Homosexuality

Introduction

One problem that I have seen with Christians from the first century is the propensity to mis translate section of the Torah and the Tanakh and for modern Christians to mis translate sections of the New Testament, specifically the writings of Paul. These mis-translations have allowed various Christian groups to persecute and/or put down a number of types of people including women, homosexuals, blacks, etc.

Intricacies of Language

I have studied many languages over the years. These include Spanish, German, Italian, Welsh, Navajo, Greek and Hebrew. I speak and read these languages at varying degrees of competence. Currently I translate 16th and 17th century Northern Italian fencing manuscripts. I can tell you with some surety that the translator will always be biased in heir translation. Their cultural morays and personal biases will affect the words they use in their translation. This has happened over the years with the New Testament.

Neil R. Lightfoot wrote a book called How We Got the Bible and in this book lays out where especially the New Testament comes from, the dates of the various original manuscripts that are in existence and in regards to translation said: however, we should keep in mind that the version, because they are translations, are necessarily secondary in rank as witnesses to the text. Something is always lost by way of translation.” (p 65)

Specifically in regard to English translations he said “Eventually the Vulgate was made the official Bible of the Roman Catholic Church, and so it remains today. The result is that the Roman Catholic Bible in English is a translation of a translation and is not a translation from the original languages.” (p 73)

“According to the Hebrew sage and language scholar Fabre D'Olivet (1815) in The Hebraic Tongue Restored, the trajedy of biblical translation has been that expressions meant to resonate many levels of meaning – at least the intellectual, metaphysical,and universal – have been whittled down to become “wholly gross in [their] nature . . . restricted to material and particular expressions.” This tendency to divide and overliteralize was reflected in the whole Newtonian era: a period that repressed mystical cosmology was also ill at ease with mystical translation.” (Douglas-Klotz p 2)

Compounding the issue is the fact that Paul made up words in Greek that were not used by anyone else which makes translation difficult. This will be discussed in more detail later.

As an example, I will give some examples of idioms in Italian and Navajo.

Italian Idiom

In Bocca al Lupo - Into the Wolf's Mouth – used to say good luck.

Buono Come il Pane - As good as bread – Used to indicate a bad situation.

Navajo Idiom

sha’deezha dak'os shiidiiłna - I swallowed my little sister's cough - I caught a cold from my sister.

Dichin shi'niłhi - Hunger is killing me– I am hungry.

We have plenty of idiomatic expressions in English as well. Kick the bucket, a day late and a dollar short, a long row to hoe, a pretty penny, a steal, an axe to grind, etc.

Jesus' teachings are many levels removed. Jesus spoke Aramaic as a Palestinian Jew. He may or may not have known Hebrew. That is up to debate by Biblical Scholars. We know he spoke Aramaic as the writers of the New Testament report him saying some things in Aramaic. So today we are many levels removed from the original words of Jesus; Aramaic – Greek – Latin – English. As an example of the problems this can create I will give an example of the change in the meaning of the Holy Ghost.

In English and in Latin the Holy Ghost (Spiritus) is masculine. This allows us to think of the godhead as all masculine. But what are the equivalents in Greek, Aramaic and Hebrew? In Greek spirit is pneuma and is neuter. It is neither masculine or feminine. In Aramaic the word is Ruha while in Hebrew it is Ruah and in both Aramaic and Hebrew this word that is translated as spirit is feminine. So translators changed this word from feminine to masculine. And spirit is a misnomer per se. In Hebrew and Aramaic it means more breath and comes out of G_d. It is not a separate entity although the aspect of the Shekinah is. The Shekinah may be described as the presence of G_d and is feminine in nature. The Greek translation of this, Parousia, is also feminine. As another example we may look at the word heaven. To Christians this is a far off place where G_d dwells. It is more a metaphysical concept than anything. In Aramaic the word presents an image of light and sound shining through all creation. This is closer to us and shows the physical meeting the holy.

When we do not know the idiom of expression in language we may miss some of the meaning or mis-translate what is being said. Also, as noted earlier, the translator may inject their own cultural biases or may miss idioms in the language that they are translating. In working with the Tanakh (Christian Old Testament) we have a source of information that may help us in understanding these Jewish writings; the Talmudic commentary on the Laws and the Prophets. Christians generally either do not know about these writings or completely ignore them. For the New Testament we have commentary starting with second century writings including the writings of the Patristic Fathers but these follow in the Pauline tradition. The proto-orthodox church of the very late first and second centuries put down opposing views on the nature of Jesus and began the move towards a canon that was finally authorized by Constantine. Other writings including gnostic teachings were condemned and their teachers declared heretics and were officially persecuted, the books burned and often the teachers were put to death. One Christian religion resulted and because it had the backing of Rome it was able to flourish.

The Scriptures in Question

I will address three scriptural references from the New Testament that are used to condemn homosexuality. I will treat each one separately. They include:

1 Tim 1:9-10

1 Cor 6:9-10

Romans 1:26-27

For this study I will use the Greek-English Interlinear New Testament and also the King James versions of the Bible.

Before addressing the writings of Paul, I should note that Jesus never addresses homosexuality. In a number of places in the Gospels Jesus mentions sins of the spirit but he rarely mentions sins of the body and he completely is silent on the topic of homosexuality. As Christians should we listen more to the words of Jesus than Paul? And what did Paul really say or mean?

I believe the most telling scripture that we may examine to get to the core of the matter is found in 1st Timothy.

1 Timothy 1:9-10

King James Translation

"Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, for whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine."

9 εἰδὼς τοῦτο, ὅτι δικαίῳ νόµος οὐ κεῖται, ἀνόµοις δὲ καὶ ἀνυποτάκτοις, ἀσεβέσι καὶ ἁµαρτωλοῖς, ἀνοσίοις καὶ βεβήλοις, πατρολῴαις καὶ µητρολῴαις, ἀνδροφόνοις, 10 πόρνοις, ἀρσενοκοίταις, ἀνδραποδισταῖς, ψεύσταις, ἐπιόρκοις, καὶ εἴ τι ἕτερον τῇ ὑγιαινούσῃ διδασκαλίᾳ ἀντίκειται,

“This means understanding that the law is laid down not for the innocent but for the lawless and disobedient, for the godless and sinful, for the unholy and profane, for those who kill their father or mother, for murderers, fornicators, sodomites, slave traders, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to the sound teaching . . .”

In looking at these verses in context we are able to see that Paul is setting up classes of behaviors that are contrary to the law. These classes are

godless and sinful

unholy and profane

murderers of parents or others

those taking part in sex sins involving slavery

liars and perjurers

The section on sex sins involving slavery is stated as “for whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers”. Looking above at the translation offered after the Greek passage we see that it is translated as fornicators, sodomites and slave traders. Depending on the translator a different translation or even meaning may be intoned. When looking at the Scriptures, it is important in my estimation, to not only look at the translation but also at the original. Without being able to read and study the original it is very hard to understand what the author meant by what they wrote. Since at least the time of Jesus, the Jews have maintained their scriptures in the original language (Hebrew) and have maintained their commentary on the Tanakh and Torah since the early rabbinical period that dates to just after the time of Jesus. Just prior to the time of Jesus, Hillel, one of the most famous of the rabbis, lived in Jerusalem and taught and expounded on the Torah. Jesus taught in a similar vein to Hillel and would have heard not only the written Torah but also the Oral Torah which later became the rabbinical writings. Being able to work in the original tongue allows us to delve into the intricacies of the vocabulary used.

The Greek terms for the sex sins are pornois, arsenokoitais and andropodistais. The first word pornois is based off of the word to sell. General consensus is that this refers to a male prostitute. The second word, arsenokoitais is a word that was created by Paul. It consists of two words arsen and koitas. Arsen means male and koitas means bed and the exact meaning of the word is not known. However, a definition may be determined and most definitely is not homosexual. The last word is andropodistais and means slave trader. If we take these in context, we may see that the section deals with those that prostitute their bodies or who do the same with others.

Arsenokoitai should not be translated as homosexual. This is a 19th century and later term and shows the bias of the translator. And the word is a joining of words in two different languages, Greek and Latin. This term has been applied to not only males but also to females and the original Greek specifically applies to males and not to females.

1 Corinthians 6:9-10

King James translation

"Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God."

9 ἢ οὐκ οἴδατε ὅτι ἄδικοι θεοῦ βασιλείαν οὐ κληρονοµήσουσιν; µὴ πλανᾶσθε· οὔτε πόρνοι οὔτε εἰδωλολάτραι οὔτε µοιχοὶ οὔτε µαλακοὶ οὔτε ἀρσενοκοῖται 10 οὔτε κλέπται οὔτε πλεονέκται, οὐ µέθυσοι, οὐ λοίδοροι, οὐχ ἅρπαγες βασιλείαν θεοῦ κληρονοµήσουσιν.

“Do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived! Fornicators, idolaters, adulterers, male prostitutes, sodomites, thieves, the greedy, drunkards, revilers, robbers – none of these will inherit the kingdom of God.”

Like the quote from 1 Timothy, this scripture refers to “arsenokoitai”. Unlike 1 Timothy this scripture is not set up in pairs or triplets of like behaviors. If Paul had meant to refer to homosexuals (or specifically to male-male sexual liaisons) he would have used the standard term for the time – paiderasste. This was the term for male same sex relationships.

So what did Paul mean? It is very difficult to say. But reading these scriptures in context and looking carefully at the meanings of the words involved we may make a best guess and this is not homosexual.

Romans 1:26-27

“For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet."

“διὰ τοῦτο παρέδωκεν αὐτοὺς ὁ θεὸς εἰς πάθη τιµίας· αἵ τε γὰρ θήλειαι αὐτῶν µετήλλαξαν τὴν φυσικὴν χρῆσιν εἰς τὴν παρὰ φύσιν, ὁµοίως τε καὶ οἱ ἄρσενες φέντες τὴν φυσικὴν χρῆσιν τῆς θηλείας ἐξεκαύθησαν ἐν τῇ ὀρέξει αὐτῶν εἰς λλήλους, ἄρσενες ἐν ἄρσεσιν τὴν σχηµοσύνην κατεργαζόµενοι

καὶ τὴν ντιµισθίαν ἣν ἔδει τῆς πλάνης αὐτῶν ἐν ἑαυτοῖς πολαµβάνοντες.”

“For this reason God gave them up to degrading passions. Their women exchanged natural intercourse for unnatural, and in the same way also the men, giving up natural intercourse with women, were consumed with passion for one another.”

As stated by Dr. R.S. Truluck, "Paul's writings have been taken out of context and twisted to punish and oppress every identifiable minority in the world: Jews, children, women, blacks, slaves, politicians, divorced people, convicts, pro choice people, lesbians, gays, bisexuals, transsexuals, religious reformers, the mentally ill, and the list could go on and on. Paul is often difficult and confusing to understand. A lot of Paul's writing is very difficult to translate. Since most of his letters were written in response to news from other people, reading Paul can be like listening to one side of a telephone conversation. We know, or think we know, what Paul is saying, but we have to guess what the other side has said." "The six Bible passages used to condemn homosexuals," at: http://www.otkenyer.hu/truluck/six_bible_passages.html

Paul wrote this letter to the Romans who were immersed in Roman culture (see verse 7). The whole of chapter 1 is an exhortation against idolatrous religious worship and rituals. Verses 26 and 27 are part of this. Today many religious leaders take these verses on their own out of context. If we take these verses in context it is a diatribe against Christians who have reverted to pagan practices including heterosexuals engaging in ritual homosexual behavior. This does not attack homosexuals who may be in monogamous homosexual relationships.

Did Jesus say Anything about homosexuality?

Outwardly no. He definitely did not condemn. But what many do not know, he did condone. But the question that English speakers will ask is how?

We all know from Sunday School the story of the Centurion who comes to Jesus asking that his "servant" be healed. The term this Centurion uses is translated typically as servant in English.

"Lord," he said, "my servant lies at home paralyzed and in terrible suffering." (Matthew 8:6 NIV)

The word in Greek translated into English is pais. This term may mean son or boy, servant, or a special type of servant - a male lover. At this time in history Men would often buy a male slave as a lover. This may seem bad in our modern minds but at that time it was a respected practice. And Jesus would have known of this practice.

When talking of other slaves the Centurion uses the standard term doulos. In Luke's account the servant was the Centurion's entimos doulos or honored slave. So it was not a son. And in Matthew where the Centurion directly talks to Jesus he uses the term pais in talking of his servant.

Can you imagine a Roman officer stooping to speaking with a Jewish Rabbi who he knew should denounce gay relationships? And what did Jesus say? He said he would come and heal him. There was no denouncing the "sin." Jesus did not discriminate. And if Jesus did not discriminate, why should we?

Conclusion

The Bible has been used for millenia to persecute individuals and groups of people. How the Bible is translated may also foment this type of behavior. If we try and determine the actual intent of the authors andnot take Englsih translations of the Tanakh and New testament texts at “face value”, we may walk away from our studies with a very different view on many topics.

References

Douglas-Klotz, Neil

Prayers of the Cosmos: Meditations on the Aramiac Words of Jesus.

King James Version of the Bible

Lightfoot, Neil R

How We Got the Bible

Thayer, Joseph H.

Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament

The New Greek-English Interlinear New Testament

"New Testament Greek Lexicon," Search God's Word, at: http://www.searchgodsword.org/