Understanding the LGBTQ+ Community

Preface 

As I began studying the texts and other issues surrounding the Christian LGBTQ+ community¹The word “queer” is an umbrella term including all gender identities or someone who is not “straight.”  The word carries the same meaning as LGBTQ+. (2) A transsexual identifies as something other than they were at birth.  At times they may resort to hormone or surgical treatment. (3) Transgender individuals feel they are not the gender they were born with. (4) An asexual individual is not attracted to either sex or lacks interest in sex. (5) Bisexual people are those who are emotionally or sexually attracted to their own gender and to another gender. This manuscript addresses the Christian LGBTQ+ community and NOT LGBTQ+ community which has no desire to be pleasing to God.. I was reminded of a story told by a scholar regarding his understanding of a certain subject and how he had changed his views.  When asked why he had supported his previously held interpretation, he answered, “That was where I wanted to go!”  There will always be the temptation to go to the Scriptures and find support for “where we want to go.”  

I have diligently tried to counter that tendency in this study.  Certainly, I do not consider my thoughts to be the “final word,” but hopefully this information will equip others to have a better understanding of the issues surrounding this conversation and will serve as a foundation for the research and writing of those who will come after me.   

The following are the definitions of words and phrases used in this discussion and those that follow.

1. The phrase “modern same sex relationships” refers to relationships that are monogamous, committed, consensual, and covenantal.
2. Revisionists, progressives, and the affirming community describe those who affirm  modern same sex relationships are acceptable to God.
3. Traditionalists and the non-affirming community are those who reject all same sex relationships as acceptable to God.
4. Homosexual refers to both gay men and lesbian women²Victor Furnish, The Moral Teaching of Paul: Selected Issues. 3^rd ed. (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2009), 57. Sometimes homosexuals are called “Κίναιδος”(Kinaidos).  The word is a compound word formed by κινώ”(move) and “αιδώς”(shame). The Latinized form is cinaedus. It is a condemning and insulting word. The word “homosexual” did not appear in the literature of the first century.  The first time the word appeared was in German in 1868 in a letter from a Hungarian-German physician named Karoly M. Benkert to Karl Heinrch Ulrichws.  The word first appeared in an English translation of the Bible in 1946.. 

As part of this study, I have extensively quoted revisionist writers for two reasons:

    (1)  Readers can better understand the revisionists’ diverse perspectives concerning the teachings of the Scriptures on this topic. 

    (2)  Unless by choice, readers will not have to purchase and read the books quoted on the subject.  Before the church (or individuals) make decisions about LGBTQ+ relationships, a solid biblical foundation is needed.  Because this presentation deals with “people” (unlike some doctrinal issues that can be more impersonal), emotions can play a part in how the principles are understood and applied.

After researching, reading, and listening to the affirming community, I became aware that ancient writers (Roman, Greek, Jewish, and New Testament) did not use the terminology and expressions used today (e.g., consensual/committed/monogamous) to describe ancient homosexual relationships.  Because the modern terminology is different, some in the LGBTQ+ community have decided the Scriptures dealing with modern same sex relationships are not relevant today.  Granted, “interpretive issues” will arise when going back some 2000 years as will difficulties in translating passages and terms into English.  This will necessitate “reading between the lines” in trying to determine the intent and relevance of any given author or biblical text.  If this were not the case, the opposing positions that exist today between affirming and non-affirming scholars would not exist.  It must be noted that a single quotation from one writer will not explain all the issues surrounding modern same sex relationships.  Close examination of several sources will provide a cumulative effect and hopefully clarify the concerns.   

Contemporary scholarship is involved in a theological contest between those who believe the condemnation of same sex relationships is based on God’s intent at creation and those who believe the condemnation is based on the limited exposure of the biblical writers in several areas.  These areas include:          

               (1)  The biblical writers did not know about the genetic roots of some same sex relationships.

               (2)  The biblical writers were not aware of the nature of modern same sex relationships.

               (3)  The biblical writers limited their condemnation to abusive, pagan, same sex relationships.

Introduction

 Scripture is the nearest thing to the breath of God (2 Timothy 3:16: 2 Peter 1:21).  It is important to acknowledge the inspired Scriptures must take precedent over uninspired writings³The inspired Scriptures provide for us “everything we need for a godly life” (2 Pet 1:3) and equip us “for every good work” (2 Tim 3:17)..   At the same time the problems of manuscripts, textual criticism, hermeneutics, and interpretation of history and translations must be taken into consideration.  All these factors filter into the reading of the various texts, but the main issues center on the meaning of the texts in the first century and how should they be understood in 21st century. 

This study will begin with an introductory study of Romans 1:18-32 because this section of scripture⁴Matthew Vines, God and the Gay Christian: The Biblical Case in Support of Same-Sex Relationships. (New York: Convergent Books, 2014). 96. “There’s no question that Romans 1:26-27 is the most significant biblical text passage in this debate.” Robert Gagnon, The Bible and Homosexual Practice: Text and Hermeneutics. (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2001), 230. “Rom 1:24-27 is also the most difficult text for proponents of homosexual behavior to overturn.” is longer in its discussion of same sex relationships than any other New Testament text, and historically it has been referred to as the “go to” or “linchpin” text in understanding the topic⁵Mark D. Smith, “Ancient Bisexuality and the Interpretation of Romans 1:26-27,” Journal of American Academy of Religion IXIV/2, 224..  As such it has often been problematic for revisionists.  Consequently, some effort has been made to eliminate it from the current discussion⁶Bernadette J. Brooten, Love Between Women: Early Christian Responses to Female Homoeroticism (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996), 302. “I hope that churches today, being apprised of the history that I have presented, will no longer teach Rom 1:26f as authoritative.” Dale Martin, “Arsenokoites and Malakos: Meanings and Consequences,” Biblical Ethics & Homosexuality: Listening to Scripture edited by Robert L. Brawley (Louisville: John Knox Press,1996), 117. “The New Testament provides little ammunition to those wishing to condemn modern homosexuality.” Robin Scroggs, The New Testament and Homosexuality: Contextual Background for Contemporary Debate (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1983), 101, 127. “Not only is the New Testament church uninterested in the topic, it has nothing to say about it….Biblical judgments against homosexuality are not relevant in today’s debate.” and make it non-applicable to the modern same sex Christian community.  Because of this it is important to have a contextual understanding of it and other related biblical texts.

Contextual Understanding and Background of Romans 1:18-32⁷When the edict of Claudius was recanted at his death in 54 CE, the Jewish Christians returned to Rome after six years of absence (Acts 18:1-2).  The uniting of the Jewish and gentile Christians in house churches had not gone well and it was to this issue Paul addressed his letter.  As the gentile Christians were receiving the Jewish Christians back into their house churches, there were divisions about eating certain foods and observing certain days (Rom 14:2-5).  Almost immediately Paul stresses the importance of the gospel (Rom 1:14-16) to establish the unity that was needed to resolve these issues.  By emphasizing the gospel, Paul’s goal was for them to be filled with “joy and peace” as they accepted “one another” (Rom 15:7,13).  Although Paul was willing to compromise on matters of opinion, this was not the case with sexual ethics.  In Rom 13:12 – 13, Paul clarifies how they should deal with ungodly conduct (Rom 13:12b) and offers an alternative in Rom 13:14.

Although Paul wrote most of his letters to churches with which he had some connection, there are two exceptions—Colossians (Colossians 2:1) and Romans (Romans 1:14; Romans 15:24).  Romans is Paul’s monumental book describing redemption and how it affects the Christian life.  His concerns for the church⁸ Rom 1:13 “brothers and sisters” (adelphoi). (See Rom 7:1, 4; 8:12, 29; 10:1; 11:25; 12:1; 15:14, 36; 16:14, 17). See article: The Meaning of “Brothers” in the New Testament by Jerry Jones on www.marriagematters.ws. in Rome center on three areas:

(1) He had known many people living in Rome from other places (Rom 16:3-15), and he wanted the whole church (Jews and gentiles) to be united (Romans 14:1,19; Romans 15:7; Romans 16:17).

(2) He envisioned Rome as a launching pad for his plans to go to Spain (Romans 15:28).⁹ He had planned to go to Rome many times to have “a harvest” among them but had “been prevented from doing so” (Rom 1:13).

(3) Even though he had not been connected to the church in a personal way, he maintained a concern for it just as he did for other churches (2 Corinthians 11:28).

Romans 1:18-32 serves as the theological basis for establishing both Jews and gentiles as sinful, separated from God, and in need of the righteousness found in Jesus Christ.¹⁰ The term “sin” was is as a noun (ἁμαρτίαν) for the first time in Rom 3:9 and then as a verb (ἥμαρτον) in Rom 3:23.  The condemnation of the gentiles (who were without excuse Romans 1:20) continues with the condemnation of the Jews who were also without excuse (Romans 2:1).  Both gentiles and Jews were sinners (Romans 3:10,23; Galatians 2:15) and both needed the good news presented in Romans 3:21- 8:29.  

After the introductory remarks of Romans 1:1-17,¹¹ The theme of Romans is taken from Hab 2:4.  Romans 1:18-3:20 answers the need for righteousness (defined as a right relationship with God). Paul begins his condemnation of the gentile world.¹² Both gentiles and Jews were under the wrath of God (Rom 1:18; 2:5; 3:5). Instead of thanking, glorifying, and worshipping God who created them, they resorted to worshipping the idols they had made.¹³ Idols were off limits for the Jewish nation (Exod 20:3-5; Acts 7:43). Idolaters were “fools”¹⁴ Ps 14:1 with darkened hearts (Rom 1:21b-22a) and being fools they lacked wisdom.  Paul then accuses the gentiles of suppressing the truth and exchanging it for “the lie”¹⁵ The Greek: “for the lie” (ἐν τῷ ψεύδει). (Romans 1:25).¹⁶ As Paul moves into the condemnation of the Jewish world, he accuses the Jews of doing the “same things” twice (Rom 2:1b-2).  The Jews knew the law but did not obey it (Rom 2:23).   As he had done with the gentiles, Paul declares God’s judgment on the Jews was “based on truth” (Rom 2:2). “Wrath and anger” will come upon all “who reject the truth” (Rom 2:8)—both gentiles and Jews.  The condemnation of the gentile and Jewish worlds supports Paul’s conclusion that ALL are “under the power of sin” (Rom 3:9, 23) and there was “no fear of God before their eyes” (Rom 3:18; Ps 36:1; Lev 19:14).  God provided Jesus as an atoning sacrifice (Rom 3:25) so through him man could be “saved from God’s wrath” (Rom 5:9).  

Because the gentiles had rejected the revelation (Romans 1:21) God’s wrath was revealed (Romans 1:19-20).  Paul follows with three examples of their rejection (Romans 1:24-31) which are also illustrations of reversals of the creational intent of God. The three illustrations are prefaced with the phrase “God gave them over” (Romans 1:24,26,28):¹⁷ παρέδωκεν αὐτοὺς ὁ θεὸς (Rom 1:24)

1. to idolatry¹⁸ “But God turned away from them (ὁ θεὸς καὶ παρέδωκεν αὐτοὺς ὁ θεὸς) over to the worship of the sun, moon, and stars” (Acts 7:42). “It is my judgment, therefore, that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God” ( Acts 15:19).  (Romans 1:24-25)¹⁹
2.  Exod 20:23: “Do not make any gods for yourselves gods of silver or gods of gold.” 1 Sam12:21: “Do not turn away after useless idols. They can do you no good, nor can they rescue you, because they are useless.”
3.  “They have been quick to turn away from what I commanded them and have made themselves an idol cast in the shape of a calf” (Exod 32:8).   “…led them into such great sin” (Exod 32:2).
4.  “You have committed a great sin” (Exod 32:30). “They made themselves gods of gold” (Exod 32:31).
5.  “…so that you do not become corrupt and make for yourselves an idol, an image of any shape, whether formed like a man or a woman or like any animal on the earth or any bird that flies in the air, or like any creature that moves along the ground or any fish in the waters below” (Deut 4:16-18).
6. to sexual perversion (Romans 1:26-27). 
7. to ungodly behavior (Romans 1:28-31).

Paul is explicit when he states they had been given over to their own lusts (Romans 1:24), because “…they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator…” (Romans 1:25).  This rejection of God and the reversal that resulted by turning to idols was nothing new and is easily traced to the garden of Eden.  Adam and Eve sought to reverse the wisdom of God for their own wisdom “you will be like God knowing good and evil” (Genesis 3:5).  In truth they became their own idols by attempting to place themselves on par or perhaps even above God.  From that point forward, the scriptures make a strong connection between mankind’s rejection of God for idols and the behavior which followed the rejection. Torah considered idol worship “corrupt (Deuteronomy 4:16) and a great sin” (Exodus 32:21,30).  Israel turned from worshipping god to worshipping idols made by “themselves” (Exodus 20:23; Exodus 32:8,31; Leviticus 19:4).²⁰ Paul warns the Corinthians not to be idolaters as were the people of Israel who committed sexual immorality along with their idol worship (1 Cor 10:7-8). Paul (Galatians 5:20), Peter (1 Peter 4:3), and John (Revelation 2:14,20) connect idolatry and immorality in their warning to Christians. 

After declaring idolatry a reversal of God’s purpose for mankind, Paul follows with a second example of reversal—same sex relationships (Romans 1:26-27). This was not God’s original intent for males and females (Genesis 1-2). 

With the two reversals firmly established Paul returns to the theme of “wickedness”²¹ ἀδικία: adikia (introduced in Romans 1:18) which came from a “lack of knowledge of God” (Romans 1:28a).²² The creation story in Genesis 1-2 provides information about “the knowledge of God” (Isa 1:3; Ps 51:4; Gen 39:9; Hos 4:6). Instead of being “lovers of God,” they were “God-haters” (Romans 1:30).  Contrasted to righteousness, the twenty-one sins of Romans 1:29-31 serve as examples of the ungodly behavior “God gave them over to” (Romans 1:28).  They serve as poignant reminders of how far mankind—made in his “likeness” and his “image” (Genesis 1:26-27; Genesis 5:1)—had come from what God had intended.  As Paul ends the condemnation of the gentiles, he mentions “no fidelity,²³ 1 Cor 10:13 no love,²⁴ 1 John 4:16 and no mercy.”²⁵ Eph 2:4  These are all reversals of who God is and what God-like people should be (Romans 1:28-31;²⁶ The word transgression (parabasis) is a combination of two words: para meaning contrary and baino meaning to go. It carries the idea of “overstepping” and purposely “stepping over the line.” Transgression is a synonym for ἁμαρτία. Hamartia means “missing the mark” or “breaks the law” (1 John 3:4 “Everyone who sins breaks the law; in fact, sin is lawlessness” (Romans 4:15; Romans 5:14; Galatians 3:19; Psalm 65:3). Matt 22:37).  Note: Other examples  include:

1. Selfishness²⁷ “Egocentric” describes selfishness. is a reversal of the attitude of Jesus (Philippians 2:3-5).
2. Seeking greatness instead of servanthood is a reversal of the nature of Jesus who “did not come to be served but to serve…”(Mark 10:41-45). 
3. Refusal to “love God” and “deny self” is a reversal (Matthew 16:24; 22:37). 

The condemnation of same sex relationships occupies only two verses (Romans 1:26-27 with the possible inclusion of Romans 1:24) because it was not the focus of Paul’s condemnation of the gentiles—living a reversed life was!²⁸ The Jews were not guilty of idolatry or same sex relationships, but of some of the “same things” (Rom 2:2-3) listed in Rom 1:29-31. Paul was not implying that all gentiles were involved in same sex relationships, but its prominence among gentiles was evidence of the degenerative nature of the gentile (pagan) world (1 Corinthians 5:1; 1 Corinthians 12:2; Ephesians 4:20; 1 Thessalonians 4:5).

Considering Romans 1:18-32, two questions beg a response:            

1. Are there any circumstances or conditions under which idolatry would be acceptable?  

The answer is no.  Idolatry is a reversal from worshipping God to worshipping something else.²⁹ Question: Is the need for man to worship something considered a “human need”?

2. Are there any circumstances or conditions under which the sins of Romans 1:29-32 (greed, murder, strife, envy, God haters, insolent, boastful, arrogant, no love, no mercy) would be acceptable?  

The answer is no. All conduct should be avoided that does not reflect God, is not in harmony with the character of God,³⁰ Without God as the center of their lives the gentiles were destined to become involved in all kinds of behavior that was “ungodly.”  Because idolatry is mentioned in various letters to gentile churches (Corinth (1 Cor 1:2; 10:7-8; 12:2; 2 Cor 1:2; 6:16), Pontus, Galatia (Gal 1:2; 4:20), Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia (1 Pet 1:1; 4:3), Pergamum (Rev 2:12, 14), Thyatira (Rev 2:18,20), the writers saw it as a “clear and present danger” for gentile believers. Modeling the life of Jesus by serving God  and not idols provides the proper direction for all believers (1 Cor 2:16; 11:1; Phil 2:5; 1 Pet 2:21). or is a reversal of who God is.³¹ “Be holy as I am holy” (Lev 11:44-45; 19:2; 1 Pet 1:15). “You shall have no other gods before me” (Exod 20:3-4; 20:22). “Do not make any gods to be alongside me; do not make for yourselves gods of silver or gods of gold” (Deut 4:15-20).

Sexual immorality is just another reversal and example of rejecting godliness.  Without a moral compass rooted in God, the “sin living” in mankind (Romans 7:17,20) makes us prone to serve ourselves or anything of our choosing. 

Put to death, therefore, whatever belongs to your earthly nature: sexual immorality, impurity, lust, evil desires and greed, which is idolatry (Colossians 3:5).