The American Spectator

Along with the many freedoms we enjoy in America, many citizens have come to expect to be able to exercise their Christianity for nothing.

That is, to accept Jesus, be forgiven your sins, and go to heaven at no cost to themselves.

p>That is the concept embraced at least by so-called “gay evangelicals,” who with special vision see a “just can’t help it” exception in the Christian Guidebook that authorizes them to continue in homosexuality, free of judgment. The New York Times , in an article Tuesday datelined near my hometown (Raleigh), discussed sympathetically this growing segment of evangelicalism as though Bible literalists someday will no longer be able to deny its legitimacy within Christianity: br> /p>

“Scripture clearly, pervasively, strongly, absolutely and counterculturally opposes all homosexual practice,” Dr. [Robert A. J.] Gagnon [associate professor of New Testament at Pittsburgh Theological Seminary] said. “I trust that gay evangelicals would argue otherwise, but Christian proponents of homosexual practice have not made their case from Scripture.”

In fact, both sides look to Scripture. The debate is largely over seven passages in the Bible about same-sex couplings. Mr. Gagnon and other traditionalists say those passages unequivocally condemn same-sex couplings.

Those who advocate acceptance of gay people assert that the passages have to do with acts in the context of idolatry, prostitution or violence. The Bible, they argue, says nothing about homosexuality as it is largely understood today as an enduring orientation, or about committed long-term, same-sex relationships.

br> In other words, they have dredged up an old argument: That the Bible has no relevance to modern society. You see, being gay today is so different from the homosexuality of the Biblical period, which was devoid of “enduring orientations” and instead was all about lustful men seeking out Willy and Nilly to fulfill their desires. The apostle Paul obviously couldn’t imagine the world’s moralized homosexuals circa 2006 when he (First) told the Corinthians (in chapter 6): br>

9 Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, 10 nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God.

br> Do you see that “idolatry, prostitution or violence” context? Neither can I.

Nevertheless, the gay evangelicals spot an exemption for themselves, which implies a denial for the need to repent from that particular sin. Would they argue a similar case for any of the other transgressions mentioned by Paul?