Great confusion exists currently on the subject of homosexuality. In the general public certain groups and individuals have vigorously sought to change traditional thinking. They have waged a multi-pronged attack in legal, social, political, and scientific arenas advancing arguments for their agenda. In the religious realm confusion reigns because church leaders and scholars have rejected the authority of the Scriptures and have denied the clear teaching of the Scriptures. Paul wrote in his epistle to the Romans of such confused men that, "their foolish heart was darkened" and "they exchanged the truth of God for a lie." The biblical view of homosexuality is consistently clear. The present study will examine what God has declared about it.
Jesus and Homosexuality
Perhaps the best place to start to examine what the Scriptures teach about the subject of homosexuality is from Jesus. Jesus' statements on human sexuality should end any debate. Those wishing to promote homosexuality have sought to strengthen their arguments and mislead the public by stating that Jesus never spoke about homosexuality. From this, they conclude that homosexuality is not sin or at least a very minor one. But they are wrong. Jesus leveled the most devastating argument possible against homosexuality. Matthew 19.3-6 and Mark 10.2-9 record Jesus' statements on human sexuality.
Matthew recorded:
"And some Pharisees came to Him, testing Him, and saying, 'Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any cause at all?' And He answered and said, 'Have you not read, that He1 who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, "For this cause a man shall leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and the two shall become one flesh"? Consequently they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate."
Mark recorded:
"And some Pharisees came up to Him, testing Him, and began to question Him whether it was lawful for a man to divorce a wife. And He answered and said to them, 'What did Moses command you?' And they said, 'Moses permitted a man to write a certificate of divorce and send her away.' But Jesus said to them, 'Because of your hardness of heart he wrote you this commandment. But from the beginning of creation, God made them male and female. For this cause a man shall leave his father and mother, and the two shall become one flesh; consequently they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate.'"
The focus of the Pharisees' question centered upon divorce--a subject as debated in Jesus' day as it is in ours. How Jesus answered their question is most revealing. What was the context of this discussion? Were the Pharisees honestly seeking truth and understanding? The passages above reveal they were not. They did not approach Jesus with an earnest desire to learn how to address the problems and tragedy of difficult marriages and divorce. On the contrary, the Scriptures state that the purpose of their questions was to "test" him. Their goal was to find a cause to discredit and condemn him.
Jesus understood their motivation and answered them in a way that silenced them. He quoted portions of two passages found in Genesis 1 and 2. These passages are the bedrock of human sexuality.
"Then God said, 'Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.' And God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. And God blessed them; and God said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it; and rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky, and over every living thing that moves on the earth" (Gen. 1.26-28).
"And the LORD God fashioned into a woman the rib which He had taken from the man, and brought her to the man. And the man said, 'This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh; She shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.' For this cause a man shall leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and they shall become one flesh" (Gen. 2.21-24).
In the first passage, we learn that God created Man, i.e. mankind, in His own image. This image was composed of male and female. The next passage enlarges on Man's creation. From it we learn how God created woman. He built (Heb. hnfbf "banah") her out of the man. This act changed the "unity" of "Man" in the form of male and female "in Adam" and reformed it into two individual beings, male and female. Unity is recreated in marriage. The Bible expresses this wonder as "a man will leave his father and mother, cleave to his wife, and they will become one flesh. Hence, through sexual union and marriage, what began as a unity "in Adam" (man and woman) continues as a unity in two distinct individuals, man and woman, who become one flesh.
Jesus reaffirmed the image of God as male/female, man/woman with his quotation of Genesis. Alternative alignments of man/man, woman/woman, etc. reject God's creation and deface the image of God. No greater rebellion can be waged against the Creator than to reject his highest creation--the creation of Mankind who is in His own image. Jesus told the Pharisees, "what therefore God has joined together, let no man separate". This is precisely what those who argue for homosexuality insist upon. They desire to redefine the singularity of God's image into their own image. Therefore, while not mentioning the word"homosexuality" Jesus affirmed that only man/woman, male/female was legitimate as the image of God. Jesus' words on man/woman, male/female as the image of God should silence alternate sexual unions and partnerships. Those who argue for homosexuality as an alternative partnership and union have Jesus as their chief opponent.
In addition to Jesus' strong statements above, he upheld the inerrancy of the Hebrew written text. He declared,
"For verily I say unto you, 'Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven'" (Mt. 5.18-19).
"But it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one stroke of a letter of the Law to fail" (Lk. 16.17).
Jesus' declaration that it is easier for the universe to cease to exist than for the Scriptures to fail is at first glance shocking. Upon reflection, Jesus' statement reveals the simple fact that the faithfulness of God, indeed the character of God, is more secure than the existence of the universe. When Jesus spoke of the "Law" he is used it as a metonymy for the entire body of Scripture. According to Jesus, all that had been written, from Genesis to Malachi, was inerrant. With Jesus' validating imprimatur of the Scriptures, it is instructive to consider what they declare regarding homosexuality.
Sodom and Gomorrah
Genesis 18-19 records the story of God's deliverance of Lot from the city of Sodom which he afterwards destroyed. According to Genesis 13.13, "Now the men of Sodom were wicked exceedingly and sinners against the LORD". Genesis 18.20 states, "And the LORD said, 'The outcry of Sodom and Gomorrah is indeed great, and their sin is exceedingly grave.'" One of the sins of Sodom was homosexuality. The account in Genesis states:
"Before they lay down, the men of the city, the men of Sodom, surrounded the house, both young and old, all the people from every quarter; and they called to Lot and said to him, 'Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us that we may have relations with them.' But Lot went out to them at the doorway, and shut the door behind him, and said, 'Please, my brothers, do not act wickedly' (Gen. 19.4-7).
The translation, "have relations" is the Hebrew word "yada" ((dayf) and means "to know". It is used of intellectual, experiential, and sexual knowledge. Clearly, what is in view in this passage is sexual knowledge, cf. Gen. 4.1, "Now the man had relations (or "knew," (dayf) with his wife Eve, and she conceived and gave birth to Cain, and she said, "I have gotten a manchild with the help of the LORD." From the context of Genesis 19 it is clear that the men of Sodom wished to have homosexual relations with the two "men"2, who had come to deliver Lot from the gross immorality of the city and its impending destruction. Lot begged the men of Sodom not to act "wickedly" (Heb. ((arf). This word "raah" is always used of performing evil.
Lot continued his appeal to the men of Sodom:
"Now behold, I have two daughters who have not had relations with man; please let me bring them out to you, and do to them whatever you like; only do nothing to these men, inasmuch as they have come under the shelter of my roof. But they said, 'Stand aside.' Furthermore, they said, 'This one came in as an alien, and already he is acting like a judge; now we will treat you worse than them.' So they pressed hard against Lot and came near to break the door" (Gen. 19.8-9).
These verses expand our insight into the horror of this unnatural union to Lot's mind. Rather than have the men of Sodom violate the two "men", i.e. angels under his care, Lot offered them his virgin daughters. This dreadful offer must give any reader pause. What father would choose for his daughters to be gang raped? There is only one logical answer. Only a father so stressed at the thought of sex against the two angels that he regarded such a choice a lesser evil. Lest we think that Lot's judgment on this matter unique we will examine another story in the Scriptures with a similar plot. This is Judges 19.
While the sin of Sodom involved more than homosexuality, (cf. Ezek. 16.49-50) homosexuality was an overt indicator of its immorality. Its citizens not only practiced it; they were shameless about it (cf. Is. 3.9; Rom. 1.32). Throughout the Scriptures, Sodom and Gomorrah are used as examples of gross immorality. The Jewish prophets frequently referred to these cities as standards of evil when they identified their own nation's sin. Jesus noted these cities in his own preaching of repentance to Israel (cf. Mt. 10.15; 11.23-24; Lk. 10.11; 17.29).
Some maintain that the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah was not homosexuality itself but "abusive homosexuality". The problem with such an interpretation is that the Scriptures never make such a distinction. According to the Scriptures, homosexuality is abusive by definition. It is aberrant sexuality for it profanes the image of God. Others maintain that the sin of the men of Sodom was inhospitality. Such a suggestion is without Scriptural support and is not serious biblical scholarship.
God destroyed both Sodom and Gomorrah (the two major cities) as well as the cities of Admah and Zeboiim. The entire valley was morally corrupt. Jude commented of the destruction:
"And angels who did not keep their own domain, but abandoned their proper abode, He has kept in eternal bonds under darkness for the judgment of the great day. Just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities around them, since they in the same way as these indulged in gross immorality and went after strange flesh, are exhibited as an example, in undergoing the punishment of eternal fire" (Jude 1.6-7).
The translation "strange flesh" is the Greek expression "sarkos heteras" (Gk. sarko\j e(te/raj). In Greek, two words mean "other" or "another", ("allos" and "heteros", Gk. a)/lloj and e(/teroj). The word "allos" denotes another of the same sort while "heteros" denotes another of a different sort. For example, Jesus promised to send another "allos" Comforter (Jn. 14.16), i.e., another like himself. Paul warned the Galatians against another "heteros" gospel, i.e. a gospel different in character and quality than that which he preached--"another" (e)/teron) gospel which is not "another" (a)/lloj, Gal. 1.6-7). So, Jude, by using the word "heteros" meant flesh of a different kind.
Jude's statement "went after strange flesh" is intriguing. What does he mean by "strange flesh?" On the surface it might appear that "strange flesh" is Jude's way of referring to homosexual relations. But Jude seems to mean more than this since he brings up the matter of "angels who did not keep their own domain". Who were these angels? The most likely explanation is that they are the beings found in Genesis 6. There we find an account of "sons of God" ("bene elohim", Heb. Myhiol)e:hF-yn"b:) who had sexual relations with women. These women produced mighty offspring, the Nephilim. The expression, "bene elohim" (sons of God) means has been debated greatly by scholars. But it is not a difficult interpretation. The reason it has been debated is because of the idea of cohabitation between humans and angels. The phrase "bene elohim" is always used in the Scriptures of angels--never men (cf. Job 1.6, 2.1, 38.7). Therefore, the lexical evidence supports "bene elohim" being angels. As strange as sexual activity between angels and humans may sound, the Bible declares it was possible and happened in the distant past. From these unions arose the Nephiliim (Gen. 6.4; Num. 13.33). These beings are the source of the stories of "gods" and "demi-gods" found in pagan mythology. God destroyed these beings in the Flood. However, even after the Flood we find the offspring of these unions (e.g. Goliath, cf. 1 Sam 17.4-23; 21.9; 22.10; 2 Sam 21.19; 1 Ch 20.4-8). Such demi-humans or demi-gods as Goliath were members of the tribes of the Rephaim, Emim, Anakim (Dt 2.10-11) and the Zamzummim (Dt 2:20) which lived in the ancient near east. This interpretation would also explain God's unusually harsh commands to Israel to destroy completely the inhabitants in the lands (such as the Canaanites) they went to war against.
Jude's statment seems to indicate that the men of Sodom knew that the visitors were angels. The Genesis text does not reveal this, however. In any case, the angels were in the form of men and sex with them would have been a homosexual act. Lot's response clearly reveals that he regarded the demand of the men of Sodom to be evil.
Idolatry and Immorality
The Holiness Code of Leviticus 18 and 20 mentions homosexual activity. Leviticus 18.22 states, "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination". Leviticus 20.13, says, "If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltiness is upon them." Some have argued that this these acts refer to ritual uncleanness. The only passages with an element of ritual uncleanness are Lev. 18.19 and 20.18 which involve menstrual impurity. No serious biblical scholarship can accept that these two verses govern these two chapters. Such a conclusion is hermeneutical amateurism at best. The plain reading to the text indicates clearly that what is in view is moral purity not ritual cleanliness. Both Leviticus 18 and 20 enumerate rules of moral behavioral for the new Jewish national entity. They were not to follow the practices of the Egyptians. These moral rules defined and prohibited incest, adultery, homosexuality, bestiality, spiritism, and child sacrifice. The conclusion of both chapters is, "Thus you are to be holy to Me, for I the LORD am holy; and I have set you apart from the peoples to be Mine" (Lev. 20.26) and demolishes any argument for ritual purity.
Some maintain the issue at stake in these chapters is idolatry not homosexuality. There is merit in this observation. But to compartmentalize the issue would be a false path. It is not one to the exclusion of the other but both. Throughout the Scriptures there is a close correspondence of idolatry and aberrant sexuality. Sexual perversion is concomitant to false religion. An examination of idolatry in the Hebrew Scriptures (e.g. Ezek. 16.20-50; Lev. 20.1-5; Dt. 12.28-32) reveals that gross immorality was associated in idolatry. This fact is further revealed in secular literature and by archaeology. Paul clearly expounds the issue in Romans 1 when he argues that rejection of the true God results in idolatry which leads to degrading immorality (see the discussion below on Rom. 1.18-27).
Idolatry is the worship of false gods, that is to say, the worship of any other God than the God of Israel, YHVH. The word "idolatry" comes from two Greek words, "eidon", (Gk.ei)/don) the aorist form of the verb "horao" (Gk. o(ra/w) "to see" and "latreia", (Gk. latrei/a) which means "service". In the Septuagint "latreia" is used exclusively for divine service. Therefore, idolatry in its essential sense is rendering divine service to that which is visible. The God of the Bible is invisible and beyond sensory perception in his essential nature. This is the reason why God ordered the Jews not to make idols or representations of God.
Pagan cults almost by definition had idols and were rife with sexual immorality--both heterosexual and homosexual. Preachers rarely expound on idolatry and its associated phallic cult and most churchgoers are ignorant about what transpired in ritual idolatry. But such practices are well-known to historians and archaeologists who have studied the ancient near east, ancient Greece and Rome, and indeed all the ancient world. Every culture that engaged in idolatry exhibited sexual behavior that violated the pattern set forth by God in Genesis and in the Law of Moses. Idolatry in ancient cultures included human sacrifice, demonism, homosexuality, lesbianism, bestiality, and incest. Orgies and sexual promiscuity were intrinsic to the phallic cults; pagan "worship" involved priests and priestesses sexually acting out the roles of the fertility gods.
Debasement of the Concubine
Few stories are more sordid than the one recorded in Judges 19. It is as shameful a tale of immorality and debasement as one can imagine. The story involves a Levite who went to restore his concubine3 who had committed adultery against him. He traveled to her father's house where he spent several nights as his guest. Eventually he and his concubine left and arrived at a town opposite Jerusalem. Unable to find a place to stay for the night he was resigned that they would have to stay in the open square of the town. However, an old man came in from working in the fields to his rescue. He told him that he and his concubine were not to stay in the public square; they could spend the night with him. The Levite accepted the hospitality of his host and went to his house.
At this point the story assumes characteristics similar to the account of Lot in Genesis 18-19. Certain men of the city, aware that a stranger had arrived in town, began to pound on the old man's door. They demanded, "Bring out the man who came into your house that we may have relations with him" (Jud. 19.22). The word for "sexual relations" is the Hebrew "yada" ((dayf) we noted above. Judges recounts, "Then the man, the owner of the house, went out to them and said to them, 'No, my fellows, please do not act so wickedly; since this man has come into my house, do not commit this act of folly" (Jud. 19.23). The word for "wickedly" is the Hebrew word "raah" (((arf) which we met in Genesis 19. The phrase "act of folly" is the Hebrew word "nabalah" (hlfbfn;). The translation "folly" is rather insipid to modern ears. It conveys the sense of "silly" and has a connotation of triviality. This is not the sense of the word "nabalah" which carries the same sense as the word "nabal", (Heb. lbfnf). Both words mean "fool" or "foolish"--not in the sense of "silly" or "trivial"--but in the sense of being insensible to God and to right and wrong. Thus, Moses, called his generation "foolish" (Dt. 32.1-6) for they were insensible to God's goodness. The "fool" in Scripture is one who's mind lacks reason for he denies God's existence (Ps. 14.1). Premeditated rape is "nabalah" and is translated "disgraceful thing" in Genesis 34.7. Each of these occurrences contains no trace of triviality. Each denotes perverse insensitivity to what is good and right.
In response to the demand of the men, the old man, like Lot who offered his virgin daughters for the men of Sodom to rape, offered his own daughter and the Levite's concubine to the men. Both Lot and the old man faced the choice of relative evil. Either choice was "nabala". But both Lot and the old man determined that it was less evil for the men to rape their daughters than to have sex with a member of the same sex.
The story has a horrible outcome. The men of the city seized the Levite's concubine and "raped and abused" her all night long (v. 25). She died from the abuse. The Levite put her on his donkey and went home. When he got there he cut her up into twelve pieces and sent a piece to each tribe of Israel. Judges 19 ends, "And it came about that all who saw it said, 'Nothing like this has ever happened or been seen from the day when the sons of Israel came up from the land of Egypt to this day. Consider it, take counsel and speak up!'"
This passage of Scripture graphically illustrates how far the nation had fallen into sin. The accounts in both Genesis and Judges are parallel. Both Lot and the old man judged rape of the women to be a lesser sin than rape of the men. We would do well to heed the closing works of the chapter, "Consider it, take counsel and speak up!"
The Record in 1 Kings
Israel's history under its kings is recorded in Kings and Chronicles. After Solomon, the nation divided. In the north was "Israel" (ten tribes) and to the south "Judah" (two tribes). Judah had better kings and was more faithful to YHVH but eventually they too fell away from God. In each of the three passages below we find idolatry and cultic sexual immorality in the reigns of Jeroboam (Israel)/ Rehoboam (Judah) through Ahab (Israel)/Jehosophat (Judah):
"And Judah did evil in the sight of the LORD, and they provoked Him to jealousy more than all that their fathers had done, with the sins which they committed. For they also built for themselves high places and sacred pillars and Asherim on every high hill and beneath every luxuriant tree. And there were also male cult prostitutes in the land. They did according to all the abominations of the nations which the LORD dispossessed before the sons of Israel" (1 Ki. 14.22-24).
"So in the twentieth year of Jeroboam the king of Israel, Asa began to reign as king of Judah. And he reigned forty-one years in Jerusalem; and his mother's name was Maacah the daughter of Abishalom. And Asa did what was right in the sight of the LORD, like David his father. He also put away the male cult prostitutes from the land, and removed all the idols which his fathers had made. And he also removed Maacah his mother from being queen mother, because she had made a horrid image as an Asherah; and Asa cut down her horrid image and burned it at the brook Kidron. But the high places were not taken away; nevertheless the heart of Asa was wholly devoted to the LORD all his days" (1 Ki. 15.9-14).
"Now the rest of the acts of Jehoshaphat, and his might which he showed and how he warred, are they not written in the Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Judah? And the remnant of the sodomites who remained in the days of his father Asa, he expelled from the land" (1 Ki.22.45-46).
The translation, "male cult prostitutes" and "sodomites" (Heb. "qadesh" #$d"qf in the passages above were men who engaged in homosexual sex as part of the cultic worship of false gods (idols). This word comes from the root "qds" #$dq which has the meaning of being set apart or consecrated, i.e. "holy". But something is always set apart unto something. In context it means that the idolaters were set apart or consecrated to evil. Israel's priests, on the other hand, were set apart to YHVH. See also the passage, Dt. 23.17, which forbade Israel's men and women to be involved in cult-prostitution. Such cult prostitutes engaged in both heterosexual and homosexual acts. This is well-know from ancient near eastern studies as well as from the biblical text itself. Tragically, in the above occurrences, the godly meaning of "holy" had been turned into the false and immoral. If one is able to learn only one thing from the study about God in the Jewish Scriptures it is that the God of the Bible, YHVH, is fundamentally different from the gods of the ancient near east. He is ethically and morally perfect, i.e. "holy" and can have no commerce with sin. God went to great lengths to teach Israel about his character through the establishment of the Law of Moses, the Levitical priesthood, and the ceremonies necessary to worship and serve him.
What is clear from this passage is that the Scriptures declare that these activities were evil. It also provides us with the knowledge that there is a long lineage of homosexuality associated with false religion. Male and female prostitutes occupied a key role in ancient near east pagan religion. Thus, as Paul wrote that the Jewish Scriptures were written for our instruction (Rom. 15.4; 1 Cor. 10.11) we have an historical barometer to warn and guide us. As homosexuality makes inroads into Christianity it serves as an indicator that those involved in this promotion are engaged in false religion and is the modern equivalent of cult prostitution.
Paul's Indictment of Mankind
In chapter one of Romans, Paul rolls out the biblical analysis of the problem with the world. His analysis is a devastating indictment of mankind. Paul argues that man consciously rejects God and exchanges good for perversion and evil. What is God's response to man's rebellion? God allows man the freedom to practice evil. He "gives man over" to his perverse desires.
Paul's indictment begins in verses 18-21. He wrote,
"For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God, or give thanks; but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened."
The problem begins with man's conscious suppression of the truth. This results in futile speculations and hearts of darkness. The first consequence of mankind's rejection of God is given in verses 22-23:
"Professing to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures."
In verses 24-25 Paul writes of the second consequence of man's rebellion:
"Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, that their bodies might be dishonored among them. For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen."
Lastly, Paul tells of the third consequence of man's dark heart in verses 26-27:
"For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error."
Paul's argument pivots upon the words translated "changed" or "exchanged" and "abandoned" found in verses 23, 25, 26, and 27. In verse 23 Paul uses the word "allasso" (Gk. a)lla/ssw) and in verses 25 and 26 the word "metallasso" (Gk. metalla/ssw). The word "allasso" is used elsewhere in the New Testament five other times: Acts 6.14; 1 Cor. 15.51, 52; Gal. 4.20, and Heb. 1.12) while "metallasso" is used only in the passage above. Why does Paul change vocabulary? This is difficult to answer since the words are very similar and since "metallasso" is a hapax legomenon (Gk. a(/pac lego/menon). Perhaps it was a simple stylist choice. Perhaps we may account for the different vocabulary in that verse 23, where "allasso" is used, the "change" is a simple one to one exchange, i.e. God for idol, whereas in verses 25 and 26, where Paul uses the word "metallasso", the "change" or "exchange" is followed by perversion in worship and perversion in sex. Lastly, in verse 27 Paul uses the word "abandoned" (Gk. a)fi/hmi). This word carries the sense of "leave", "abandon", "send away" or "give up". It seems to convey an even stronger sense of will in rejecting what is good for what is evil or perverse.
The response of God to man's rejection of Himself and the truth is expressed in Paul's words: "God gave them over" vv. 24, 26, 28. Augustine said the punishment for sin is sin. He had a point.
There should be little controversy about the meaning of these verses. The passage teaches that homosexuality is contrary to nature, a rejection of God, and a rebellion against God's sexual design for the human race.
Paul's Instructions to the Corinthians
Corinth was a major metropolitan city of great commercial wealth. It had been such for generations and continued so in Paul's day. Paul wrote to the Corinthians to correct them on factions which had divided the members of the church and to address sexual immorality. He wished to encourage them to holy living. Paul's attitude towards homosexuality is consistent throughout his writings. We will examine the two other passages in which he comments on homosexuality. The first is in 1 Corinthians. Paul wrote the Corinthians,
"Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, shall inherit the kingdom of God. Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God." (1 Cor. 6.9-10).
Two words in the above passage refer to homosexuality. The first, translated "effeminate" is the Greek word "malakos" (Gk. malako/j). Literally, the word means "soft" or "soft to the touch" (cf. Mt. 11.8). Metaphorically, the sense in which Paul intends the word, it is used of catamites, of men and boys who allow themselves to be misused sexually with men. The second word, translated "homosexuals," is the Greek word "arsenokoites" (Gk. a)rsenokoi/tej). This word is used of a male homosexual or a pederast. Paul thus uses these two words to refer to the two types of behavior in homosexual acts. The first word "malakos") refers to the passive behavior and the second word (arsenokoites) refers to the active role in the homosexuality act. Both of these actions are regarded as sin and have no place in the kingdom of God.
Scientific research has discovered several factors that contribute to homosexuality--confused family roles from smothering or over-dominant mothers, absent or disinterested fathers, and physical or sexual abuse. However, Paul makes it clear in Romans 1 that ultimately homosexuality is no different from any sin. It is rooted in rebellion against God and against conscience. Some maintain homosexuality is genetic, i.e. they are "born that way." There is truth to this view for this is the problem for all of us. We are all born into sin. David wrote in his great confessional psalm, "Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin my mother conceived me" (Ps. 51.5). David did not mean his mother was guilty of committing an immoral act in his conception. Rather, he was acknowledging he entered the world a sinner.
Each of us has areas of strength and weakness when it comes to sin. For some, homosexuality is an area of weakness. For others it is stealing, lying, lust, murder, etc. Each person has a will and each person chooses to do the things he does. Consider crime. A man is brought before the court for stealing. His defense is, "I couldn't help it. I was born this way". What does the judge say? Guilty. Five years.
Some maintain that homosexuality is a congenital, natural state. There is no evidence, either scientific or biblical for this view. The Scriptures teach that homosexuality is an aberration. It is an unnatural declination. But it is also something that the Lord can change. Paul wrote the Corinthians, continuing the verses examined above:
"And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God" (1 Cor. 6.11).
Some of the Corinthians had been homosexuals. But no longer. God had transformed them. This is the hope for all of us. Each of us comes to the Lord with our old lives of sin. But as the wonderful verse above says, we have been wash, sanctified, and justified. Thanks be to God!
Paul's Instruction to Timothy
In this passage, Paul wrote to Timothy,
"But we know that the Law is good, if one uses it lawfully, realizing the fact that law is not made for a righteous man, but for those who are lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers and immoral men and homosexuals and kidnappers and liars and perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound teaching, according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, with which I have been entrusted" (1 Tim. 1.8-11).
The word "homosexuals" in the above passage is the Greek word "arsenokoites" (Gk. a)rsenokoi/tej), which we examined in the passage above. It is important to note that we find two passages with the same message, one to the Corinthians and one to Timothy. The significance of this fact is that we have a consistent message from the great Apostle that homosexuality was sinful.
Conclusion
"Then the messenger who went to summon Micaiah spoke to him saying, "Behold now, the words of the prophets are uniformly favorable to the king. Please let your word be like the word of one of them, and speak favorably." But Micaiah said, "As the LORD lives, what the LORD says to me, that I will speak" (1 Ki. 22.13-14).
Ahab, King of Israel sent his messenger to find Micaiah the prophet on the advice of Jehosophat, King of Judah. Micaiah stood in opposition to the religious establishment of the four hundred prophets who served Ahab. In questioning them about whether he would be successful in war against Ramoth-gilead all Ahab's prophets had responded, "Go up, for the Lord will give it into the hand of the king" (v.6). Arriving before Ahab, Micaiah spoke the word of the Lord to Ahab and told him he would die and lose the battle. Ahab chose to listen to his own prophets. He thought he could disguise himself in the battle and be safe. He was wrong. He died.
Some things never change. Micaiah's courageous stand before Ahab over 2,800 years ago is a challenge to us today. What are Christians to do on the matter of homosexuality? Many Church leaders, like Ahab's prophets, have declared that there is nothing wrong with homosexuality. They maintain that what the Bible says about homosexuality is wrong, that it is not "the word of the Lord". This is an old line. One can hear the hiss of the serpent who enticingly uttered "Hath God said"? The great question and challenge to us as Christians in a fallen world is whether we will be faithful to God and his Word. How do we do that? We do it by believing what God says, by communicating the truth, and by challenging and encouraging others to believe and be faithful also. The only issue at hand is what is the word of the Lord? The prophets who served Ahab claimed to speak the word of the Lord. They were the majority. They were the establishment. They were the power. Every one of them was wrong. Ahab lost the battle. Ahab died. The word of our God is found in the Scriptures. The Scriptures are unambiguously clear in their teaching that homosexuality is sin. Those who reject the testimony of Scripture and promote and tolerate homosexuality profane the image of God and are in rebellion against God.
None of us is without sin. But, thanks be to God, Christ has paid for our sins. God loves all sinners! He has redeemed us from the law of sin and death. He has opened to us new life. As Christians, what is our message to those in the bondage and slavery of homosexuality? First, it is believe in Christ (1 Cor. 15.1-4) and second, it is to allow him to transform us (Rom. 12.1-2). God's desire is to conform us into the image of Christ (Rom. 8.28-29). The only way we can be "ourselves" is by being His. Paul wrote that if we are "in Christ" we have been fundamentally changed; we new creatures. Our message to mankind and those bound in homosexuality is the message of the great apostle Paul:
"Therefore if any man is in Christ, he is a new creature; the old things passed away; behold, new things have come. Now all these things are from God, who reconciled us to Himself through Christ, and gave us the ministry of reconciliation, namely, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and He has committed to us the word of reconciliation. Therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God were entreating through us; we beg you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God. He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him" (2 Cor. 5.17-21).
1The Scriptures state that Jesus is the Creator of all things (cf. Jn. 1.3; Col. 1.16; Heb. 1.2). Therefore, Jesus' response to the Pharisees was a reference to his own activity.
2Angels always appear in the form of men in the Bible.
3A concubine was a slave and a wife of secondary rank. She was usually acquired as payment of a family debt, purchased from a poor family, or taken as a captive in war. Succession and inheritance went through concubines as with wives.
Resources consulted for this study are the following:
G. Abbott-Smith, A Manual Greek Lexicon of the New Testament, T. & T. Clark, 1977.
William F. Arndt and F. Wilbur Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, University of Chicago Press, 1957.
Geoffrey W. Bromiley, The International Standard BibleEncyclopedia, revised edition, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1979-1988.
Francis Brown, S. R. Driver, and Charles A. Briggs, A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament with an Appendix Containing the Biblical Aramaic, Clarendon Press, 1979.
R. Laird Harris, Gleason L. Archer, Bruce K. Waltke, Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, Moody Press, 1980.
James Hope Moulton and George Milligan, The Vocabulary of the Greek Testament Illustrated from the Papyri and Other Non-Literary Sources, William. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1980.
W. E. Vine, An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words with their Precise Meanings for English Readers, Fleming H. Revell Co. 1966.
a)gapw~nti h(ma~j kai\ lu/santi h(ma~j e)k tw~n a(martiw~n h(mw~n e)n tw|~ a(i/mati au)tou~.
©2004 Don Samdahl. Anyone is free to reproduce this material and distribute it, but it may not be sold.
Updated December 9, 2006