Authored by: Machen.

In my response I intend on pointing out several errors that Payton has made in his article, and providing some helpful insight on the teachings of the Bible concerning homosexuality.

Has homosexuality always been seen as sinful to Christians?

“I hope to take steps towards correcting the peculiar view, which has become almost universal among Christians in recent decades…”

The case that Payton and B.A. Robinson make is that post-KJV Bible translations like the NIV, ESV, and NASB have mistranslated 1 Timothy 1:9-10.  From that Payton concludes that the verse in question has never been seen as condemning homosexuality prior to the first time arsenokoites was translated as pertaining to homosexuality specifically.  While homosexuality isn’t the only sin that the Apostle Paul is listing in the verse, it most certainly does refer to homosexuality, thereby showing that it has always been seen as a sin.  Rather, the movement that Payton is supporting has proposed interpretations of scripture that are only about 50 years old (generous estimate) if he can provide any older ones, I’ll give him that point.  While I will agree with him that neither Calvin nor Luther saw this verse as pertaining to homosexuality in particular, they did both see that the Bible condemns homosexuality as a sin.

Is it right to argue that translator’s prejudice guide their textual reasoning?

“Such a position cannot be taken on any logical basis, but must instead be the result of a kind of prejudice born from a misguided attempt at intuitivist morality.”

Unfortunately in Payton’s article there are no references to New Testament scholars who support the translation of arsenokoites meaning homosexuality.   This would have been very helpful to the reader as to seeing the rationale behind the translation, and then critiquing that. Instead what we are given is an assertion that the translation was guided by prejudice rather than textual reasons. That is a serious charge and even slanderous.  At best the assertion that prejudice rather than textual reasoning guided the translation is wholly an assumption that cannot be proven unless the translators admit such a prejudice.  Therefore it isn’t a wise remark in this debate, as it is an attack on the translator’s character rather than their reasoning of the issue.

What is the rationale for translating arsenokoites as pertaining to homosexuality?

“It is a compound word, formed from two well-known and well-precedented words; “arsen“, meaning “male”, and “koitai“, meaning “beds”. We might suspect, then, that Paul is not writing about “them that defile themselves with mankind”.”

We must first look at the word arsenokoites and it’s origins.  As Payton rightly pointed out the word is a compound word, and Paul is attributed to it’s first occurrences in Greek literature.  Payton neglects to mention the theories behind Paul’s reasoning for making this word, most notably that Paul derived this word from two Old Testament passages from the Septuagint Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13.  I will refer to a brief description of the view by Brian J. Dodd (LXX):

Robin Scroggs has plausibly suggested that Paul created this new word by combining the two terms found in the Greek version of Lev 18:23 (LXX 18:22) and 20:13: arsen = “male,” and koite = “bed,” which translate the Hebrew for “lying with a male” (mishkav zakur; The New Testament and Homosexuality: Contextual Background for Contemporary Debate [Fortress, 1983] 106-8). With the likelihood that these Levitical prohibitions are echoed in 1 Cor 6:9, the NRSV is justified in translating the term as a reference to homoerotic intercourse, even if the English “sodomites” is somewhat archaic.

To be specific, the textual argument that arsenokoites refers explicitly to homosexuality, and that understanding was Paul’s intention in creating the word goes as follows:

1. “You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.”- Leviticus 18:21
2. “If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them.” -Leviticus 20:13

The above two verses communicate the same message which is explicitly forbidding homosexual practice.  The italicized portions are very important with the formulation ofarsenokoites in Paul’s understanding.  Let us now walk through the Septuagint from which Paul pulled arsenos and koites, again, the key terms are italicized:

1. “meta arsenos ou koimethese koiten gyniakos” – Leviticus 18:22 (LXX)
2. “hos an koimethe meta arsenos koiten gyniakos” – Leviticus 20:13 (LXX)

Arsenoskoites (males combined with bed or couch) is a Greek counterpart to the Hebrew phrase “mishkab zakur” which is used in the above verses in the original Hebrew form.

1. Mishkab is Hebrew for arsenos, which is Greek for bed or couch.
2. Zakur is Hebrew for koiten, which is Greek for male or males.
3. Mishkab zakur is used where sex between men is expressly forbidden.
4. Therefore, mishkab zakur is translated into Greek as arsenokoite, and used by Paul to reflect Leviticus 18:22, 20:13. Paul did this in order to call to the attention of the Greek readers that homosexuality is a sin, just as Leviticus says.

Paul condemns what Leviticus condemns.  This is also why Paul didn’t use words that already existed for the term homosexual. So it is not “abundantly clear that Paul is not referring to homosexuality here.” This also makes Justin Cannon’s study start off on the wrong foot, as he doesn’t make the connection between arsenokoites and the verses in Leviticus, which left Justin thinking the word must mean prostitutes.  Which is an unneeded substitute for a reference to the Old Testament law forbidding homosexuality.  I’m also very surprised that Cannon didn’t address the only two times that koite is used in the New Testament.  As both usages have a sexual connotation.

1. “Let us walk properly as in the daytime, not in orgies and drunkenness, not in sexual immorality [koite] and sensuality, not in quarreling and jealousy.” -Romans 13:13
2. “Let marriage be held in honor among all, and let the marriage bed [koite] be undefiled, for God will judge the sexually immoral and adulterous.” -Hebrews 13:4

As you can see, it isn’t unusual for koite to be used as referring to sexual intercourse, leading the argument to stand that arsenos (male/males) and koite (bed or couch with a sexual connotation) combined explicitly means men having intercourse together.

This makes Justin’s conclusion that arsenokoites can only refer to prostitutes nearly laughable.  Arsenokoites being a combination of male and bed has no room to imply trade, buying, or selling.  Homosexuality in all forms is condemned as a sin.

With all of that said, I think the biggest issue in Payton’s work is that it begins by assuming bad motives in the work of the translators of the newer versions.  The picture that he painted is that Christian history has had it all wrong.  This conflict would not happen if the arguments for the translation of arsenokoites were actually reviewed prior to writing a confident bashing of the modern translators/translations.

In conclusion, we can see that the recent inventions of pro-gay theologians are exactly that, recent inventions.  It is also odd that the verse in question was argued against as a linchpin of the entire debate that rages between pro-gay theologians and orthodox theologians.  While this verse is extremely important (as all verses are) the Bible is abundantly clear that homosexuality is in fact unnatural, and sinful.  To pick the verses that make this clear and crunch them and ignore the history of translation is an abuse of the scriptures that no apologist should allow.  No Greek Lexicon disagrees with the translations we have today, but even such a well-known resource is completely ignored.  The Arndt-Gingrich Greek Lexicon defines arsenokoite as “a male who practices homosexuality, pedarist, sodomite” and quotes Romans 1:27 as an example.  Strong’s Concordance translates arsenokoites as “a sodomite:–abuser of (that defile) self with mankind.” in obvious reference to Sodom.  This makes the case that pro-gay theologians try to make seem to be nothing more than conspiracy theories making allegations of discrimination and prejudice about those who have translated our Bible versions.

A brief statement on how Christians should see, and treat homosexuals

Christians are to treat homosexuals the exact same way they treat everybody else.  Homosexuality isn’t a worse sin than any other, but it is much harder to overcome than any other as far as sin patterns and lifestyles go.  Paul’s message in this passage is very clear, and convicting to every Christian.  Certainly there are men and women who have homosexual leanings that have come to Christ and began to repent.  There are ministries out there who can provide the testimonies.  One in particular I will reference is that of Joe Dallas, as he has a truly incredible story of his battle with homosexuality.

The Big Issue

Finally, the big issue is who is handling the text rightly?  It is one thing to just reject Christianity because of it’s views on homosexuality (as many homosexual advocates do.)  It is an entirely different issue to try to squeeze the Bible into promoting homosexuality bad interpretations/exegesis of the Bible.  There is a tremendous amount of work on this issue, and below I will link some that I find to be most trustworthy.  Perhaps you will find it refreshing that not all of the following links are in agreement with each other on all theological issues.

• A New Testament Perspective on Homosexuality

• But God Made Me This Way!

• Is the Bible ambiguous about homosexuality?

• Homosexuality: A Biblical Perspective

• Responding to Pro-Gay Theology