The Sound of My Lonely Kazoo

Sharing Options

If it is possible for a man to put a fruit plate on his head, and it is, and also possible for him to deck his tan little body out in leather and oil, and it is, and possible for him to gyrate that little body on a float cruising down Main Street, USA, and it is, then we should consider three possible responses, and reject another one.

The first is to find someone who can explain to us what is happening, and why it is happening. This explanation is sober, didactic, and helpful. The setting is in a classroom, and provides the necessary background work to any other responses. The apostle Paul does this in Romans 1. A good contemporary example would be Peter Jones’ helpful book, The God of Sex. Couple that read with G.K. Beale’s book, We Become What We Worship.

The second response is to find someone who can plead with sinners not to destroy themselves. Ezekiel does this — why will you die, O house of Israel? (Ezek. 18:31). John Piper does this well.

The third response is typified by my opening paragraph. The biblical model for it would be something like Elijah’s address to the priests of Baal who were dancing and cutting themselves to no effect (1 Kings 18:27). And behold, they leaped about upon the float which they had made (1 Kings 18:26). When a rebellion against Heaven is underway, the Lord holds them in derision (Ps. 2:4). Some may complain that we don’t do it as well as we think we do, but be that as it may, that is what we are doing.

The issue is the rebellion, not the vice or sin that has someone in bondage, the kind of bondage that eventually brought them to the point where they joined such a rebellion. What is risible? Not the sad rationalizations that bring a man to the point where he, in the grip of tragic compulsions, gambles away his family’s paycheck every month. No, that’s not even a little bit funny. It is when he bands together with others in the “gambler community” to organize a march, demanding that we respect the dignity of his choices. To which I respond, not going to do it. When his blackjack pride float gets near my spot on the sidewalk, that faint sound he hears in the background will be the sound of my lonely kazoo.

Does anyone think that the priests of Baal had no personal issues? Were there no sad cases among them? Of course there were — just as there were heartbreaking stories about young German men forced to fight against your great uncle Stan at Normandy. The fact that there are such sad cases does not in the slightest diminish the need to fight. And once you have determined to fight, you have to ask how Scripture would direct such an effort. What does the Bible call us to do? What should our weapons be? When we have asked and answered such questions, we discover that one of the things we should be doing is exactly the opposite of what the gay priders in the street are demanding that we do. They want civic respect, and all they are going to get from me is a goodly amount of civic disrespect, along with a couple of raspberries. Do I have any qualms of conscience in this? Nary a qualm.

This is not to say that we have to choose between the three. All are necessary and, depending on the circumstances, we should be prepared to respond with any of the three. Take any participant in any gay pride fandango and bring him in to see me one-on-one, and I would plead with him in just the way that Piper would. But when the barbarians are scaling the gates, I am not trying to determine what possible issues that third fellow down on the ladder may have had with his father — though I would be willing to bet, in the abstract, that there are such issues.

I mentioned earlier that there was a response that we should avoid. World magazine, which at one time wanted to be in the vanguard of biblical worldview thinking applied to current events, has started to give up on that difficult task. They are now settling for exercises that will help us process it when our adversaries eventually say, “Checkmate.” This article is simply a fearful muddle, and it is the result of an unwillingness to hold to the Bible with any published opinions in a way that would bring on the opprobrium of fundamental disrespect from urbane sophisticates — whether within the Church or out.

But if you are going to take your stand on what the Bible says about sexuality, unvarnished, then you will soon find, about five minutes in the Q&A session, that Moses said some other things too, mostly about oysters and slavery. If you are determined to take your Bible the same way you take your whiskey — straight — then you have better go find your respectability, hold him in your arms for a moment, and kiss his forehead good bye. He was such a sweet boy.

 

 

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments