Many biblical scholars do not believe that we have correctly interpreted the various writers correctly on this issue. The OT claims against homosexuality are more akin to issues of hospitality rather than the action itself.
As to the NT claims mostly from Paul, but present in a couple of other places as well, many believe that the real issue here is one of power. The male who submits is thought of as one giving up power and this is unacceptable. It is never the dominant person who is chastized. In the annals of Roman history, Julius Caesar was made sport of because of his apparent relationship with a foreign king. The king was not so made fun of, apparently because it was believed he was the dominant in the relationship. Caesar, who was supposed to be so manly, was seen an womanish and thus chastized.
The same can be said for the Greeks. It was a common practice for adult males to guide young men under the age of puberty. This included the practice of homosexual liasons. While we of course don’t accept such behavior, the child being below the age of majority, this was the very reason it was acceptable in Greek society. Once the boy reached puberty, such behavior was no longer allowed, the boy now being a man. Thus it would be unseemly for him to continue to submit.
What is written in letters and has been adopted into the canon is almost always heavily tied to the specific communities to which it is addressed, and not especially fruitful to be used as moral precepts for today. This was commonly understood by the people of that time. Paul certainly had no expectations that his letters to local churches would one day be considered scripture! To some degree, Paul’s moral remarks are simply a regurgitation of what was common in both Jewish and Roman/Hellenistic thought. That is not to say there is no relationship to now, but that we must be careful in ascribing such relationship.
Paul was incorrect in his assumption that the end of the world was close at hand and that Jesus would return during his lifetime. He did believe, it appears that love should be our motivating force, as an expression of our faith. That seems to be the universal key by which we should investigate and determine what is morally right or wrong today. He’s basic assumption that slavery was normative suggests that as well. Clearly, we don’t believe Paul on that point today, any more than we believe that Christ’s return is imminent. It is what as we now all acknowledge.
