Idolatry in the context of Romans 1

"Malus omnia in malum vertit, etiam quae cum specie optimi venerant"

Seneca

God loves His sons and daughters. Because He is a loving father, He sometimes has to chasten His children so they keep going in a straight path. If He doesn't, then we are not His children but illegitimate, bastards (Hebrews 12:5-8). Worse, we are children of Satan (John 8:44) because we do not do the will of God, which is in our best benefit (Romans 12:2). As we fall short to His glory, and we don't repent, He gives us up to the Enemy, so we can experience the whole spectrum of consequences of our actions; that's what the parable of the Lost Son is about (Luke 15:11-32): He let us go to experience a self-conducted (as opposed to conducted by the will of God), godless life, but always waiting for our return so there can be celebration in Heavens. That explains why Paul in 1 Corinthians 5 and 1 Timothy 1 speaks about handing over people to Satan as a corrective experience: we are so stubborn in resisting the one and perfect will of God, that there is no other choice but to let us go for us to see the real dimension of what we wish to do. We want something so badly that we cannot longer hear the voice of God but the crave; we renounce His will so ours can take place, and we like it. And that is the essence of idolatry: to want, love something more than God Himself, to put Him aside so we do what we desire. He is so loving that He doesn't oblige us to do what He wants but let us go, it's our choice and He respects it. He is so loving He even waits there for our return to welcome us with arms wide open to His kingdom.

All that is what Romans 1 is about. People wanting something so blindly they forgot about God and engaged in what they wished to do. Knowledge, money, power, pleasure, anything... Those are not bad things. The Scriptures even encourage us to pursue those things (please, read the Song of Solomon before you misinterpret me holding some prude perspective). The bad thing is to want some of those more than God, because it'd break one of the two commandments we Christians have: love God above everything else. I think that would also explain why Paul says "for the pure, all things are pure" (Titus 1:15). People often take this passage as Paul talking about foods, but it says "all things", which I think includes circumcision and all other ceremonial laws. As Barnes noted: "The principle of the declaration is, that a pure mind - a truly pious mind - will not regard the distinctions of food and drink; of festivals, rites, ceremonies, and days, as necessary to be observed in order to promote its purity. The conscience is not to be burdened and enslaved by these things, but is to be controlled only by the moral laws which God has ordained. [...] But unto them that are defiled and unbelieving is nothing pure - Everything is made the means of increasing their depravity." As we do things that are sanctified, we can see the fruits of it, because sin always reveals its true nature (John 8:44).

So what the Christians in Rome did was apostasy. They liked what they did more than God, and it came with consequences. He didn't inflict a curse over them for their actions, He just gave them up to what was already there. We should avoid that: be so stubborn to God with something He doesn't have another choice but to leave us to experience the consequences.

Couples in the context of Genesis 2

The man and his wife were both naked, but they were not ashamed.

Genesis 2:24 NET (emphasis mine)

And God Almighty and Perfect created man, the original human being. But His original creation had a tiny detail: he was neither man nor woman, he was Adam. God hadn't created woman, so how could He create a gender-differentiated being if there was no other one with whom he could couple.

He put the man in this beautiful garden, where Adam saw trees and their fruit, and those were pleasant to look and good for food. The man felt they were good, he naturally knew it, that's why they were pleasant; there was something in him that knew he could eat from them. And then God gave him the freedom to eat from any tree, but the one in the middle.

Then God saw something: the man was by himself, alone but not in the sense of loneliness, God was with him. The Hebrew word that's been translated as "companion" in many bible versions actually means "helper", "one who does what we cannot do by ourselves". If analysed in the context, we see that after that realization, God wanted to create a helper, a companion for man that would help him with the labor God entrusted: to care for the garden. 

But it wasn't going to be any creature that Adam could find the one who was going to be his companion, it had to be one suited for him, complementary to him, not in the context of sexuality --the man was not gender differentiated yet, so that companion wasn't a sexual one. That's why, in order to find a partner for Adam, God brought before him all kinds of animals. There's an interesting thing here: God brought all these creatures before Adam for him to choose. God could've made a perfect companion right away and give it to Adam, but instead He delegated that responsibility to man. 

The Scriptures say that after naming all creatures, a suitable companion was not found, so we can deduce that God and Adam expected to find one among the creatures. He didn't, so God made woman and brought her to him. When Adam saw her, he said "this one at last [...]". After all, God did made him an adequate companion because Adam was happy with it, he saw she was suitable, she was like him, related to him, thus he gave her a name.

It is because all that that the man leaves his parents' home and comes to live with his wife and make a family, because Adam was pleased with the companion that was made for him (the scholars of the NET bible translation agree that the word flesh at the end of verse 24 really means 'kin' or 'family', as explained by the ancient OT custom of calling relatives flesh of my flesh). God knew what he needed and he liked it because it was the woman the one who was made for the man, not the other way around (1 Corinthians 11:8-9). I think that also explains why Jesus said that eunuchs don't have to live with women (Matthew 19:10-12): if they don't find them suitable companions, they don't have to deal with them.

Some times I wonder, if the man had found dogs to be better help for him, women would've never existed, and it would be just Adam and his dogs the ones running the world! So, Genesis 2 is not a story of romantic love, how sex came to be, or other fleshy things, but one of partnership, about finding someone suitable to be our complement, someone like ourselves with whom have a lot of offspring that could help us run the planet. Let's remember this all came to happen so we could accomplish God's very first commandment to Adam: "take care of my garden."

A double standard or beyond ethics?

Why right and wrong exists? To whom are ethics applied?

Easy: morals exists to avoid suffering, unpleasant situations. No one wants to feel bad or uneasy, so what make us feel that way is wrong. That's why human beings invented ethics, so we won't be harming each other all the time in our way to get what we want, using our judgement to decide how we can prevent that. As animals don't have moral sense or cannot make a judgment, morals and ethics do not apply to them; that's why some people say that animals don't have rights. The definition of what is suffering is also subjective to each individual; a few people actually like pain, so pain is not suffering for them; others don't tolerate lactose, so eating ice cream is suffering. This being said, we can conclude that ethical principles and moral are only applicable to humans and are relative to culture. That makes me question: why are we always trying to use our moral on God? 

God is a perfect, almighty being; obviously, superior to us. We are superior to animals and cannot apply our ethics to them, but we can treat them as it happened just to be good persons, because we know better. The same way, the moral standards and ethical principles of God cannot apply to us. The apparent exceptions to the Mosaic Law shown in the Old Testament and the ones Jesus did can't be examined with human standards. E.g, when God told Abraham to kill his beloved son Isaac. "God, who's perfect and good, cannot order the killing of someone", might say some people. In fact, He can. First, He created humankind and thus has the right to do whatever He wants (Romans 9:19-24). Second, His divine disposition does not change, so He knew that Isaac wasn't going to die; it is impossible for us to foresee things, but God knows the beginning and the end undoubtedly. That special attribute comes with certain changes in ethics: you can do things that might seem wrong, but if you know for sure the outcome will be a good thing and nothing bad actually won't happen, so it is not bad at all. And third, someone for whom death is not a problem because can be undone, certainly has a different way to see life.

The categorical imperative of God

Kant speculated about the idea that morality could be "summed up in one ultimate commandment of reason, or imperative, from which all duties and obligations derive". He called that categorical imperative, "an absolute, unconditional requirement that asserts its authority in all circumstances, both required and justified as an end in itself". Although Kant rambled intending to expose something different, I think there is no better definition that "categorical imperative" for the utmost principle of God's Law: love. Love is the base and foundation of the Mosaic Law, as is stated in Matthew 22:36-40 (note He said "hang" as in everything else depends on or comes from it):

“Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?”

Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.” NIV

Besides, there is something most people --who don't understand the Scriptures or have never read the Bible-- often overlook: the higher ethical principle of God, love. In the Bible there are plenty of passages about that, but the most notorious is the one that says "God is love" (1 John 4:8). We are similar to God, therefore we can understand and feel love, and act according to that. E.g, if you tell a lie to a robber to safe someone else's life --let's say, your daughter--, it doesn't mean you should go to pray and repent 'cause of your transgression of the commandment, just because you broke it in order to safe a life. There was simply no transgression whatsoever as you did it accomplishing the foundation of that commandment: love for a life. Some say that you can tell the lie, and then repent. Think: if you told the lie knowingly and willingly, it'd become a deliberate sin and thus with no forgiveness (Hebrews 10:26-27). 

Jesus' suicide

Suicide is sin because you will be killing yourself or willingly letting yourself be killed by something (a car, train...), and killing is bad, it's forbidden. But Jesus willingly let Himself be killed, He committed suicide, but... He did it for love towards us, so by doing it He was being faithful to the utmost principle and foundation of the Law, not a part of it that forbids to kill (1 Corinthians 13). That's also why He contradicted the experts on the Law when they seemed to be right. He himself made a distinction between what's right and wrong from what's good and bad in Matthew 12:1-12.

About Abraham, as somebody else stated, the purpose of God here seems to teach us that the love of Abraham towards God was so big he didn't even withhold his own son, and his faith was so great he knew God would keep His promise of giving him a son, that God would raise Isaac from death if necessary to keep it. It is also a preamble of what was coming: how God's love for humankind made Him sacrifice His only son.

Conclusion

Anyone who acts by perfected love and for love does not do wrong. God's commandments are just to show us how it would be like to do it (Romans 7:7).

Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.
1 Corinthians 13:4-7 NIV

The world is not coming to an apocalyptic end

For those who are somehow religious/spiritual and hold the Bible as truth, here's a rough explanation about why the world is not coming to an apocalypse like in Hollywood movies.

First, the book of Revelation never says that the Earth will be destroy by a cataclysmic event. Yes, there's a meteorite involved, but it never disintegrates a great mass of land -- or water -- and annihilates life through and explosion. It just falls and contaminates water; no gigantic Armageddon-style waves that inundates entire cities. The book is mainly metaphorical and when talks about destruction, it is about the end of this system of things -- or better put, the reign of the Dark Prince's age and the restoration of God's kingdom. Plus, when New Jerusalem comes down from Heaven, it will be placed on Earth; it'd be a shame to see such a beautiful city surrounded by a horrible Terminator-like landscape. And no, it won't happen in 2012 as the Mayan predicted.

Here are some passages you should read:

For this is what the LORD says—
he who created the heavens,
he is God;
he who fashioned and made the earth,
he founded it;
he did not create it to be empty,
but formed it to be inhabited—
he says:
“I am the LORD,
and there is no other [...]
Isaiah 45:18 NIV

He said to them: “It is not for you to know the times or dates the Father has set by his own authority.
Acts 1:7 NIV

In fact, He hates the ones who destroy the Earth:

“I am against you, you destroying mountain, you who destroy the whole earth,” declares the LORD. “I will stretch out my hand against you, roll you off the cliffs, and make you a burned-out mountain.
Jeremiah 51:25 NIV (similar to Revalation 11:18)

Still I think there's gotta be some kind of natural disaster as the next passage says -- I believe the author is being hyperbolic:

But the day of the Lord will come like a thief. The heavens will disappear with a roar; the elements will be destroyed by fire, and the earth and everything done in it will be laid bare.
2 Peter 3:10 NIV

Perfection

Nobody is perfect because we can't achieve perfection. But perfection can be reached. It can't be reached by our effort as we ourselves are imperfect and cannot yield perfection, thus we need something (or someone) which is perfect, and that is God. 

He is known to ask humans for things who are impossible or very difficult for us to achieve, but He only does that to teach us we can't alone. That's why He asked us perfection:

"Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect."

NIV Matthew 5:48

So it means perfection is somehow achievable, we must just ask God for it through Christ:

"And I will do whatever you ask in my name, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son. You may ask me for anything in my name, and I will do it."

NIV John 14:13,14

"Now to him who is able to do immeasurably more than all we ask or imagine, according to his power that is at work within us..."

NIV Ephesians 3:20

God can do what is unimaginable for us and He does much more than He's asked if we have Him within us. So, are we imperfect? Yes, but perfection is reachable; there's no excuse not to try.