HOMOSEXUALITY AND THE BIBLE
BIBLE STUDY 9
It has been said that an agenda is for those times when the Holy Spirit doesn’t move. This week the Spirit let me know that I wasn’t finished with what needed to be said about 1 Romans 26-27.
Romans 1:26-27 (KJV)
For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections; for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature; And likewise also the men leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust toward one another; men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
Romans 1:26-27 (NIV)
Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.
One of the main arguments against homosexuality (or the issue of gender identity) has been “it’s not natural.” A favorite argument used against homosexuality is “God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve.” This is a non-argument because, of course, God did make Adam and Steve, and Mary and George, and Alice and Suzie–God made every one of us, but to negate the validity of an orientation because it was not described in the Garden and is therefore "unnatural", is absurd, the poetry notwithstanding.
Human beings are the masters of the "unnatural," perhaps beginning with the first time someone skinned an animal and used the skin for clothing or shelter. From the cars we drive, to the televisions we watch; from the computers we use which allow us to communicate across the world, to the alarm clock which wakes us in the morning; from last night’s frozen dinner to the microwave we cooked it in, every aspect of our lives celebrates the "unnatural." Even the Amish of Pennsylvania who eschew our modern conveniences "unnaturally" hitch horses to wagons to ride into town.
But what does Paul mean when he uses the term? In the original language, the words used here in Romans 1:26 were para phusin, translated against nature, which many scholars have interpreted as referring to homosexuality. However, we find that Paul used these same words in Romans 11:24 to explain to Gentiles that though Gentiles are not naturally part of the Chosen, God welcomes Gentiles and is willing to graft them into the family tree, and also willing to graft back into that same family tree those of the Chosen who had fallen away: "After all, if you (Gentiles) were cut out of an olive tree that is wild by nature (phusin), and contrary to nature (para phusin) were grafted into a cultivated olive tree (the Chosen family tree), how much more readily will these, the natural branches, (the Chosen who have fallen away) be grafted (back) into their own olive tree." (NIV)
It is quite evident that Paul’s use of the phrase here has nothing to do with homosexuality, nor is it a criticism of immorality. Rather Paul refers to phusin (or phusis) to mean that which is innate in the person, or how they were born. We find an example of this usage in Galatians 2:15. What the KJV says is "We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles…", is translated "We who are Jews by birth and not ’Gentile sinners’…" in the NIV.
We know that Paul used the term nature to mean different things at different times. Besides that which we’ve already shown, in 1 Corinthians 11:14 Paul writes, “Does not the very nature of things teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a disgrace to him…?” (NIV). Is it not true that nature causes hair to grow long? Would it not be against nature to cut it? Consider that Paul was an educated man, who by his own words, excelled his peers in knowledge of Jewish law, customs and traditions. Certainly he would have known of Samson in the book of Judges. In chapter 16:10 we find Samson telling Delilah, "No razor has ever been used on my head," he said, "because I have been a Nazirite set apart to God since birth. If my head were shaved, my strength would leave me, and I would become as weak as any other man.” (NIV). When Samson’s hair was cut his famously powerful strength did leave him and did not return until his hair had once again grown out. If Nazirites were people set apart to serve God, what prompted Paul’s comment in 1 Corinthians? Is it possible that all able-bodied Corinthian men were required to spend time in the military (with military haircuts) and that those whose hair remained uncut were shirking their duties? In this instance of the use of nature, we find that the connotation was not about morality, or that which is innate, or accident of birth, but merely civic responsibility.
In Ephesians 2:3 & 4 Paul writes, referring to the ways of the world: All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the cravings of our sinful nature and following its desires and thoughts. Like the rest, we were by nature objects of wrath. But because of God’s great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions–it is by grace you have been saved. (NIV) Here Paul demonstrates that God has raised us to be above nature; that we are to transcend nature–that we are to walk in the Spirit and not fulfill the lust of the flesh. On the one hand, it appears that Paul glorifies the concept of being "with nature, not against it," while on the other hand he would have us be "above nature," and not in harmony with it.
Since Paul uses the terms nature several different ways in the epistles, no scholar can know with absolute certainty Paul’s specific meaning of the word in the captioned passages above. However, the evidence of Galatians 2:15 certainly gives us room to infer that the acts referred to in Romans 1:26 -27 were acts that were not natural to the persons committing them. That is, heterosexuals who engaged in homosexual activity (to facilitate idol worship). If we are correct that Paul condemns those who engage in sexual activity that is not natural for them, then not only would the condemnation apply to heterosexuals who engage in homosexual activity, but would also apply to homosexuals who engage in heterosexual activity.
There are
churches who deny that homosexuality is innate–an individual’s
orientation–believing and teaching that it is a life-style choice, or learned
"activity.” Those who take this position fly in the face of common sense and
decency. They deny the individual’s own life experiences–their personal truths
about themselves. They deny the scientific evidence that strongly suggests that
homosexuality is a biologically determined trait, not a lifestyle choice. They
deny the position of the American Psychiatric Association which stopped
classifying homosexuality as a disease in 1973. They choose to believe that
homosexuals are so mentally imbalanced or depraved that they would rather be
beaten, tortured and murdered than give up this "chosen behavior.” They take the
position that homosexuality is not observed in any animal specie other than
human. That statement is patently untrue. Research has shown that homosexual
activity has indeed been demonstrated in animals, fish and birds.
It is important to note that The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia
in its article on Natural/Nature states:
"….The word nature is contaminated by no biblical concepts from Greek thought onward, especially concepts lacking the foundational biblical confession of God as Creator. The term’s ambiguity (for whatever reasons) allows a spectrum of usage ranging from the abstract and universal to the subjective, sensate life of a person…. The natural relationship between the sexes is established in the regular order of nature (Rom. 1:26). The pagan is indicted for the violation of this physis (i.e. nature).”
Again we find this reference to idolatry as being what is "against nature," and the condemnation indicated in Romans 1:26-27.
This ends our study for today. Next week: 1 Corinthians 6:9