First of all, it does matter what the word arsenokoitai means in order to grasp whether homosexual acts are or not condemned in the Bible. More than that, we must consider who has written this word and to whom he has done that. It appears in two Paul’s epistles: 1Co, which is really by Paul and 1Tm, which authorship and date are rather controversial. In the first case, 1Co, the term comes together with malakoi, which was translated as “moles” in the Vulgata Latina, by Saint Jerome. The Latin translation here is important because Corinth, in the 1st century BC, was a Roman city, rather cosmopolitan, but very roman in its values and morals. In that time, the ‘pagans’ themselves condemned passive sexual attitudes by men (uir), who were conceived as political citizens and, as such, also governors of their houses. In this sense, the moral condemnation of the ‘malakoi’ or ‘moles’ (‘humid’ and ‘effeminate’ man) existed among the Romans as an improper activity for free man. It was not only considered something bad for a man to man relationship, but also for a man to woman relationship in which the man would have a passive attitude (like in some sexual positions). However, Paul condemns not only the malakoi, but also the one who might have had an active relationship with him: the ‘arsenokoitai’. It is clearly suggested that the exploitation of the ‘morally condemned’ ‘malakoi’ is also reprehensible. Paul was certainly aware of what is written in Leviticus about fornication, which is a part of the Jewish Law which was considered relevant for the gentiles converted to the Christian faith to follow, as it is explained in the book of Acts. He adopted or translated the sexual relationship of a man with a man condemned in the Old Testament to the Pagan context of his time and to the moral rules of the Romans in a Greek province. The point here is not to check the validity of the terms ‘arsenokoitai’ or ‘malakoi’ to the present days, but to adapt or translate them into the current behaviors related to contemporary homoafectivity. Certainly, a sexual intercourse cannot be considered morally right or wrong not considering the conscience of the ones who practice it. ‘Pagans’ converted to Christianity could understand the point of view of Paul because they recognized his words with practices that they knew. The point is that: do we talk about the same thing when we consider homosexual practices nowadays? If we want to be fair with our brothers and sisters who feel attracted to people of the same sex, we have to know which are their practices and, more important, which intentions inform their practices. We’re not Romans nor Jews anymore. We are not citizens of the Empire nor subjects to all the Jewish restrictions and taboos. But we have the Holy Spirit to illuminate our minds and a magnanimous judge to consider our acts and thoughts with mercy. We can be like Paul instead of blind followers of his words. Get closed to homosexuals and see by yourselves if they deserve punishment for the life they live. They are sinners, but only in the same extent that we all are.
