Assault of the Paramours: the Unequal Marriage of the Ox & Donkey; Query #1: What Partnership Has the Righteous with the Lawless?  None!  2 Cor 6:14

20.	The concept goes back to the Mosaic prohibition of yoking together draught animals of different species.  The example given is to match an ox with a donkey.  The ox is considered a clean animal which means it is good for food and sacrifice.  The donkey is good for neither and is therefore classified as unclean.
21.	The Jew considered the Gentile to be unclean and thus prohibited him from going through the entrance of the “middle wall” into the inner court of the temple.
22.	But Christ removed the “middle wall” with his substitutionary sacrifice which brought both Jew and Gentile together through faith alone in Him.
23.	Thus the believer is warned by Paul in 2 Corinthians 6:14 against uniting with the unbeliever in any way.  A believer married to an unbeliever is compared with an ox yoked with a donkey.
24.	The ox represents the believer who has been sanctified by the work of Christ on the cross and thus created as a new spiritual species with citizenship in heaven.
25.	Were the “ox” to marry an unbeliever it would result in union with a “donkey” that is unclean because of unforgiven sin and an outcast from the heavenly community.
26.	When the doctrinal damsel is the ox and she marries the unbelieving donkey she comes under his authority as spiritual head of the household.  This neutralizes her spiritual life.
27.	If she seeks to maintain her spiritual life then discord is created between the two.  If she opts to sacrifice her spiritual life she enters into reversionism with her husband.  Either way, there is the ever-swirling cauldron of tension, conflict, and change.
28.	The “donkey” or the unbeliever is identified by the noun ¥pistoj, apistos, a compound that joins the negative alpha prefix to the noun for faith and literally means “no faith.” 
29.	Five illustrations of this obvious union of opposites follow in the form of rhetorical questions which in the Greek demand the response of “None!”
30.	Each demonstrates the absence of compatibility and rapport and the impossibility of establishing esprit de corps within the souls of those involved.
31.	The first query is “what partnership have righteousness and lawlessness?  None!”
32.	“Partnership” is the noun metoc», metochē.  It carries the idea of participation toward a common objective.  In what ways could righteousness participate in a common effort with lawlessness?  None!
33.	“Righteousness” is the Greek noun dikaiosÚnh, dikaiosunē and speaks of Christian integrity which is proposed to be in association with ¢nom…a, anomia: the alpha privative plus the word for “law,” literally means “no law” and speaks of the unbeliever’s rejection of divine truth.
2 Corinthians 6:14 -	Do not be bound together [ ˜terozugšw, heterozugeō: “to march in line with another of a different kind” ] with paramours; for what participation does Christian integrity have in common with one opposed to the truth?  None!