Same-Sex Activity: What does the New Testament Say?
This article is from the Forum Magazine, Fall 2015 - view the full issue here
What does the New Testament say about same-sex activity? The answer to this question is clearer than is often claimed. The answer is also more important than whatever experiences or feelings we may have about this controversial subject. Our experiences with gay friends and family members are important and do matter. Those who read this article and are gay, your experiences and feelings are important and also do matter. But for Jesus followers, the only thing that ultimately matters when it comes to same-sex activity is what God says in his Word.
Preliminary Observations
Before turning to the relevant texts of the NT, there are some preliminary observations that ought to be made. First, a key distinction exists between orientation and activity: the NT texts we will look at refer to sexual acts and do not deal with same-sex orientation. The Bible clearly condemns same-sex acts, but there is nothing inherently sinful about people who have a same-sex orientation.
Second, same-sex acts, though wrong and not part of God’s will for humanity, should not be ranked as worse than other sins. The NT texts list same-sex acts alongside many other things that are equally forbidden to followers of Jesus. For example, the fact that 1 Corinthians 6:9 lists the “greedy” shortly after “men who have sex with other men” as those who will not inherit the kingdom of God suggests that the church should be just as concerned about those who pile up more money than they will ever need in their 401(k) retirement fund and yet fail to share their abundance with others as it is with those who engage in same-sex conduct.
Third, the church needs to demonstrate more compassion and support for those with same-sex orientations. It is a sad truth that the Christian community as a whole, including our Christian Reformed denomination, has failed in its calling both to demonstrate in concrete ways empathy for our homosexual brothers and sisters and to provide the kind of supportive environment in which they, along with heterosexual members whose orientation is also negatively impacted by the fall, are equipped to live a life of holiness.
The Testimony of Jesus
Revisionists—those who argue against the traditional position that the Bible condemns same-sex activity—are often quick to point out the silence of Jesus on homosexual conduct: “If same-sex acts are so bad, why didn’t Jesus say anything about it?” The weakness of this argument, however, becomes clear from several observations.
First, the Judaism of Jesus’ day was in complete agreement in denouncing same-sex activity. It is highly unlikely, therefore, that Jesus would differ from that view, unless he explicitly stated so. Yet Jesus never even hints at an affirmation of homosexual conduct that would reveal his supposed contrast to the condemnatory statements by fellow Jews of his day.
Second, despite the popularity of “red-letter” Bibles, Christians should not treat Jesus’ words as more important than the other parts of Scripture. What Paul has to say about same-sex acts is just as much the “word of God” (1 Thess. 2:13) as what Jesus says, or, in this case, does not say.
Third, Jesus never says anything against other sexual sins such as prostitution, incest, pederasty or bestiality. Yet no one concludes from Jesus’ silence that he was tolerant of such behaviors.
Fourth, Jesus lists in Mark 7:21–23 several things that defile a person, and at the head of the list is “sexual immorality” (NIV 2011). This particular rendering may be misleading because the Greek term porneiai is rendered in translation as singular but is plural in the original: “sexual immoralities.” This suggests that Jesus, a rabbi who knew well the Torah, or OT law, has in mind the different kinds of sexual sins (plural) forbidden in texts such as Leviticus 18 and 20—texts that condemn all kinds of unlawful sexual relations, including those of same-sex partners (Lev. 18:22; 20:13).
The appeal to Jesus’ silence on the issue of homosexual conduct and the portrayal of Jesus as someone who would be open to certain forms of same-sex acts, therefore, suffer from significant weaknesses. The evidence instead indicates that Jesus shared with the Jews of his day a universal agreement that same-sex acts were sinful and not to be done by God’s covenant people.
The Testimony of Paul
Paul, like Jesus, was a first-century Jew and thus would have been similarly influenced by the unanimous condemnation of same-sex acts found in the Jewish community of his day. Furthermore, the apostle’s position on sexual matters generally is very conservative. For example, he writes to the Thessalonians “that you should avoid sexual immorality; that each of you should learn to control your own body in a way that is holy and honorable, not in passionate lust like the pagans” (1 Thess. 4:3–5). Paul strongly rebukes the Corinthian church for tolerating a sexual relationship between a man and his stepmother (1 Cor. 5:1–11) and for accepting certain members who were engaging in the sexual services of prostitutes (1 Cor. 6:12–20). The apostle’s position on sexual matters is so conservative that he writes to the Ephesians that “among you there must not be even a hint of sexual immorality” (Eph. 5:3). In light of both Paul’s Jewish background and also his statements on sexual conduct more generally, we can plausibly expect to find that the apostle would not approve of same-sex acts. T his is, in fact, exactly the position of Paul that emerges from the three texts where he explicitly addresses homosexual practice: Romans 1:24–27; 1 Corinthians 6:9; and 1 Timothy 1:10.
Let’s look at 1 Corinthians 6:9 and 1 Timothy 1:10 first. These two texts address same-sex acts with just two words in Greek: malakoi and arsenokoitai. Here is the context in which both words occur:
9 Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men [malakoi and arsenokoitai] 10nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. (1 Cor. 6:9–10)
8We know that the law is good if one uses it properly. 9We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, 10for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality [arsenokoitai], for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine 11 that conforms to the gospel concerning the glory of the blessed God, which he entrusted to me. (1 Tim. 1:8–11)
The issue centers on how to translate accurately each of these two Greek words. Revisionists claim that these words refer narrowly to abusive forms of same-sex activity, namely, man-boy sex (pederasty) and prostitution. According to this view, Paul is rejecting the exploitive nature of these specific kinds of same-sex acts that were common in his day, and so 1 Corinthians 6:9 and 1 Timothy 1:10 cannot be used to condemn the consensual, monogamous same-sex relationships characteristic of our contemporary age.
This interpretation suffers from at least three major problems. First, if Paul had in view only exploitive samesex relationships such as pederasty, he could have easily made this clear by using any one of several Greek words that refer specifically to this exact samesex act (e.g., paiderastēs, from which we get the English word “pederast”), all of which were commonly known and used in the writings of his day.
Second, there is the OT allusion to Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 in Paul’s use of the unique word arsenokoitai in both 1 Corinthians 6:9 and 1 Timothy 1:10. This word is a compound term made up of two parts: arsēn, which means “male,” and koitē, which literally means “bed” but euphemistically refers to sexual acts that take place on a bed. Even the person who does not know Greek can easily see how the two parts of the compound word arsenokoitai come from the Greek translation of
Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13:
Leviticus 18:22
kai meta arsenos ou koimēthēsē koitēn gynaikeian
“And with a male you shall not lie as with a woman”
Leviticus 20:13
kai hos an koimēthē meta arsenos koitēn gynaikos
“And whoever will lie with a male as with a woman”
Why is it significant that the unique word Paul uses in two key texts dealing with same-sex acts comes from Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13? Since these OT texts deal with all types of same-sex acts, not just exploitive ones such as pederasty and prostitution, Paul’s use of this word indicates that he is also likely thinking of the Mosaic law where any kind of sexual act between two males is forbidden. This likelihood seems confirmed by the double use of the word “law,” a reference to the OT law, in 1 Timothy 1:8–9. Paul’s word choice of arsenokoitai in the immediately following verse means that he has in view the OT’s comprehensive prohibition of males sleeping with males and not only exploitive same-sex acts.
Third, the pairing of the two words malakoi and arsenokoitai in 1 Corinthians 6:9 is significant. There is widespread agreement among grammarians that the first term, which means “soft” or “effeminate,” refers to males who played the female role in sex and allowed themselves to be penetrated by other males while the second term refers to males who penetrate other males. This consensus is reflected in the NIV 2011 and ESV translations, which both have exactly the same textual note on this verse: “The words men who have sex with men translate two Greek words that refer to the passive and active participants in homosexual acts.” Paul, by pairing these two words, is referring not narrowly to pederasty or prostitution but comprehensively to both the passive and active partner in any same-sex relationship.
The final text from Romans 1:24–27 is the most important because of its length, its explicit reference to both gay and lesbian conduct, and its argumentation:
24Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen. 26Because of this God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.
The larger context (Rom. 1:18–32) shows that Paul’s primary goal in these verses is not to condemn same-sex behavior but to show how same-sex behavior is another example—in addition to idolatry (1:21–23, 25)— of the extent of human sin and why God’s wrath for such sin is justified. Nevertheless, the apostle’s words here are pointed and clear: women having sex with other women and men having sex with other men are sinful acts deserving of God’s wrath.
Revisionists have argued that Paul is not addressing all forms of same-sex acts but only a specific form in which women who had a heterosexual attraction to men nevertheless acted in an “unnatural” way (the Greek states more literally “against nature,” para physin) by having sex with other women; similarly, men who had a heterosexual attraction to women nevertheless also (“in the same way”) acted in an unnatural manner by having sex with other men. According to this construal, Paul is narrowly condemning “unnatural sex”—heterosexuals who ignore their “natural” desire for the opposite sex and are “inflamed with lust” for members of the same-sex. This reading, of course, leaves the door open for the apostle approving of other, more noble forms of homosexual relationships in which gays and lesbians follow their “natural” same-sex orientation.
This nuanced and novel interpretation, however, is contradicted by Paul’s key argument in these verses: same-sex acts are wrong because they violate God’s created order for male-female relationships. The word “unnatural” refers not to heterosexuals acting against their natural desire for the opposite sex but to same-sex acts that violate God’s design for men and women, the design established already in creation. That Paul does, in fact, have the Genesis creation account in mind is obvious from his multiple allusions: the larger context of Romans 1:18–32 opens in 1:20 with a reference to the creation of the world; the threefold combination of “birds and animals and reptiles” in 1:23 echoes Genesis 1:30; and there is a reference to the “Creator” in 1:25. Most significantly, the words translated “women” and “men” in 1:26 and 1:27, respectively, are actually “females” (thēlesai) and “males” (arsenes), thereby alluding to Genesis 1:27 where we read “male and female he created them.” Paul’s argument, therefore, is clear: sexual acts between a female and another female or between a male and another male are “unnatural” and wrong because such conduct goes against creation order and God’s creation of each gender physically so that male and female fit the other in a “natural” way.
One additional point about Paul’s words to the Romans should not be overlooked. The apostle ends his discussion with the sober warning that it is not only those engaged in same-sex acts who face divine judgement; it is also those who approve of such gay and lesbian relationships: “Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them” (1:32). Same-sex activity is not a subject that Jesus followers can simply ignore or tolerate.
Additional Revisionist Claims
Little space remains in this brief article to raise and respond to two additional revisionist claims about these Pauline texts. First, it is frequently claimed that Paul had no examples of a more “noble” form of homosexuality involving consensual, monogamous, long-term same-sex relationships but knew only of exploitive relationships such as pederasty and prostitution. This common assertion, however, is simply false. The existence of many different types of homosexual relations—including consensual and even monogamous—is well documented in the literature of the period (e.g., T. K. Hubbard, ed., Homosexuality in Greece and Rome: A Sourcebook of Basic Documents [Berkley, 2003]; L. Crompton, Homosexuality & Civilization [Harvard, 2003]). Paul, as a well-educated and widely traveled man, would have had ample opportunities to know about such supposedly “noble” forms of same-sex relationships.
Second, it is also frequently asserted that Paul did not have any understanding of same-sex orientation and that such ignorance relativizes his condemnation of same-sex acts. But while ancient writers such as Paul did not have a scientific explanation of samesex orientation, there is a wealth of historical evidence that they did in fact recognize that same-sex desires were biologically rooted. It is certainly historically possible, if not probable, that Paul also knew of men who were born with a sexual desire for other men. For the apostle, however, orientation makes no difference: same-sex acts violate the male-female relationship established by God at creation (Rom. 1:24–27) and are contrary to God’s law (1 Cor. 6:9; 1 Tim. 1:10).
Sola Experientia or Sola Scriptura?
This brief survey of relevant NT texts has shown that the second half of the Bible agrees with the first half: Scripture teaches in a clear and consistent way that same-sex activity of any kind is sinful and not in agreement with God’s will for his covenant people. The real issue facing the Christian Reformed church, then, is not one of interpretation but one of obedience.
Will our position on same-sex acts be controlled by our “experience alone” (sola experientia)—our encounters, either personal or via public media, with gays and lesbians? Will we rebelliously pursue all kinds of clever arguments until we finally get the Bible to say what our secular culture wants us to say and what we perhaps personally desire? Or will we submit to the clear teaching of “scripture alone” (sola scriptura)?
Those today who find themselves beset by same-sex attraction are ultimately in the same position as heterosexuals who face inclinations to act outside of God’s revealed intention for humanity. While individual feelings and personal experiences ought to play an important part in current discussions about same-sex relationships, what Scripture teaches must come first and foremost.
What about grace?
The final word on the topic of same-sex activity should not be about law and judgement but about grace and changed lives. After warning the Corinthians about various kinds of wrongdoing— including men having sex with other men—that prohibit membership in the kingdom of God, Paul reminds them that such sinful conduct is, by God’s saving work in Christ and the Holy Spirit, part of their past: “And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of God” (1 Cor. 6:11). The good news of the gospel is that God’s grace is so powerful that it can transform any kind of sinner into a saint.
