Grace & Peace!
I’m curious here, and maybe the various Prots can answer: how does your church re-read the Bible or re-interpret the anti-homosexual activity passages in the Bible?
To me, it’s pretty clear, in black and white, that this kind of stuff isn’t much favored.
Hi Maxply. Some folks, right off the bat, would object to your assumption that the passages in question are specifically “anti-homosexual activity.” The reason is three-fold.
1–The human authors of scripture did not have the 19th century understanding of sexuality which gave rise to the term “homosexual”, nor did they have in mind our 20th and 21st century notions of what that term means. They could not be addressing homosexuality as we understand it.
2–Context. Mentions of homosexually-oriented activity almost exclusively take place in contexts which discuss either a) gentile culture; or b) gentile religious practice. Which suggests to many scholars that context is key–homosexual activity is wrong because it takes place in the context of gentile worship (which included cult prostitution) or is a feature of gentile culture–which culture
as a whole is considered unsavory. This accords with Paul’s references in Romans which serve a rhetorical point–this is what gentiles do because of misguided religion, but you Jewish people, what is your excuse? In other words, the unsavory context makes the activity unsavory.
3–Translations. Many words translated in some Bibles as “homosexual” could not possibly carry that meaning to the ancient writers (given point 1 above) and are so translated given a particular
present cultural bias. A word like “malakoi” which has been variously translated “effeminate” or “sexual pervert” or “male prostitute” means soft, and in other Greek writings refers to a quality of softness (such as cloth, or freshly tilled soil); a person of loose morals, or one who has no self-control; or a weak possibly effeminate person. Literally, it could mean “soft people”. Given the context in Paul’s epistles, libertinism is the implication.
Some, though, would translate malakoi as “male receptive partner” based on a reading of arsenokoites as “male active partner”. That seems to suggest that “arsenokoites” would be a technical term that Greek audiences would be familiar with. It’s not. The first real attested use of arsenokoites is Paul, as (some have suggested) it looks like he’s attempting to use it to encapsulate in one word the verse in Leviticus which refers to “men lying with men as with women” (though literally the Hebrew refers to “men lying the lyings of women”). Literally, arsenokoites means “men who lie down”. It’s possible he’s referring to prostitutes. It’s possible he’s referring to the active male partner. It’s possible he’s referring to any number of things.
Some refer malakoi to pederasty, and arsenokoites to male prostitution. There’s no clear scholarly consensus, however.
What’s clear is this: male prostitution, either as a prostitute or as a client, is wrong; as is pederasty. Temple prostitution, likewise, is wrong.
Stretching it a bit (that is, ignoring context), the most that can be said is either that treating your male partner as a woman is wrong, or anal sex is wrong.
Based on these verses, however, we
cannot say that loving homosexual relationships are wrong in themselves.
I hope this helps.
Under the Mercy,
Mark
Deo Gratias!
