Homosexuality: Legally Permissible or Spiritually Misguided?1

Lockard, HomosexualityThe New Testament. In three places of the New Testament: Romans 1:26,27; 1Corinthians 6:9 and 1 Timothy 1:10, there are strong prohibitions tohomosexuality. Romans 1:26-27 discusses homosexuality from theperspective of the larger context of man’s relation to God and God’s generalrevelation in nature—because they turned away from God:Even women exchanged natural relations with unnaturalones . . . men also abandoned natural relations with women andwere inflamed with lust for one another. Men committedindecent acts with other men.Biblical scholars safely conclude that in Romans 1, homosexuality is seen notas a violation of some Jewish or Christian sectarian code, but rather as atransgression against the moral law of God our Creator (Davis 1993). Davisfurther contends that it is significant in Pauline analysis of his New Testamentwritings, that homosexual practices derive ultimately from the human heart orinner disposition which has turned away from God.This inward and invisible apostasy of the heart (away from God) becomesapparent and demonstrable in immoral and deviant sexual behaviour.More specifically, in 1 Corinthians 6:9, the apostle Paul used two terms,malakoi and arsenokoitai, which are generally considered by biblical scholarsto refer to homosexual behaviour. 9 The term arsenokoitai is used in the NewTestament only in 1 Corinthians 6:9 and in 1 Timothy 1:10. The word is acompound from arsen “male” and koite which is a word with definite sexualovertones. The literal etymology of this compound term suggests “males whogo to bed with males” (Davis 1993).Both the Old Testament and New Testament have quintessential teachings thathomosexuality is contrary to the moral law of God as defined in the holyscriptures. Therefore, revisionists who erroneously conclude otherwise useforced and arbitrary modes of interpretation to strengthen their claim that the9 There has been some debate about the proper translation of these two terms. The debate isreflected in these translations: (a) “effeminate and abusers of themselves withmankind” (KJV), (b) “male prostitutes and homosexual offenders” (NIV) and (c)“homosexual perversion” (NEB).159