Words Matter: 1 Corinthians 6: 9-10 and 1 Timothy 1: 9-10
"Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate (malakoi), nor abusers of themselves (arsenokoitai) with mankind, Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God."
1 Corinthians 6: 9-10
"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 (arsenokoitai), for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine."
1 Timothy 1: 9-10
If the word "homosexual" appears in your Bible in either of these passages then you're holding a version that was written after 1946, since the word "homosexual" didn't even reach common usage until the late 1800's. Prior to the 1946 Edition of the Revised Standard Version, the words that "homosexual" has replaced in many modern versions have included "boy prostitutes, effeminate, those who make women of themselves, sissies, catamites, the self-indulgent, sodomites, lewd persons, male prostitutes, and the unchaste." In What the Bible Really Says About Homosexuality, Daniel Helminiak offers that "until the Reformation in the 16th Century and in Roman Catholicism until the 20th Century, the word malakoi was thought to mean "masturbators." Among the early Greek-speaking Christian theologians who condemned homosexuality the words malakoi and arsenokoitai were never used. John Chrysostom (347-407 A.D.) preached in Greek against homosexuality and like others including Clement of Alexandra, never used these words, not even was the issue of homosexuals mentioned when he preached on these two passages. (Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality, pages 335-353.)
What am I saying here? If church tradition is part of what shapes our Christian theology then we have to recognize that church tradition and the understanding of earlier Christian theologians doesn't support the more recent translations that have placed the word "homosexuals" or "practicing homosexuals" within these two passages. At different times within church history there have been varying understandings of these passages and their exact meaning has changed from one generation to the next, now to the current time when two separate words have been collapsed into one to mean "homosexual." Along with this acknowledgment, it seems both helpful and honest to recognize that what often finds it's way into current biblical interpretation is not a more informed understanding of the biblical text based on years of accumulative knowledge but on imposing our own culture, complete with its prejudices into the interpretative work. What else would explain the shift in meaning and the narrowing of focus in the interpretation of these two passages over the last fifty years?
IT'S ALL GREEK TO ME
Rest assured that I'm no expert in the Greek language. The truth of the matter is there are days when fluent English escapes me. While studying the languages of the Bible are clearly helpful to a richer and more educated understanding of what lies within its pages, it's just as beneficial if you have the heart of an explorer. With that in mind, cast aside the studious burrows etched across your forehead and open your eyes wide to an adventure with words.
The first appearance of the word arsenokoitai in any ancient Greek literature is found in I Corinthians 6:9. While it might have been a word common in Paul's time, it can't be found anywhere else in material dated prior to or current with Paul that has already been discovered. It only begins to make its appearance in literature following Paul. An important tool in discovering the meaning of a word is to trace how it's been used previously but because arsenokoitai is invisible prior to I Corinthians this means of defining the word is missing. The times arsenokoitai is used following Paul seem dependent on Paul's usage of the word. In the Latin Vulgate that follows Paul some 500 years later, Jerome translates it as a male concubine although nothing in the word specifies whether the concubine was involved with a same-sex or opposite-sex individual. What we do know is at the time Paul was writing there were terms common for persons involved in homoeroticism and Paul chose to not use those words but to instead use a word that remains mysterious to us. What this means is that Greek scholars and theologians (among which you and I don't count ourselves) come to arsenokoitai with no previous context for understanding it's meaning and so the best that anyone, whether pro-gay or anti-gay can reason is a guess. In the early work the "The New Testsment and Homosexuality" Robin Scroggs comes to an understanding of arsenokoitai by looking at the two separate words it combines; arseno (men) and koitai (bed). From this Scroggs concluded that the literal meaning of arsenokoitai was "male bed" which he understood as descriptive of the active male (penetrator) in same-sex intercourse. The problem with this method of interpretation can be seen with examples in English like "lady-killer", "manhole" or "butterfly." You don't arrive at the true meaning of the word "butterfly" by defining the words "butter" and "fly" anymore than it's possible to define the accurate meaning of arsenokoitai by combining "male" and "bed".
malakoi is a word common to the Greek language which means "soft." Jesus uses the word malakoi when speaking of "a man dressed in soft (malakoi) raiment" (Matthew 11:8).
Historically, church tradition has often understood malakoi to imply a moral weakness. In antiquity however, malakoi was sometimes used as a descriptive word of eromenos. If you check back to the discussion on pederasty, you'll be reminded that eromenos was the passive partner in the pederastic relationship between an older mentor and the younger boy or the beloved. It was also used in a much broader sense than exclusive to a homoerotic relationship. malakoi also described those men who had too much sex with women. In ancient Rome, the effeminate looking man often presented himself that way to attract women rather than men because a feminine man would have been a turn off to men. In the ancient world being effeminate including such behavior as bathing frequently, shaving, frequent dancing or laughing, wearing cologne, eating too much or wearing fine undergarments! Effeminate is the best understanding of the word and in its cultural context was threatening to the whole structure of society by crossing the fragile line between man and woman in a world where to be male was to be superior and to be woman was to be intrinsically inferior. While being effeminate might have been deemed a sin in antiquity we would never consider preaching against the "sin of femininity" in a world where men are encouraged to get in touch with their more gentle side and where good hygiene, a pair of silk briefs and Old Spice After Shave would catapult the male populace in most churches into this category.
MALAKOI AND ARSENOKOITAI ON THE MAP
Some scholars would argue that where malakoi and arsenokoitai are located in these passages should be considered when attempting to understand their meaning. I Corinthians 6:9-10 and I Timothy 1: 9-10 are lists of vices. Vice lists appear through Paul's writings (Romans 1:29-31, Galatians 5:19-23, Colossians 3:18-4:1, Ephesians 5:21-6:9 and 2 Timothy 3:15) and was a common literary style in both Greco-Roman and Jewish literature (Homoeroticism in the Biblical World, page 113). Rather than being a random tossing together of sins, vice lists often appear to be in a categorical order as would seem apparent in both I Corinthians 6 and I Timothy 1.
I Corinthians 6 orders the vices as: fornicators, idolaters, adulterers, malakoi,arsenokoitai, thieves, covetous, drunkards, revilers, extortioners.
I Timothy 1 orders the vices as: murderers, manslayers, whoremongers, arsenokoitai, menstealers (slave traders), liars, perjurers.
In the essay Arsenokoites and Malakos: Meanings and Consequences, included in Biblical Ethics and Homosexuality: Listening to Scripture, Dale Martin proposes that most vice lists, both in the Christian Testament and in ancient contemporary writings, separate vices in three categories: sexual sins, sins of violence and economic or injustice sins and he proposes that with this in mind, arsenokoitai, if referring to homosexuality doesn't normally appear in the category of sexual sins but is in, or on the edge of, the economic category. Though uncertain as to the date of this particular oracle, Martin provides a reading from Sibylline Oracle 2.70-77 that is labeled under the heading "On Justice."
"(Never accept in your hand a gift which derives from unjust deeds.) Do not steal seeds. Whoever takes for himself is accursed (to generations of generations, to the scattering of life.) (Do not arskenokoitein, do not betray information, do not murder.) Give one who has labored his wage. Do not oppress a poor man. Take heed of your speech. Keep a secret matter in your heart. (Make provision for orphans and widows and those in need.) Do not be willing to act unjustly, and therefore do not give leave to one who is acting unjustly." (page 120).
No sexual sin is listed in the above writing but all the sins are of economic injustice, whether through the oppression of the poor, the withholding of wages or accepting gifts from unjust deeds. It seems a possibility that in this context arskenokoitein refers to money earned through sexual behavior, which would also appear to make sense in that it follows prostitution (whoremongers, pornos) in I Timothy. Perhaps it has nothing to do with sex. It remains uncertain. Whether arsenokoitai is defined by this source in the same way as defined by Paul is equally uncertain. What is certain is that there seems sufficient evidence, or the lack thereof, to leave this word and it's appearance in I Corinthians 6 and I Timothy 1 as ambiguous in meaning. With so much uncertainty surrounding these words it's of painful concern that it's been used by some within the church with absolute rigidity to condemn gays and lesbians.
