Homosexuality in the New Testament
The phrase "passions of dishonor" (KJV: "vile affections") translates πάθη ἀτιμίας, ἀτιμία atimia meaning 'dishonour, ignominy, disgrace'.
[11] In common with many traditional commentators, Hilborn goes on to argue that condemnation of homosexual activity is derived from the "broad contours" of Paul's argument, in addition to the selective reading of individual words or phrases.
[16][page needed] Boswell argues that the conceptual modality (natural laws) which would provide the basis for the condemnation of homosexuality did not exist prior to the Enlightenment era.
[17] Richard B. Hays argues that Romans 1:26–27 is part of a general condemnation of humans, in which males and females, have rejected their creational (as in Genesis) distinctions, with homoeroticism being intrinsically wrong.
[20] Jeramy Townsley goes on to specify the context of Romans 1:26–27 as the continuation of Paul's condemnation of the worship of pagan gods from earlier in the chapter, linking the 'homosexuality' implied in Romans 1:27 to the practice of temple prostitution with castrated priests of Cybele, practices condemned more explicitly in the Old Testament (1 Kings 15:12, 2 Kings 23:7), the same religious group that violently attacked Paul in Ephesus, driving him from the city (Acts 19).
The implication is that the goddess religions, the castrated priests and temple prostitution had a wide impact in ancient Mediterranean culture so would immediately evoke an image for the 1st-century audience of non-Yahwistic religious idolatry, practices not familiar to the modern reader, which makes it easy to misinterpret these verses.
[22] Mona West argues that Paul is condemning specific types of homosexual activity (such as temple prostitution or pederasty) rather than a broader interpretation.
West argues that Paul is speaking to a gentile audience, in terms that they would understand, to show that "all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God" (Romans 3:23).
[25] While Paul does not explicitly address female same-sex relationships, Harper suggest that his silence speaks for itself and that Romans holds unspoken prejudice about the passive partner.
[27] Townsley notes that other early writers, possibly including Chrysostom, reject the 'lesbian' hypothesis, specifically, Ambrosiaster, Didymus the Blind and Clement of Alexandria.
Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor sodomites nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.
Moreover, Hippolytus of Rome in his Refutation of all Heresies describes a Gnostic teaching, according to which an evil angel Naas committed adultery with Eve and arsenokoitēs with Adam.
For example, Scobie states that "there is no evidence that the term was restricted to pederasty; beyond doubt, the NT here repeats the Leviticus condemnation of all same-sex relations".
[38] Similarly, Campbell writes, "it must be pointed out, first, that arsenokoitēs is a broad term that cannot be confined to specific instances of homosexual activity such as male prostitution or pederasty.
"[39] Others have pointed out that the meaning of 'arsenokoitēs' is identified by its derivation from the Greek translation of the Old Testament, where the component words "with a man (arsenos) do not copulate coitus (koites) as with a woman" refer to homosexual conduct.
"[41][42] Haas, reviewing the various arguments on both sides, concluded that "an examination of the biblical passages from linguistic, historical and ethical-theological perspectives fails to support the revisionist ethic and reinforces the traditional Christian teaching that homosexual practice is morally wrong.
The Greek word μαλακός; malakos carries a root meaning of soft, luxurious or dainty, but here, G. Fee argues, it is used in a derivative way, possibly referring to the more passive partner in a homosexual relationship.
Olson argues that the μαλακοί in Paul's time, "almost always referred in a negative, pejorative way to a widely despised group of people who functioned as effeminate 'call boys'."
Dale B. Martin argues that "it would never have occurred to an ancient person to think that malakos or any other word indicating the feminine in itself referred to homosexual sex at all.
For example, Malick (op cit) writes that a significant expression of this usage is found in a letter[note 2] from Demophon, a wealthy Egyptian, to Ptolemaeus, a police official, concerning needed provisions for a coming festival.
[55] Some theologians have argued that, when read in historical context, the Jewish Platonist philosopher Philo of Alexandria used the term in reference to temple prostitution.
[60] King James Version (1611): "Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine"The term relevant to homosexuality, "that defile themselves with mankind", translates ἀρσενοκοίτης ('arsenokoitēs'), the same term for homosexuals used in 1 Corinthians.
[19][64] King James Version (1611): "Even as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.
Simon J. Kistemaker notes that the Greek phrase 'σαρκὸς ἑτέρας' (sarkos heteras, "strange flesh") is often interpreted as the specific desire on the part of the Sodomites to have sexual relations with angels.
Thomas E. Schmidt's dictionary entry on the topic concludes that a process of spirituality and sexuality are developmental in the life of Christian believers and proper instruction is towards "a growth in discipleship" rather than self-identity.
[85] For example, William Walker says that the very notion of "homosexuality" (or even "heterosexuality", "bisexuality" and "sexual orientation") is essentially a modern concept that would simply have been unintelligible to the New Testament writers.
[86] The word "homosexuality" and the concept of sexual orientation as being separate from one's perceived masculinity or femininity (i.e. gender identity) did not take shape until the 19th century.
Moreover, he asserts that there is absolutely no evidence that modern orientation theory would have had any impact on Paul changing his strong negative valuation of homosexual practice.
[89] A statement by the Bishops of the Church of England ("Issues in Human Sexuality") in 1991 illustrates a categorization and understanding of homosexuality, claiming that in ancient times "society recognized the existence of those, predominantly male, who appeared to be attracted entirely to members of their own sex."
The same study is careful to point out that "the modern concept of orientation has been developed against a background of genetic and psychological theory which was not available to the ancient world."
