it nourishes another life, a life that is perhaps more important than we like to admit.  The consumers of humanity are the flies, dust mites, bacteria and fungus, which humans generally have come to disdain.

Earth Rise as Seen From Lunar Surface
(NASA)

For me, this is enough, the beautiful eternity of the cycle of life is all I need to know before I die.  After all, before I was born, my consciousness was nothing, and every day bits of me return to a lack of conscious being.  One day, I will die, and my body will disperse its energy into the world.  There is no single cell of my body that can contain my thoughts and feelings, and there will be an end to "me."  It is such an amazing miracle that I will return to the dust from which I came, but in between I have been given the gift of my body and mind on this perfect planet circling our perfect sun in our galaxy in space.