Last week, in our “Scripture and the Welcoming Church” Bible class, we looked at the three New Testament texts which have been historically read as passages that condemn same-sex relationships. We begin with the biggest passage of them all, and perhaps the most direct one in all of scripture, Romans 1:18-32. I invite you to click on the link or open your Bible and read this text right now, as it’s too large to include in this article. 

Romans is written by the Apostle Paul, to a church he had yet to visit but one he knew well. I had a seminary professor, Dr. James Thompson, who was a Pauline Scholar, and he wrote a well-received book arguing that Paul’s letters are written like a sermon, following the model of Greek oration, and providing the congregations he’s writing the sermon he would preach if he were not here. It reminds me of those days during the pandemic when we’d record sermons, imagining the congregation responding, but not being able to actively engage the listeners. 

At issue in the book of Romans is a conflict between Jewish Christians and Gentile Christians. Culturally, there is a lot of difference between the two, and each come from different backgrounds with different religious expectations. It is believed that the church in Rome was started primarily with Jewish Christians. Over time, they converted some Gentiles to Christianity, but the Jews had all the power in the church, and often argued that Gentiles needed to adapt cultural Jewish practices in order to be authentically Christian. This was all interrupted, however, when there was a Roman Emperor, Claudius, who expelled the Jews from the city of Rome. That left a vacuum in the church, and after the Jewish leaders were gone, the Gentiles stepped into positions of power. But then, 5 years later, Emperor Claudius died and with him died the edict banning Jews. Thus, the Jews returned, and in the Church in Rome, they came back to find Gentiles holding the power that they once held. 

Imagine what would happen in our church a large group of long time members left, leaving a vacuum. Newer members stepped in, and then, after 5 years, the old members returned, demanding their positions of power back. A lot can change in 5 years, and when this happened in Rome, there was inevitable conflict. This is the context in which Paul is writing his letter. When the church receives it, perhaps they are expecting Paul to take the side of the Jews, since he is one of them. At first, as you read chapter 1, it seems like that’s what he’s doing, arguing that the Gentiles are lesser than the Jews, because the Jews have done more to please God. But if you keep reading, you see that the whole letter is to make one big theological point: that no one, in of themselves, are righteous; no one owns God; no one can save themselves. Everyone—Jews and Gentiles—are saved through Jesus Christ alone.

That’s the book of Romans in a nutshell.

With all that in mind, we return to this passage that we have used to forbid homosexuality. Here’s the gist of what the text says: God created the world, but God is angry at ungodliness and wickedness. And no one is without excuse—everyone should know better. They know God, they don’t honor God. They claim to be wise, but are fools! And — big point here — they exchange the glory of God for images and for things less than God.

This is where Paul begins talking about sex. He says “they” turned to degrading passions like “women exchanged natural intercourse for unnatural,” men “giving up natural intercourse with women were consumed with passion for one another. Men committed shameless acts with men and received in their own persons the due penalty for their error.” Thus, because of this, God gave them up to their debased minds, and “things that should not be done”. And then a long list of sins is given, which we should note, mention things like gossiping, being haughty, boasting, and rebelling against parents. 

It seems pretty clear what Paul is talking about. Paul is describing the moral, baseless lives of Gentiles. And you can imagine the Jews thinking—“yes! That’s how they are! You tell them, Paul! They’re nasty! They’re gross! They’re perverts!” But keep reading, because Paul is making a wider argument, and before we get into what he means in these verses about homosexuality, we need to understand the full argument. Romans 2:1, the very next verse after this passage, which says that you (the Jewish Christians) have no excuse, for when you judge others, for in passing judgment on another you condemn yourself, because you are doing the same things. 

Do not judge, for you are doing the same things. We should pause to point out that a text that has been used to judge harshly anyone who is sexually different, often kicking them out of the very kingdom of God, is, in fact, a passage that condemns such judgment.

What is Paul doing here? Paul is a preacher, and he’s making a rhetorical argument. He’s getting the Jews all riled up, as he talks about all the “gross things” we all know Gentiles do, like “men laying with men”, and in the moment they are fired up by the sinfulness of Gentiles, Paul points the finger at them and says—don’t you judge, because you’re just as bad! Paul is a good preacher!

Later in the book, Paul will say that “All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.” That Jews have no advantage over Gentiles. And that everyone is justified by the redemption of Jesus Christ. No one is better than the other. All need Jesus. Stop judging. That’s the message of Romans.

Given what we understand of Paul’s big argument, when we return back to these “gay texts” in Romans 1, we have to understand that Paul isn’t just giving a list of sins. He’s making an argument using examples. He’s building off the prejudices of their times to show how nasty and wrong people believe the Gentiles to be. What is it actually saying, though, when he talks about men and women doing sexual things that are natural and unnatural. Shameless acts. Due penalty for their errors. What is all of this?

Some points to consider. First, in the ancient world, it was assumed that all people could be satisfied with heterosexual sex, which was supposed to be only for procreation or, if necessary, to relieve passion in a safe way. Anything that went beyond that was seen as insatiable lust. In his commentary on Romans 1:26-27, John Chrysostom, an early Church leader, wrote, “You see that the whole of desire comes from an excess which cannot contain itself within its proper limits.” Paul’s main point here is a concern with uncontrollable lust, and playing off the stereotype that Gentiles just can’t control themselves! He isn’t specifically condemning being gay as opposed to being straight. He is making a wider argument, condemning all self-seeking excess as opposed to moderation, selfishness as opposed to love, a concern he makes clear by his repeated use of the term “lustful.”

Second, we have to realize that committed same-sex relationships simply aren’t in view in Romans 1. Those didn’t exist. What is in view is any and all sex that is done merely for pleasure. Which brings us to an examination of the words “natural” and “unnatural”. Often, people have referred to this use of “unnatural” to suggest that Paul is saying that any same-sex coupling is against nature, that is, against God’s created intent. 

But there are different ways to understand the word Paul uses. “Natural” in Greek can be “as created in nature”, but it can also mean “in kind, or characteristic.” As in, it’s customary. In 1 Corinthians 11, Paul says that it’s “unnatural for a man to have long hair.” He’s not saying it’s always wrong, but he’s saying having long hair is uncustomary in their culture. In fact, we know that long hair in men isn’t always shameful, because the ancient Jewish Nazirite vow forbade men from cutting their hair (Numbers 6:5). Samson’s decision to cut his hair was shameful in his context, but scripture lifted up his long hair was actually a source of strength (Judges 16:17-19). What is honorable and shameful varies across times and cultures. Even for me, it was out of character for me to grow my hair out! I had shaved my hair for two decades. It wasn’t my custom. But then I did something unnatural.

It’s also important to note that in those days, too, any sex that was for more than procreation could be “unnatural”. So, having sex just for pleasure, unnatural. Using protection, unnatural. Certain position, unnatural. Chances are, we’ve all been “unnatural” in our sex lives over time, according to 1st century customs. Cultural norms about sex are always evolving, and the point is that Paul isn’t making a theological argument, but referring to cultural norms in order to make a point that none of us stand in a position to judge others.

One quick note about the phrase, “due penalty for their error” that Paul describes in Romans 1:27. This verse has been used to say that God gives gay people AIDS or other STDs. Of course, anyone can get AIDS or STDs, especially straight people, and Lesbians are the least likely to transmit disease. So…there’s that. But also, God giving people diseases isn’t really consistent with what we understand about God, and believe about God. Do you want to make the argument that God gives AIDS, Cancer, and Muscular Dystrophy as punishment? I know I don’t. Always when interpreting scripture we need to remember what scripture consistently says about the character of God. Understanding God’s character, and the example Jesus gave us, gives us a lens to read these texts.

The issue in our Romans passage is with the word “penalty”. The Greek word really means recompense, reward, payment, and the word can be used in a negative or positive way. So, “penalty” is not really the best translation. Really, I think what’s being talked about here is impurity and uncleanliness. This is the same thing we say when we studied Leviticus last week. These behaviors cause people to be religiously, ritually impure. It makes them unclean, as a lot of actions according to ancient Jewish customs would do.

I do not think this Romans text forbids same-sex relationships. It refers to same-sex activity, yes, but when we understand the context and theological argument of the book, it’s clear Paul’s real point is that everyone is “unclean” and “sinful” and none can be righteous on their own. Thanks be to God for the gift of Jesus Christ!

There are two more New Testament passages, the last of the 6 passages in scripture that mention “homosexuality”. They are 1 Corinthians 6:9 and 1 Timothy 1:10. They are very similar passages, containing what we call “sin lists”.  At the end of the 1 Corinthians 6:9 list, Paul says, “This is what you used to be, but you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ.” This, once again, shows his broader point, arguing that the we all have sinned but are made new by Jesus.

At issue in these texts, though, are two Greek words in 1 Corinthians 6:9, and one Greek word in 1 Timothy 1:10, which is repeated from 1 Corinthians 6:9. The New Revised Standard Version of the New Testament translates these two words as  “Male prostitutes” and “sodomites”. In class last week, we had everyone read what their own translations said, and we found a wide variance of translation. It’s important to note that all translation is interpretation. Meaning, we do not always know what the words mean or how they’re being used. So, when we translate, we do our best. But our cultural baggage always plays into the translation.  

A lot of English versions might use the word “homosexual” in these verses. It’s important to note that this is the only use of this English word in all of scripture, and English Bibles did not include “homosexual” until the Revised Standard Version in 1946. At that time, the RSV took two words in 1 Corinthians 6:9 and made them into one word, “homosexual”. This was not an accident. The scholars who did this chose to do this, in order to make a point about homosexuality. And, thus, it included this understanding in scripture for years.

Prior to this, the King James Version interpreted these two words as  “effeminate” and “abusers of themselves with mankind”, whatever that might means. Again, the NRSV chose, “Male prostitutes and sodomites”. So, what are the Greek words? The first is Arsenokoitai – which has been translated “homosexuals, sodomites, child molestors, perverts,” along with other stuff. You can find the various translation possibilities in various English Bibles, highlighting the confusion about what this word means.

The other word is Malakoi, which has been translated as “effeminate”, “boy prostitutes”, or even “sissies.” Some in the Middle Ages translated it as “masturbators.” Prejudices change, and with them translations of biblical words.

The first thing we should note is, we’re already on shaky ground, condemning entire groups of people over words that are confusing in their meaning. The truth is, no one really knows what these words mean, so that, alone, should give us pause to apply them to homosexuality. Many believe that Paul either made these words up, or used words that people did not broadly know or use. They don’t appear anywhere else in scripture, and in few texts in ancient culture, all of which show up after 1 Corinthians. So, this passage is the first known use of these words. Paul might be taking known words and creating new words to refer to something culturally.

The word Malakos literally means “soft” or “softs”. It’s used for clothing or food. When applied to moral issues, it could mean “loose”, like soft morals, loose morals, for people don’t stand for much, are undisciplined, or unrestrained. “Soft” would be used of all people, not just straight people. When referring to sex, some have suggested it means “effeminate call boy”, like a male prostitute. This seems the most likely case, given the context, and if so, Paul’s use of the word would be condemning prostitution, not consensual, partnered sex.

The word Arsenokoitai, is the word that also shows up in 1 Timothy and no where else in scripture. Literally, it is a joint word created from two known words that can mean “man” and “bedroom”. It’s probably a word Paul created, and some believe it could mean “man sleeper” or “man penetrator.” Because of this, some have thought that Paul is talking about men who pay for sex with other men. 

Once again, we are considering the culture of the day. In that time, “gay sex” was often sex with older men and younger men, often prostitution or with slaves. It was exploitative and rape. Paul could be using both of these words to condemn men who would sell their bodies to other men for sex and for men who would purchase sex from other men, and probably younger men. Scholars have argued that in those days, when “homosexuality” was discussed, it was always “pederastic”, that is, dealing with younger, underage boys. Thus, the only things Paul could be condemning here are prostitution and pediaphilia, not consensual sex between two people of the same gender.

Throughout scripture, a consistent witness is that relationships should not be exploitative. Scripture always argues against cultural norms, which either use sex as domination or frivolously, or in the context of idol worship. In this passage, Paul seems to be arguing against all these ideas. We’re still not fully sure what he’s saying here, but he seems to be suggesting that sex should not be selfish or exploitative, nor should it cause harm or play into the cultural use of sex in idol worship. “That’s what some of you were,” he argues. But now we are different. What the text does not do, however, is offer a clear condemnation of same-sex relationships. Indeed, once again, the text doesn’t even mention female same-sex relationships. Clearly, something else is going on here.

Next week we will look at some big picture arguments, and see what the teachings of Jesus might have to say to us on this topic. Thanks for reading!