What does the NT say about homosexuality (2)
passages from the NT
since Paul seems to anticipate the objection that Gentiles could not have known God without the law. According to Paul, even Gentiles are under God’s condemnation and “without excuse” since God is knowable through creation (
provides a helpful summary of this interpretation: “No other way to be saved is available than that of accepting the gospel by faith, for since the wrath of God rests by nature upon man, the latter is completely unable to save himself, whether by performing the works of the law or by any other means.”
Among the few passages in the Bible that explicitly address homosexuality,
Paul suggests that the Gentiles are “without excuse” because they should have known God through the revelation of His power and divine nature in creation (
Interestingly, Keener also suggests that humanity’s ability to “know” God through nature and conscience is based on their being made in the image of God (see
Paul explains how God’s wrath is revealed against the Gentiles for failing to recognize Him as God. Paul accomplishes this with the repetition of the verb paradidōmi (literally, “to hand over”) in
God both allows people to continue in their sinful ways and delivers them to even more sin. In support of this view, Moo (1996, 111) suggests that to “hand over” entails not only a withdrawal of divine influence, but also the deliverance of sinners to “the terrible cycle of ever-increasing sin.”
Three questions must be addressed to accomplish this task. First, how do the Greek terms physis and physikos influence the meaning of
Second, what sexual activities and types of behavior are in view in
Third, assuming that
Paul lists several kinds of evildoers in 1 Cor 6:9b–10, calling them “unrighteous” (adikoi; see “Key Word Study: Adikos, ‘Unrighteous’ ”). This list is intended to remind the Corinthians of the types of people they are allowing to judge their affairs and—even worse—are themselves in danger of becoming (May 2004, 91). The presence of the list itself is not surprising in the context of the letter; Fee (1987, 242) argues that the list brings together several issues raised in
Interpreters also struggle to agree on the precise meaning of the second term in
Among recent commentators, Garland (2003, 211–15) provides the best summary of previous research on these terms. He also draws attention to the use of these terms in Graeco-Roman literature. He proposes the following dialectical translation: “those males who are penetrated sexually by males” and “those males who sexually penetrate males.”
There is considerable debate regarding the meaning of the terms malakos and arsenokoitēs in relation to homosexuality activity (see “What do Malakos and Arsenokoitēs Mean?”). Part of the difficulty of interpreting Paul’s comments on this subject lies in the differences between modern terminology and categories used to describe homosexuality and that of the ancient world (see “Homosexuality,” EDB). Two of the common forms of homosexual activity in the ancient world were pederasty, referring to sexual relations between adult males and young boys, and male prostitution. Both of these forms differ from our typical understanding of homosexuality in the modern Western world.
Understanding the ancient context of Paul’s comments on same-sex activity is important for interpreting his statements. Wright (in Hawthorne and Martin 1993, 413), for example, argues that Paul’s attitude toward homosexual conduct reflects both the views of Hellenistic Judaism and Stoicism. Additionally, places such as Corinth, which during Paul’s time was a Roman colony, had particular laws regarding homosexual activity. Commenting on Roman legislation on same-sex activity, Gill (2002, 132–33) writes, “Corinth as a Roman colony would thus consider homosexual acts with fellow citizens as illegal, but not with noncitizens (i.e., non-Romans) and slaves.”
Paul’s condemnation of legalists is not a condemnation of the law itself.
The Vice List in
