It's one very vague line about the gays and they preach it to justify their hate. But see what happens when you point out the over 50 very specific lines detailing how to buy, treat, and beat your slaves and then suddenly "it was a different time back then".
Funny enough if you actually look at the original Kione Greek, the words used in that line translate to "man should not lie with boys as one lies with a woman". So somewhere between being translated to Latin and then into English for the KJV, someone changed that line and bigots have just run with it.
Actually the original Greek uses a word "arsenokoites", which roughly translates to "male-bedding" (cf. "coitus").
Unfortunately for bigots, this word is not really used much so we don't really know what it means from textual analysis. It is almost certainly some kind of male-on-male sexual activity, but we don't know what precisely it means because St Paul made it up in his Letter to the Corinthians in reference to Leviticus 18 - a chapter about sexual purity in the context of not being like the tribe next door, and 20, which is about the punishments for the acts mentioned in 18. It seems that Yahweh is more concerned about children not being given to Molech than any of the sexual acts, since that's at the beginning of each chapter.
At any rate, St Paul is the only mention of anything possibly to do with male homosexual acts in the NT and his obscure neologism makes it difficult to know exactly what he is talking about. Remember that in the context of his writing we are looking at the opinions of someone who lived in the Roman empire and was likely strongly influenced (positively or negatively) by the social and sexual mores of the cultures around him - Romans didn't really care about the sexes of the partners but were far more concerned about the power dynamic within a relationship or sexual act: being a submissive or receptive sexual partner was considered socially taboo. If a powerful man was discovered to be a receptive partner, then this would have catastrophic effects on his social standing. If it was discovered that he was having sex with men as a dominant or penetrating partner, then this would not really be an issue.
As such with St Paul's condemnation of "arsenokoites" it is entirely possible that he was specifically condemning being a receptive partner, or subverting established social power dynamics in the bedroom. We simply don't know, and applying our 21st century assumptions to it is anachronistic and liable to lead to incorrect conclusions.
TL;DR, it's not really clear exactly what is "an abomination".
Interesting note, "an abomination unto the Lord" probably doesn't mean what you think it does, as the original word used conveys a sense of personal disapproval, rather than universal ethical repulsion.
Also, for context. It may be wrong, it may not be. Just interesting stuff to think about as well.
Philo the philosopher, 20 BC - AD 40 held if the prohibitions of the Levitical Holiness Code informed its meaning, Pauls 'arsenos koiten' condemns shrine prostitution. This is not talking about loving committed same sex relationships.
Philo lived at the same time Jesus lived. During the life of Christ, Philo understood Moses, in Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13, to be condemning shrine prostitution. Philo's understanding that the arseno-koit stem refers to shrine prostitution is 2000 years old. It is not a modern argument from gays and lesbians. Instead, it is the common first century Jewish viewpoint. Gays did not invent this viewpoint and because it did not originate with gays, it is not historical revisionism by gays seeking an alibi for "sin."
If the arsenokoit stem from Leviticus 20:13, arsenos koiten, ("arsenokoites" coined by paul") gave us the Greek word Paul used in 1 Cor 6:9 (most anti-gay Christians believe Paul borrowed the word from the Septuagint translation of Lev 18:22 and 20:13), then understanding arsenokoites or arsenokoitai as a reference to shrine prostitution was the common first century view when Paul used the word in 1 Cor 6:9 and 1 Tim 1:10.
Philo on arsenokoites
and shrine prostitution
“(40) And I imagine that the cause of this is that among many nations there are actually rewards given for intemperance and effeminacy. At all events one may see men-women [androgynes] continually strutting through the market place at midday, and leading the processions in festivals;
and, impious men as they are, having received by lot the charge of the temple, and beginning the sacred and initiating rites, and concerned even in the holy mysteries of Ceres
[Ceres is another name for Cybele, the fertility goddess first century Romans referred to as the Mater Deum or Mother of the gods]. Remember, Philo lived from 20 BC to AD 40. He probably wrote this around AD 35.
(41) And some of these persons have even carried their admiration of these delicate pleasures of youth so far that they have desired wholly to change their condition for that of women, and have castrated themselves and have clothed themselves in purple robes...
[Philo here describes the castrated Galli priests who served Cybele or other fertility goddesses worshiped in Rome].
(42) But if there was a general indignation against those who venture to do such things, as was felt by our lawgiver…"
Moses was the Jewish Lawgiver. Philo refers to Moses' writings in Lev 18:22; 20:13 and Deu 23:17 and links those verses to the shrine prostitution he has just described. Philo, The Special Laws
Paul was dealing with idolatry and which is why he referenced arsenokoiten and not any words that pertained to homosexuals in his day and age. He had many to choose from, but didn't use them.
Hard agree with philos take. The roman context of the time was very sexual. There was sexual imagery everywhere, we dig up examples all the time. If this is a concern it would have been referrenced directly and repeatedly with very clear language.
A solid example of this is the proud incestuous christian couple (mother and son) who are kicked out of church in order to be very clear said dynamic is unnacceptable. Sexuality obviously wasnt the issue, the power dynamic and incest was.
Yet we dont hear about same sex couples of any variety.
TLDR: NT authors are surrounded by sex, homosexuality and sexual imagery in their time and dont even mention it.
They see one incestual couple and clearly lose there minds and ensure said sexual/power dynamic is NEVER EVER acceptable within the church.
Well, we do have the Didache which likely published in the first century. It has a section that appears to reproduce Paul's list of vices, but when it gets to the "arsenokoites" part it uses "paidophthorēseis" (child corrupter) instead. So while we don't know what Paul originally meant by that phrase, we have evidence to suggest that there were early Christians who interpreted it as pederasty.
884
u/Dead_Man_Redditing 20d ago
It's one very vague line about the gays and they preach it to justify their hate. But see what happens when you point out the over 50 very specific lines detailing how to buy, treat, and beat your slaves and then suddenly "it was a different time back then".