New Testament and Homosexuality PDF

Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
TERMS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
WHEN SAME-SEX MARRIAGE WAS A CHRISTIAN RITE . . . . . . . . . . 2
UNDERSTANDING TRANSLATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
JESUS CHRIST ON HOMOSEXUALITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
THE NEW TESTAMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
PAUL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1 CORINTHIANS & 1 TIMOTHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
THE FIRST EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE CORINTHIANS: CHAPTER 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
THE FIRST EPISTLE OF PAUL TO TIMOTHY: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
MALAKOS, ARSENOKOIATI / ARSENOKOITES: MALE PROSTITUTES, THE SELF-INDULGENT,
THE EFFEMINATE, PERVERTS, HOMOSEXUAL OFFENDERS? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
ARSENOKOITES: HOMOSEXUAL OFFENDERS? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
THE ETYMOLOGY OF ARSENOKOITES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
MALAKOS AND ARSENOKOITES TOGETHER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS 1, 26 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS: CHAPTER 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
ROMANS 1:26-27 IS CLEARLY ABOUT SAME-SEX RELATIONSHIPS. . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
ROMANS 1:26-27 IS ALSO CLEARLY NOT SPEAKING ABOUT ALL SAME-SEX RELATIONSHIPS.
HOW SO? READ THE VERSES IN CONTEXT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
1 KINGS 14:24 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
SEXUAL IMPURITY AND UNNATURAL RELATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
IF YOU ACCEPT WHAT PAUL SAYS ABOUT HOMOSEXUALITY, THEN YOU MUST
ALSO ACCEPT THE FOLLOWING: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
PAUL DID NOT CARE FOR MEN WITH LONG HAIR OR WOMEN WITH SHORT HAIR: . . . 11
THE FIRST EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE CORINTHIANS: CHAPTER 11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
PAUL THOUGHT A WOMAN SHOULD BE SUBMISSIVE, SILENT, DRESS PLAINLY. . . . . . 12
PAUL DID NOT LIKE WOMEN PREACHERS OR TEACHERS: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
THE FIRST EPISTLE OF PAUL TO TIMOTHY: CHAPTER 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
THE FIRST EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE CORINTHIANS: Chapter 14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
THE FIRST EPISTLE OF PAUL TO TIMOTHY: CHAPTER 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
PAUL DID NOT REALLY CARE FOR WOMEN: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
THE FIRST EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE CORINTHIANS: Chapter 7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
PAUL WAS NOT DISTURBED BY SLAVERY, PARTICULARLY IF THOSE IN BONDAGE WERE
“HAPPY” CHRISTIAN SLAVES: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
The New Testament & Homosexuality ii

THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE COLOSSIANS: Chapter 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE EPHESIANS: Chapter 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
THROUGHOUT THE BIBLE, LUST IS CONDEMNED, WHETHER THE LUST IS HOMOSEXUAL
OR HETEROSEXUAL. THE DICTIONARY GIVES THE THEOLOGICAL MEANING OF LUST AS
“SEEKING UNRESTRAINED GRATIFICATION” AND “EXCESSIVE SEXUAL DESIRE.” . . . . . 13
THE FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN: CHAPTER 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
CONCERNING JUDGMENT: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS: CHAPTER 14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO MATTHEW: CHAPTER 7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
THE FIRST EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE CORINTHIANS: CHAPTER 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
BUT OF LOVE, JESUS SAID: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO JOHN: CHAPTER 13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
AND IN PAUL’S WORDS: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS: CHAPTER 13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
ALL ONE IN CHRIST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

HOMOSEXUAL MARRIAGE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
WHAT DID CHRIST SAY? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
WHO ARE THE EUNUCHS? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
MARRIAGE AND THE PURPOSE OF GOD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
NEW TESTAMENT HISTORY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Emperor Constantine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Arius . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Athanasius . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
THE EARLY CHRISTIAN CHURCH COURTS PAGANS . . . . . . . . . . . 21

THE CHRISTIANIZATION OF PAGAN HOLIDAYS . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
SUNDAY SERVICES INSTEAD OF THE SABBATH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
CHRISTMAS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
EASTER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
WHY THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH TARGETED HOMOSEXUALITY . . . . . 22

CURRENT STATE OF CHRISTIANITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
The New Testament & Homosexuality iii

INTRODUCTION
There are many Gay, Bisexual, Lesbian, Transgender, and Questioning youth and adults who have a strong
Christian Faith, but who struggle to deal with what seem to be messages in Scriptures condemning who
they are. There are also many Christians who use Scripture as a Weapon to attack GLBTQ people, and as
justification for Bigotry (Discriination & Hate) against GBLT people.
The purpose of this paper is to: 1) Help Homosexual and Bisexual Christians reconcile their FAITH to their
Sexual Orientation; 2) Educate Christians about the and correct translations of Scripture; and 3) To be use
to counter attacks by Christians who use Scripture as a weapon. After reading this paper, it is my hope that
your Faith and your Sexual Orientation can coexist in Harmony.
My intent is to shine the light of truth on the passages in the New Testament that are used to attack
homosexuality, to see what they really say when translated in historical and language contexts. Christianity
and Islam account for almost all of the hate and bigotry against homosexuals in the history of mankind. Yet
the scriptures themselves, when examined in the light of truth, do not support the attack on homosexuality.
Hate comes from People, not Christ, or God. There is now considerable evidence that you are born Gay, as
I will show in another paper. Homosexuals have existed since the dawn of man. Homosexuality also exists in
the animal kingdom, so it must be part of God’s plan.
Please note that I am not a Christian, nor of any other Religious Faith. I do not believe in a God you would recognize,
nor in a Heaven or Hell, but I am a Spiritual man in my own way. I choose to be a good person without the threat of
a Hell nor the reward of a Heaven. I do so because it is the Right thing to do. I have studied Christian Theology over
the years, as well as Comparative Theology.
TERMS
SEXUAL PERVERTS – It is Important to remember that terms like Sexual Perverts are wide open to
interpretation in the Old Testament and is used in numerous ways. Modern Conservative Christians say
it is defined by Homosexual Activity, when obviously throughout the Old Testament it is used to describe
adultery, sex outside of marriage, sex during religious rituals, even sex between tribes.
Christians choosing to interpret the phrase this way are being extremely selective, excluding the many other
interpretations of the phrase. Please pay close attention, as this term will be defined as we move along.
SODOMY – The word, “sodomy” which first appeared in the 17th century King James Bible was then used
simply to mean wickedness. This shows how much change and interpretation has gone on through the
centuries. How terms and interpretations became more and more homophobic and Targeted at homosexuals
as Scapegoats.
During the Little Ice Age in Europe, when the Black Plague hits and violent storms plagued Europe, The
Catholic Church blamed the horrid weather and storms on Witches, saying each storm was the work of a
Witch. This started the Witch Hunts that saw thousand of innocent women first tortured for confessions,
then tortured to death, or burned at the stake.
The New Testament & Homosexuality 1

WHEN SAME-SEX MARRIAGE
WAS A CHRISTIAN RITE
An icon from St. Catherine’s Monastery on Mt.
Sinai in Israel shows two robed Christian saints.
Between them is a traditional Roman ‘pronubus’
(a best man), overseeing a wedding. The pronubus
is Christ. The married couple are both men.
Is the icon suggesting that a Same-Sex (Gay)

Wedding is being sanctified by Christ himself?
The idea seems shocking. But the full answer
comes from other early Christian sources about the two men featured in the icon, St. Sergius and St. Bacchus,1
two Roman soldiers who were Christian martyrs. These two officers in the Roman army incurred the anger of
Emperor Maximian when they were exposed as ‘secret Christians’ by refusing to enter a pagan temple. Both
were sent to Syria circa 303 CE where Bacchus is thought to have died while being flogged. Sergius survived
torture but was later beheaded. Legend says that Bacchus appeared to the dying Sergius as an angel, telling
him to be brave because they would soon be reunited in heaven.
While the pairing of saints, particularly in the early Christian church, was not unusual, the association of these
two men was regarded as particularly intimate. Severus, the Patriarch of Antioch (512 – 518 CE) explained
that, “we should not separate in speech they [Sergius and Bacchus] who were joined in life.” This is not a case
of simple “adelphopoiia.” [Adelphopoiesis, or adelphopoiia, derived from (adelphos) “brother” and (poieō) “I make,”
literally “brother-making” is a ceremony practiced at one time by various Christian churches to unite together two
people of the same sex (normally men).]
In the definitive 10th century account of their lives, St. Sergius is openly celebrated as the “sweet companion
and lover” of St. Bacchus. Sergius and Bacchus’s close relationship has led many modern scholars to believe
they were lovers. But the most compelling evidence for this view is that the oldest text of their martyrology,
written in New Testament Greek describes them as “Erastai,” or “Lovers.” In other words, they were a Male
Homosexual Couple. Their orientation and relationship was not only acknowledged, but it was fully accepted
and celebrated by the early Christian church, which was far more tolerant than it is today.
Contrary to myth, Christianity’s concept of marriage has not been set in stone since the days of Christ, but
has constantly evolved as a concept and ritual.
Prof. John Boswell2, the late Chairman of Yale University’s history department, discovered that in addition
to heterosexual marriage ceremonies in ancient Christian church liturgical documents, there were also
ceremonies called the “Office of Same Sex Union” (10th and 11th century), and the “Order for Uniting Two
Men” (11th and 12th century).
1. Saints Sergius & Bacchus, Roman martyrs. Their Catholic feast day is October 7th. Catholic Encyclopedia http://
www.newadvent.org/cathen/13728a.htm
2. John Eastburn Boswell (American Council of Learned Societies); Same-Sex Unions in Premodern Europe Random
House, June 1994

These church rites had all the symbols of a heterosexual marriage: the whole community gathered in a church, a
blessing of the couple before the altar was conducted with their right hands joined, holy vows were exchanged,
a priest officiated in the taking of the Eucharist and a wedding feast for the guests was celebrated afterwards.
These elements all appear in contemporary illustrations of the holy union of the Byzantine Warrior-Emperor,
Basil the First (867-886 CE) and his companion John.
Such same gender Christian sanctified unions also took place in Ireland in the late 12th and early 13th
centuries, as the chronicler, ‘Gerald of Wales’ (‘Geraldus Cambrensis’) recorded.
Same-sex unions in pre-modern Europe list in great detail some same gender ceremonies found in ancient
church liturgical documents. One Greek 13th century rite, “Order for Solemn Same-Sex Union,” invoked St.
Serge and St. Bacchus, and called on God to “Vouchsafe unto these, Thy servants [N and N], the grace to
love one another and to abide without hate and not be the cause of scandal all the days of their lives, with
the help of the Holy Mother of God, and all Thy saints.” The ceremony concludes: “And they shall kiss the
Holy Gospel and each other, and it shall be concluded.”
Another 14th century Serbian Slavonic “Office of the Same Sex Union”, uniting two men or two women, had
the couple lay their right hands on the Gospel while having a crucifix placed in their left hands. After kissing
the Gospel, the couple were then required to kiss each other, after which the priest, having raised up the
Eucharist, would give them both communion.
Records of Christian Same-sex Unions have been discovered in such diverse archives as those in the Vatican,
in St. Petersburg, in Paris, in Istanbul and in the Sinai, covering a thousand-years from the 8th to the 18th
century.
The Dominican missionary and Prior, Jacques Goar (1601-1653), includes such ceremonies in a printed
collection of Greek Orthodox prayer books, “Euchologion Sive Rituale Graecorum Complectens Ritus Et
Ordines Divinae Liturgiae” (Paris, 1667).
While homosexuality was technically illegal from late Roman times, homophobic writings didn’t appear in
Western Europe until the late 14th century. Even then, church-consecrated Same-sex unions continued to
take place.
At St. John Lateran in Rome (traditionally the Pope’s parish church) in 1578, as many as thirteen same-gender
couples were joined during a high Mass and with the cooperation of the Vatican clergy, “taking communion
together, using the same nuptial Scripture, after which they slept and ate together” according to a contemporary
report. Another woman to woman union is recorded in Dalmatia in the 18th century.
Prof. Boswell’s academic study is so well researched and documented that it poses fundamental questions
for both modern church leaders and heterosexual Christians about their own modern attitudes towards
homosexuality.
For the Church to ignore the evidence in its own archives would be cowardly and deceptive. The evidence
convincingly shows that what the modern church claims has always been its unchanging attitude towards
homosexuality is, in fact, nothing of the sort.

It proves that for the last two millennia, in parish churches and cathedrals throughout Christendom, from
Ireland to Istanbul and even in the heart of Rome itself, homosexual relationships were accepted as valid
expressions of a [Christian] god-given love and commitment to another person, a love that could be celebrated,
honored and blessed, through the Eucharist in the name of, and in the presence of, Jesus Christ.
“…in the evening the youth came to him [Jesus], wearing a linen cloth over his naked body. And he
remained with him that night, for Jesus taught him the mystery of the Kingdom of God. And thence,
arising, he returned to the other side of the Jordan.” —The Secret Gospel of Mark, The Other Bible,
Willis Barnstone, Editor, Harper & Row, San Francisco, 1984, pp. 339-342.
UNDERSTANDING TRANSLATION
There are some interesting notes on Translation. Paul refers to “Faith, Hope and Charity” in older version of
the Bible. Most modern translations now say, “Faith, Hope, and Love.” But there is a major problem with
that. The primary definition of Charity was (and still is) “Universal Love For Your Fellow Mankind.” So,
basically, they have translated “Universal Love for Your Fellow Mankind” into the single word “Love.” This
is drastically different.
Many translation use the word “HOMOSEXUAL” but there was never a word in ancient Hebrew, or Latin,
or Greek, for that word. The word was added to Greek only in modern times of the last century. When you
translate documents, IT MUST BE IN THE USAGE OF THE PERIOD WRITTEN. The translators speak
of the many compromises they must make. It is important for you to get a feel for what Translation is really
like. You had a room for of scholars debating single passages for weeks, voting, try to find consensus.
In Paul, his frequent syntactical shortcomings and to be interpreted to make sense to the English ear. The
Gospel According to John comprises a special case. Absolute fidelity to his technique of reiterative phrasing
would result in an assault on the English ear that would be almost unbearable. Yet the softening of the vocal
effect by the substitution of words and phrases would destroy the effectiveness of his Greek poetry. Serious
compromise had to be made, although they attempted a translation rather than a paraphrasing.
Jesus taught by parable, as you know already. There are historical references that are important to the story. For
example, when Jesus washes the feet of the visitors, it is actually custom of the time. People wore open
sandals, and when you walked to vista a friend, your feet were filthy by the time you got there, so the host, or
his servants would wash the feet of arriving guests.
…I tell you the truth, it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. Again I tell you, it is easier for
a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God. Matthew 19:23-24,
Mark 10:24-25 and Luke 18:24-25. The “Eye of the Needle” is a gate out of Jerusalem, it is skinny and not so
tall. I have a picture of it. So when you study the Bible, to really understand it, you must study the culture
and history of the period, in order to understand the context of what is being said, and of the parable.
People insetting on believe the Bible word for word are IGNORANT, intellectually lazy, and the most likely
to impose their beliefs on others, to be bigots, and to harm others in their righteousness.

JESUS CHRIST ON HOMOSEXUALITY
A Christian theologian told me, “While the greater focus is on what Christ said, we must remember the
important of what Christ did not say.”
I would challenge you to very carefully read Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, the eyewitness to Christ, and
look for anything related to homosexuality, or same-sex sex. You will find not even a hint, yet it is something
that was prevalent and very much a part of the Roman Empire, into which Christ was born. There were
Roman garrisons throughout the Holy Land (Judea). So, Christ would have been aware of such a prominent
cultural practice. Surely, if Christ had a problem with this, he would have said something about it. Some
issues he came back to more than once.
There is also no mention of homosexuality in the Epistles of James, Peter, John, and Jude. In fact, the only place
anywhere in the New Testament where homosexuality is mentioned, is in Paul (Timothy will be discussed
later).
It should be noted here that homosexuality, as we know it today, did not exist then, and there was no word
for homosexuality in Greek, Roman, or Hebrew. In the Greek and Roman empires, including the time of
Christ, Greek and Roman society did not distinguish sexual desire or sexual behavior by the gender of the
participants, but by how it conformed to social norms. The active (penetrative) role was associated with
masculinity, higher social status, and adulthood, while the passive role was associated with femininity, lower
social status, and youth. Any sexual activities in which a male penetrated a social inferior was regarded
as normal; “social inferiors” could include anyone of lower social status than you, women, male youths,
foreigners, prostitutes, or slaves. In other words, a man could penetrate anyone or anything of lower status,
but could not be penetrated by anyone of lower status.
Same-Sex sex, as well as have long-term lovers, was common in the Roman Army and is seen throughout
the historical record of the times. The tradition went back to the Ancient Greeks. From Plato’s Symposium,
wherein the character Phaedrus remarks, “And if there were only some way of contriving that a state or an army
should be made up of lovers and their loves, they would be the very best governors of their own city, abstaining from
all dishonor, and emulating one another in honour; and when fighting at each other’s side, although a mere handful,
they would overcome the world. For what lover would not choose rather to be seen by all mankind than by his
beloved, either when abandoning his post or throwing away his arms? He would be ready to die a thousand deaths
rather than endure this. Or who would desert his beloved or fail him in the hour of danger?
The Theban army, in the 4th century BCE, formed The Sacred Band of Thebes, which was a troop of picked
soldiers, consisting of 150 age-structured couples (Male Lovers), which formed the elite force of. The Sacred
Band fought the Spartans at Tegyra in 375 BCE, vanquishing an army that was at least three times its size. It
was also responsible for the victory at Leuctra in 371 BCE, called by Pausanias the most decisive battle ever
fought by Greeks against Greeks. Leuctra established Theban independence from Spartan rule and laid the
groundwork for the expansion of Theban power.
The war training and education of boys and young men typically entailed a relationship with an older experienced
man “Erastes,” and his young pupil “Eromenos.” The older man was a role model, protector, mentor, and while the
relationship often included sex, it often did not include sex, and instead was an elaborate Platonic Love Affair. It
was just part of the culture.

THE NEW TESTAMENT
PAUL
Paul was not an eye witness to Christ. Paul asserted that he
received the Gospel not from any person, but by a personal
revelation of Jesus Christ. [Gal. 1:11–16]. Paul was in dispute
with the apostle Peter and the Central Church, arguing that
Gentiles need not comply fully with Mosaic Law, requiring
circumcision and dietary restrictions. He claimed independence from the Central Church and roamed over
vast distances (covering most of the area on the map above) spreading the word of Christianity.
Paul dictated all his epistles through a secretary (or amanuensis), who would usually paraphrase the gist of
his message, as was the practice among first-century scribes. The letters are largely written to churches he had
visited, thought to be responses to problems they were experiencing (trying to get them on a righteous path).
The letters are Paul’s gospels. As one theologian said, “If poor Pail knew his private letter were going to be the
very foundation of the Christian church, I am sure he would have taken more care in writing them.”
1 CORINTHIANS & 1 TIMOTHY

The second passage where Paul may be speaking of homosexuality is in The First Epistle Of Paul To The
Corinthians. The King James Bible uses the phrase “nor effeminate” while the St. Joseph Catholic Bible uses
the phrase “no sexual perverts.”
THE FIRST EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE CORINTHIANS:

CHAPTER 6
9 Can you not realize that the unholy will not fall heir to the kingdom of God? Do not deceive yourself: no fornicators,
idolaters, or adulterers, no sexual perverts, 10 thieves, misers, or drunkards, no slanderers or robbers will inherit God’s
kingdom. 11 And such were some of you; but you have been washed, consecrated, justified in the name of our Lord
Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.
The third passage where Paul may be speaking of homosexuality is in The First Epistle Of Paul To Timothy.
The King James Bible uses the phrase “for them that defile themselves with mankind” while the St. Joseph
Catholic Bible uses the phrase “sexual perverts.”
THE FIRST EPISTLE OF PAUL TO TIMOTHY:

CHAPTER 1
8 We know that the law is good, provided one uses it the way it is supposed to be used 9 that is, with the understanding
that it is aimed, not at good men but at the lawless and unruly, the irreligious and the sinful, the wicked and the
godless, men who kill their fathers or mothers, murderers, 10 fornicators, sexual perverts, kidnapers, liars, perjurers, and
those who in other ways flout the sound teaching 11 that pertains to the glorious gospel of God-blessed be he-with
which I have been entrusted.

In 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 and 1 Timothy 1:9-11, Paul lists some sins, and at first glance it sounds like
homosexuality is included in these sins. Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of
God? Do not be deceived:
Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor
thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. (1 Corinthians
6:9-10, NIV)
We also know that law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful,
the unholy and irreligious; for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, for adulterers and
perverts, for slave traders and liars and perjurers-and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine that
conforms to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which he entrusted to me. (1 Timothy 1:9-11, NIV)
MALAKOS, ARSENOKOIATI / ARSENOKOITES: MALE PROSTITUTES, THE SELF-

INDULGENT, THE EFFEMINATE, PERVERTS, HOMOSEXUAL OFFENDERS?
In 1 Corinthians 6, Male Prostitutes is a translation of the Greek word Malakoi (singular: Malakos), and
Homosexual Offenders is a translation of Arsenokoiati (singular: Arsenokoites), which occurs in one other
place in the Bible, 1 Timothy 1:10, where it is translated as Perverts.
The correct translation of these words is highly debated, and there is no consensus among Bible translators,
Malakos is translated as:
†† Effeminate (King James Version, American Standard Version Bible);
†† Pervert (Contemporary English Version Bible);
†† Male Prostitutes (New Revised Standard Version Bible);
†† The Self-indulgent (New Jerusalem Bible)
Arsenokoites is translated as Homosexual Offenders in 1 Corinthians, but as Perverts in 1 Timothy (New

International Version Bible). As it is possible to be a heterosexual pervert, these English terms are clearly two
different things. Other translations for Arsenokoites include Homosexuals (New American Standard Bible,
New Living Translation), and Sodomites (New Revised Standard Version, New King James Version).
Some translations translate Malakos and Arsenokoites as one word or phrase, such as Men Who Practice
Homosexuality (English Standard Version), Homosexual Perverts (Good News Bible), or Sexual Perverts
(Revised English Bible, Revised Standard Version (2nd Edition).
When translators cannot agree on the general meaning of a Greek word, it is a sign of their uncertainty. These
verses are important for Christians when thinking about same-sex relationships, so it is very important to
look at these words as carefully as we can.
What does Malakos actually mean? The word is widely used in Greek texts, including the New Testament.
It literally means Soft and it is used like this elsewhere in the New Testament (Matthew 11:18). It can also
mean Effeminate, and it is used like this in other Greek texts. Although some gay men are effeminate, the
two words are not synonyms. Not all effeminate men are gay, and very few gay men are effeminate. Being
Malakos also has connotations of being wanton or unrestrained. In the first century, when Paul wrote his
letters, Malakos was not a term that was applied to gay men.
It is very difficult to say exactly what Paul meant when he wrote Malakoi but there is no evidence that he
was referring to Same-sex Relationships of any kind, and plenty of evidence that he meant something else.
ARSENOKOITES: HOMOSEXUAL OFFENDERS?
Although the range of translations for Arsenokoites is narrower that the range for Malakos, it is still
a difficult-some would say impossible-word to translate. That difficulty can be seen in the NIV’s use of
two different English words to translate it. Perverts and Homosexual Offenders are two different things.
Arsenokoites is used in a handful of other Greek texts from the first few centuries after Christ, and none of
them really give enough context to determine what the word means. The Penitential attributed to ‘John the
Faster’ (d 595) mentions Arsenokoitia in the context of Opposite-sex Relationships:
In fact, many men even commit the sin of arsenokoitia with their wives.
This important quotation shows that Arsenokoites cannot be translated to Homosexuals or any similar word.
Please look at all of the texts that use Arsenokoites and related words. They are all available on the Internet.
When the context gives any clue to the meaning of the word, none of these texts require that Arsenokoites
means Homosexual or anything similar, and some, like the Penitential quoted above, show that it cannot have
this meaning.
As with Malakos, we cannot say with certainty what Paul meant when he wrote Arsenokoites, but it is clear
that it does not refer to Same-sex Relationships.
THE ETYMOLOGY OF ARSENOKOITES
It is tempting to look at the etymology of Arsenokoites to find out what it means. However, the etymology
of a word gives only its history, not its meaning. In English for example, the etymology of the phrase lady
killer suggests either a lady who kills, or a person who kills ladies, but it really means a man who knows how
to charm ladies. The only reliable way to determine the meaning of a word is from how it is used. The way
Arsenokoites is used indicates that it does not mean Homosexual. However, the etymology of this word does
give a clue (and it is no more than a clue) about what it means.
Arsenokoites is a compound word, formed from arseno- which means men, male humans, and -koiati, which
refers to the penetrating partner in sexual intercourse. When these two parts are put together, forming a word
meaning something like man-penetrator, it is not clear if it means a man who penetrates, or a man who is
penetrated, or lady killer, or it could mean something completely different. We can get a little more context
from the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament.
The word Arsenokoites almost appears in the Septuagint, in Leviticus 20:13: “hos an koimethe meta arsenos
koiten gunaikos.” It might be the case that Arsenokoites is a contraction of arsenos koiten. If it is, then Paul
possibly meant to repeat the Leviticus prohibition. That restriction is not a general prohibition of male-male
sex, but is a prohibition of a specific sexual act . If Leviticus is the origin of the word, and the origin of the
word gives an indication of the meaning, then Arsenokoites refers to just that sexual act, and that is a sexual
act that both same-sex and opposite-sex couples can practice. John the Faster’s use of Arsenokoitia supports
this suggestion. Therefore, Paul’s uses of Arsenokoites are injunctions against certain types of sexual activity,
not against same-sex relationships.
MALAKOS AND ARSENOKOITES TOGETHER
It is sometimes thought that Malakos and Arsenokoites are a pair, one being the active partner, the other
being the passive partner. The English Standard Version has this footnote for 1 Corinthians 6:9: “The two
Greek terms translated by this phrase refer to the passive and active partners in consensual homosexual acts.”
Looking at the two words on their own is sometimes criticized as the divide and conquer approach.
Are Malakos and Arsenokoites a pair? There is no evidence to suggest that they are, and plenty of evidence to
suggest that they are not. Arsenokoites is used twice in the Bible, but it is only used once with Malakos. If the
two words are a pair, it doesn’t make sense for Paul to use only Arsenokoites in 1 Timothy. In other Greek texts,
the only times the two words are used together is in quotations of 1 Corinthians 6. These words are not a pair.
CONCLUSION
If 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 could be translated as “…homosexuals…will not inherit the Kingdom of God,”
or anything like that, then this debate would be over, for the Christians at least. But Arsenokoites and
Malakos can’t be translated in that way.
We have to conclude that 1 Corinthians 6:1-10 and 1 Timothy 1:9-11 have nothing to say about same-
sex relationships.
THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS 1, 26

The first passage is in The Epistle Of Paul To The Romans 1, 26. Here he is saying that God is punishing
those who worship false idols by delivering them up to disgraceful passions and homosexual acts. They are
filled with every kind of wickedness; maliciousness, greed, ill will, envy, murder, etc.
THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS:

CHAPTER 1
Punishment Of Idolatry. 18 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against the irreligious and perverse spirit
of men who, in this perversity of theirs, hinder the truth. 19 In fact, whatever can be known about God is clear to them;
he himself made it so. 20 Since the creation of the world, invisible realities, God’s eternal power and divinity have
become visible, recognized through the things he has made. Therefore these men are inexcusable. 21 They certainly
have knowledge of God, yet they did not glorify him as God or give him thanks; they stultified themselves through
speculating to no purpose, and their senseless hearts were darkened. 22 They claimed to be wise, but turned into
fools instead; 23 they exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images representing mortal man, birds, beasts,
and snakes. 24 In consequence, God delivered them up in their lusts to unclean practices; they engaged in mutual
degradation of their bodies, 25 these men who exchanged the truth of God for a lie and worshiped and served the
creature rather than the Creator-blessed be he forever, amen! 26 God therefore delivered them up to disgraceful
passions. Their women exchanged natural intercourse for unnatural, 27 and men gave up natural intercourse with
women and burned for lust for one another. Men did shameful things with men, and thus received in their own
persons the penalty of their perversity. 28 They did not see fit to acknowledge God, so God delivered them up to their
own depraved sense to do what is unseemly. 29 They are filled with every kind of wickedness: maliciousness, greed,
ill will, envy, murder, bickering, deceit, and craftiness. They are gossips 30 and slanderers, they hate God, are insolent,
haughty, boastful, ingenious in their wrongdoing and rebellious towards their parents. 31 One sees in them men
without conscience, without loyalty, without affection, without pity. 32 They know God’s just decree that all who do
such things deserve death; yet they not only do them but approve them in others.

ROMANS 1:26-27 IS CLEARLY ABOUT SAME-SEX RELATIONSHIPS.
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.
(Romans 1:26-27, NIV)
ROMANS 1:26-27 IS ALSO CLEARLY NOT SPEAKING ABOUT ALL SAME-SEX

RELATIONSHIPS. HOW SO? READ THE VERSES IN CONTEXT.
1. The people knew God but did not glorify him or honour him, and their heats were darkened. 
For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became
futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. (Romans 1:21, NIV) 
2. Claiming to be wise they became fools and started worshipping idols made in the image of people and
animals. 
Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made
to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.(Romans 1:22-23, NIV) 
3. Then God gave them over to sinful sexual desires. 

Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies
with one another. (Romans 1:24, NIV) 
4. Then the truth about God was replaced with idolatry. 

They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator-who is
forever praised. Amen. (Romans 1:25, NIV) 
5. Then, because of what they had done before, God gave them over to shameful lusts. 
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.
(Romans 1:26-27, NIV) 
6. And finally, their rejection of God was complete, and they became very wicked. 
Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved
mind, to do what ought not to be done. They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and
depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, slanderers, God-haters, insolent,
arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; they are senseless, faithless, heartless,
ruthless. Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only
continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them. (Romans 1:28-32, NIV) 
The depravity described in verses 26 and 27 (and verses 28 to 32) is part the process of rejecting God
and descending into idol worship and wickedness. One step follows another. It does not describe same-sex
relationships among Christians. How could this passage describe gay Christians when Christians glorify God
and give thanks to him (step 1)? How could this passage describe gay Christians when no Christians is an
idol-worshipper (step 2)? How could this passage describe gay Christians when no Christians has exchanged
the truth of God for a lie (step 4)? Gay Christians have not passed through steps 1, 2, 3, and 4. To say that
step 5 describes Christians in same-sex relationships is taking verses 26 and 27 completely out of context.

1 KINGS 14:24
There is a possible link between Romans 1:21-32 and 1 Kings 14:24. As we have seen, Romans 1 has a
connection between false religion and sexual immorality. That same connection is found in 1 Kings 14:24.
There were even male shrine prostitutes in the land; the people engaged in all the detestable practices of the nations
the LORD had driven out before the Israelites.(1 Kings 14:24, NIV)
The male shrine prostitutes were temple prostitutes. They are very similar to the men described in Romans
1:27. The Hebrew word is qadheshim.
This King James Version translation of this verse is significant.

And there were also sodomites in the land: and they did according to all the abominations of the nations which the
LORD cast out before the children of Israel. (1 Kings 14:24, KJV)
The KJV’s use of the word Sodomites here is now universally acknowledged as a bad translation, and the
phrase male cult prostitutes is much more accurate. The same applies to Deuteronomy 23:17, 1 Kings 15:12,
1 Kings 22:46, and 2 Kings 23:7 where qadheshim is used in the Hebrew.
SEXUAL IMPURITY AND UNNATURAL RELATIONS
The unnatural relations described in verses 26 and 27 are described as shameful. Does this indicate that all
Same-sex Relationships are shameful? No. In step 3, verse 24, sexual activity is described in a negative way:
“sexual impurity,” “degrading their bodies.” But Same-sex Relationships are not described until verses 26 and
27, so verse 24 must be describing Opposite-sex Relationships. When we read verse 24 in context, we see
that it is not describing all Opposite-sex Relationships, just the immoral opposite-sex relationships of the idol-
worshippers. In context, it is clear that verses 26 and 27 describe the immoral Same-sex Relationships of the
idol-worshippers as well, not all Same-sex Relationships.
IF YOU ACCEPT WHAT PAUL SAYS ABOUT HOMOSEXUALITY,

THEN YOU MUST ALSO ACCEPT THE FOLLOWING:
If you accept what Paul says about homosexuality, then you must also accept the following:
PAUL DID NOT CARE FOR MEN WITH LONG HAIR OR WOMEN WITH SHORT HAIR:

CHAPTER 11
4 Any man who prays or prophesies with his head covered brings shame upon his head. 5 Similarly, any woman who
prays or prophesies with her head uncovered brings shame upon her head. 6 Indeed, if a woman will not wear a veil,
she ought to cut off her hair.
8 Man was not made from woman but woman from man. 9 Neither was man created for woman but woman for man.
10 For this reason a woman ought to have a sign of submission on her head, because of the angels.
14Does not nature itself teach you that it is dishonorable for a man to wear his hair long, 15 while the long hair of a
woman is her glory? Her hair has been given her for a covering. 16 If anyone wants to argue about this, remember that
neither we, nor the churches of God, recognize any other usage.
PAUL THOUGHT A WOMAN SHOULD BE SUBMISSIVE, SILENT, DRESS PLAINLY.
PAUL DID NOT LIKE WOMEN PREACHERS OR TEACHERS:

CHAPTER 2
11 A woman must learn in silence and be completely submissive. 12 I do not permit a woman to act as teacher, or in any
way to have authority over a man; she must be quit. 13 For Adam was created first, Eve afterward; 14 moreover, it was
not Adam who was deceived but the woman. It was she who led astray and fell into sin. 15 She will be saved through
childbearing, providing she continues in faith and love and holiness-her chastity being taken for granted.

Chapter 14
According to the rule observed in all the assemblies of believers, 34 women should keep silent in such gatherings. They
may not speak. Rather, as the law states, submissiveness is indicated for them. 35 If they want to learn anything, they
should ask their husbands at home. It is a disgrace when a woman speaks in the assembly.

CHAPTER 2
9 Similarly, the women must deport themselves properly. They should dress modestly and quietly, and not be decked
out in fancy hair styles, gold ornaments, pearls, or costly clothing; 10 rather, as becomes a women who profess to be
religious, their adornment should be good deeds.
PAUL DID NOT REALLY CARE FOR WOMEN:

Chapter 7
Advice to the married. 1 Now for the matters you wrote about. A man is better off having no relations with a woman.
PAUL WAS NOT DISTURBED BY SLAVERY, PARTICULARLY IF THOSE IN BONDAGE

WERE “HAPPY” CHRISTIAN SLAVES:
THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE COLOSSIANS:

Chapter 3
Slaves And Masters. 22 To slaves I say, obey your human masters perfectly, not with the purpose of attracting attention
and pleasing men but in all sincerity and out of reverence for the Lord.
THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE EPHESIANS:

Chapter 6
Slaves And Masters. 5 Slaves, obey your human masters with the reverence, the awe, and the sincerity you owe to
Christ. 6 Do not render service for appearance only and to please men, but do God’s will with your whole heart as
slaves of Christ. 7 Give your service willingly, doing it for the Lord rather than men.
Paul is very bigoted and does not like women too much. People who choose to interpret his words literally,
word for word, as if Got wrote them, do so out of ignorance and stupidity.

THROUGHOUT THE BIBLE, LUST IS CONDEMNED, WHETHER THE LUST IS
HOMOSEXUAL OR HETEROSEXUAL. THE DICTIONARY GIVES THE THEOLOGICAL
MEANING OF LUST AS “SEEKING UNRESTRAINED GRATIFICATION” AND “EXCESSIVE
SEXUAL DESIRE.”
THE FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN:

CHAPTER 2
16 For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is
of the world, 17 and the world with its seductions is passing away, but the man who does God’s will endures forever.
CONCERNING JUDGMENT:

CHAPTER 14
13 Therefore we must no longer pass judgment on one another. Instead you should resolve to put no stumbling block
or hindrance in your brother’s way. 14 I know with certainty on the authority of the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean
in itself; it is only when a man thinks something unclean that it becomes so for him.
THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO MATTHEW:

CHAPTER 7
Avoiding Judgment. 1 If you want to avoid judgment, stop passing judgment. 2 Your verdict on others will be the
verdict passed on you.

CHAPTER 2
God’s Just Judgment. 1 That is why every one of you who judges another is inexcusable. By your judgment you convict
yourself, since you do the very same things.
BUT OF LOVE, JESUS SAID:
THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO JOHN:

CHAPTER 13
34 I give you a new commandment;
Love one another.

Such as my love has been for you, so must your love be for each other.
35 This is how all will know you for my disciples;
by your love for one another.
THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO MATTHEW:

CHAPTER 22
The Great Commandment. 36 Teacher, which commandment of the law is the greatest?
37 Jesus said to him:
You shall love the lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.
38 This is the greatest first commandment. 39 The second is like it:
You shall love your neighbor as yourself.

40 On these two commandments the whole law is based, and the prophets as well.

AND IN PAUL’S WORDS:

CHAPTER 13
Love Fulfills The Law. 8 Owe no debt to anyone except the debt that binds us to love one another. He who loves his
neighbor has fulfilled the law. 9 The commandments, “You shall not commit adultery; you shall not murder; you shall
not steal; you shall not covet,” and any other commandment there may be are all summed in this, “You shall love your
neighbor as yourself.” 10 Love never wrongs the neighbor; hence love is the fulfillment of the law.
ALL ONE IN CHRIST

Before concluding the look at what the Bible says about same-sex relationships, there is one more passage to
read. It is short, and is not usually associated with same-sex relationships, but I believe it is very important. It
has a simple message, and it gives great insight. The passage is in Galatians.
You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus, for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves
with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. (Galatians
3:26-28, NIV)
This passage is all in the present tense: “for you are all one.” Galatians is not a promise of the unity that will
exist after the return of Christ. It is about how we are today.
†† In Christ, we are neither Jew nor Greek. Our race does not matter, because in Christ we are all one.
†† In Christ, we are neither slave nor free. Our social class does not matter, because in Christ we are all one.
†† In Christ, we are neither male nor female. Our gender does not matter, because in Christ we are all one.
In Christ, we are all part of one group, all in one category. The differences between us, the differences that the
world looks at, do not matter. They are irrelevant, because we are all one.
HOMOSEXUAL MARRIAGE
Marriage is instituted almost right at the start of the Bible, in Genesis.
For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh.
(Genesis 2:24, NIV)
In the New Testament, the relationship between Christ and the church is compared to the relationship
between the bridegroom and his bride, or the relationship between a husband and his wife.
Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her to make her holy, cleansing
her by the washing with water through the word, and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or
wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their
own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. After all, no one ever hated his own body, but he feeds and cares

for it, just as Christ does the church-for we are members of his body. “For this reason a man will leave his father and
mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.” This is a profound mystery-but I am talking
about Christ and the church. (Ephesians 5:25-32, NIV)
In Genesis 2:23, Adam says Eve “is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh” (NIV). In Ephesians 5:30,
Paul says the followers of Christ are “members of his body” (NIV). This metaphor is also used in Revelation,
where the church is the bride and Christ the bridegroom. It is an important metaphor. It teaches us about the
relationship between Christ and the church using something we can all understand: the relationship between
a husband and wife.
Because of this metaphor, some people believe that same-sex relationships are wrong; a monogamous same-sex
relationship cannot teach us about the Christ-church relationship, no matter how loving or long term it is.
Other people see that Genesis teaches that same-sex relationships are wrong because they are an act of rebellion
against the commandment to marry: “The basic principle of Gen 2:24 exposes the sin of homosexuality; it is
God’s intention that man and woman should marry and cleave to each other.”
WHAT DID CHRIST SAY?
In Matthew, we have Christ’s own commentary on Genesis 2:24.
“Haven’t you read,” [Jesus] replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’ and said, ‘For this
reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’? … Not
everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given. For some are eunuchs because they were
born that way; others were made that way by men; and others have renounced marriage because of the kingdom of
heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it.” (Matthew 19:4-5,11-12, NIV)
This could not be clearer. Marriage is not compulsory: “Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to
whom it has been given.” It is not a sin to not marry.
An unmarried man’s lifestyle does not teach us about the Christ-church relationship in the way that a happily
married Christian couple’s does. Is he therefore sinning by remaining single? No. His lifestyle is rebellion
against God’s “intention” that everyone should get married. Is that sin? No, because God does not intend that
everyone gets married.
WHO ARE THE EUNUCHS?
What about the “basic principle” of Genesis 2:24? Do same-sex relationships violate this? We should consider
the three groups of people that Christ tells us are not expected to marry.
†† Eunuchs “born that way,”
†† Eunuchs “made that way by men,”
†† Those who “have renounced marriage because of the kingdom of heaven.”

The second category, eunuchs “made that way by men” are obviously men who have been physically emasculated
at some point, a practice that was well-known, and sometimes even common, throughout history.
The third category are obviously people who have decided not to marry for religious reasons, such as the
people described in 1 Corinthians.
I would like you to be free from concern. An unmarried man is concerned about the Lord’s affairs-how he can please
the Lord. But a married man is concerned about the affairs of this world-how he can please his wife-and his interests
are divided. An unmarried woman or virgin is concerned about the Lord’s affairs: Her aim is to be devoted to the Lord
in both body and spirit. But a married woman is concerned about the affairs of this world-how she can please her
husband. I am saying this for your own good, not to restrict you, but that you may live in a right way in undivided
devotion to the Lord. (1 Corinthians 7:32-35, NIV)
But what about the first category, eunuchs who were “born that way”? It is tempting to assume that they are
people who are born with incomplete reproductive organs. But is this what people in the 1st Century believed
about born eunuchs? We can’t tell from Biblical sources (“born eunuchs” are only mentioned in Matthew 19)
so we must look at other ancient sources.
Contrary to popular belief, eunuchs were not lacking in sexual desire. Eunuchs often had sexual relationships
with men, as described in Apuleius’ ancient novel, The Golden Ass. The defining characteristic of eunuchs
was not emasculation, but a sexual disinterest in women, or disinterest or disability to reproduce. For example,
Clement of Alexandria, commenting on Matthew 19, says: “Some men, from their birth, have a natural sense
of repulsion from a woman; and those who are naturally so constituted do well not to marry.” The ancient
Jewish text The Wisdom of Sirach says that a eunuch “sighs” or “groans” if he has to embrace a woman.
What sort of man could be a eunuch “by nature”? This phrase describes a man who, for no physical reason,
is not sexually interested in women. As well as some others, all gay men could be described this way. The
institution of marriage is not for everyone.
Christ explicitly says that born eunuchs-a term which includes gay men-are exempt from marriage.
Same-sex relationships do not violate the “basic principle” of Genesis 2:24. Gay men are “born eunuchs,” as
the man who remains unmarried so he can remain concerned with the Lord’s affairs has renounced marriage
because of the Kingdom of Heaven. These men are exempt from the “basic principle” of Genesis 2:24, from
no authority less than Christ himself.
MARRIAGE AND THE PURPOSE OF GOD
There is a related argument against same-sex relationships. It goes something like this: “Same-sex relationships
deny the purpose of God. God made a woman (not a man) as the perfect companion for Adam.”
Eve, a woman, was a perfect companion for Adam. Eve complimented Adam, and together they were able
to have children, following the command to “Be fruitful and increase in number” (Genesis 1:28, NIV). It
would not have been possible for a same-sex couple to do that. Today, not everyone is supposed to marry and
reproduce.

The creation of Eve is described in Genesis 2:20-22.
But for Adam no suitable helper was found. So the LORD God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he
was sleeping, he took one of the man’s ribs and closed up the place with flesh. Then the LORD God made a woman
from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man.
Eve was created as a companion for Adam. This does not mean that every man has a female companion
specially created for him. In fact, because not everyone is supposed to marry, it is obvious that not every man
has a woman created to be his perfect partner. Same-sex Partnerships no more “deny the purpose of God” than
remaining celibate does.
Points like this highlight how weak the Biblical case against Same-sex Relationships is. The Bible gives clear
moral guidance. If you are looking for moral guidance in metaphor, or ill-defined concepts such as “denying
the purpose of God,” then you are not in a strong position.
CONCLUSIONS
Marriage is an important institution. We can learn about the relationship between Christ and the church
by looking at the relationship between a husband and wife. Marriage has existed almost right from the start
of the Bible. But marriage is not compulsory, and not marrying is not sinful. “Born eunuchs,” a phrase that
includes gay men, are among those that Christ says do not have to marry.
NEW TESTAMENT HISTORY

My study of Biblical History illustrates that much of the Bible is far from what Christ said as he walked this
Earth. The Authors of the Four Gospels are anonymous. The Gospel of Mark is dated AD 70, the Gospel
of Luke is dated AD 75-100, the Gospel of John is dated AD 90, and the Gospel of Matthew is dated AD
100–140. Supposedly they were handed down through ORAL TRADITION. In most cases, there were
schools or perspectives which shaped the final documents long after the disciples’ deaths.
In College Communications class, we practiced passing verbal messages around, person-to-person. When

it got to the last person, it never came even close to the original. Some people argue that people of Biblical
times had better memories for stories, which could be true. But even if they were twice as good, after 70 to
100 hundred years, the Gospels are going to be full of errors, especially as people embellish and change them
to what they wanted Christ to have said. The choosing of the books of the Bible was done in North African
Synods, by a bunch of men haggling over which books to keep and which to ban, with non-spiritual agendas
at play. Have you noticed that even the facts around the Birth Of Christ are different between the Gospels?
The First Council of Nicaea was a council of Christian bishops convened in Nicaea in Bithynia (present-day
İznik in Turkey) by the Roman Emperor Constantine I in A.D. 325. Constantine had adopted Christianity as
the state religion because he sought something which would unify the many Pagan factions in the Empire—
however, major disagreement had developed in the Christian Church, which threatened to dissolve that unity.
Constantine intended to make sure that the disagreement would end quickly. His orders were to unify the
church, under a Patriarchal Church. The great battle was beaten the Western and Eastern (Gnostic) churches.

The problem was caused by Arius, of Alexandria, who was teaching that Jesus Christ, instead of being fully
divine as was believed by orthodox Christians, was wholly a created being. Arianism was condemned at this
Council, and Airus was exiled by Constantine. Also as a result, the Nicene Creed was adopted—this expressly
taught that Jesus fully human and fully divine.
The doctrine of the Trinity is central to the uniqueness of Christianity. It holds that the Bible teaches that
“God eternally exists as three persons, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and each person is fully God, and there is
one God.”1 This belief is so central to Christianity that it is woven into the words Jesus gave the church in His
Great Commission, telling believers to “…go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the
Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit…” (Matthew 28:19).
It is not surprising then that the doctrine of the Trinity is one of the most denigrated and attacked beliefs by
those outside the Christian faith. Both Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses reject this central tenet and expend
considerable energy teaching against it. Much of the instruction of the Jehovah’s Witness movement tries to
convince others that Jesus Christ is a created being, not having existed in eternity past with the Father, and
not fully God. Mormons have no problem with Jesus being God; in fact, they make godhood available to
all who follow the teachings of The Church of Latter-day Saints. One Mormon scholar argues that there are
three separate Gods--Father, Son, and Holy Spirit—who are one in purpose and in some way still one God.2
Another writes, “The concept that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are one God is totally incomprehensible.”3
Among the world religions, Islam specifically teaches against the Trinity. Chapter four of the Koran argues,
“Say not ‘Trinity’: desist: it will be better for you: for Allah is One God: glory be to Him: (far Exalted is He)
above having a son” (4:171). Although Muhammad seems to have wrongly believed that Christians taught
that the Trinity consisted of God the Father, Mary the Mother, and Jesus the Son, they reject as sinful
anything being made equivalent with Allah, especially Jesus.
A common criticism by those who reject the doctrine of the Trinity is that the doctrine was not part of the
early church, nor a conscious teaching of Jesus Himself, but was imposed on the church by the Emperor
Constantine in the early fourth century at the Council of Nicaea. Mormons argue that components of
Constantine’s pagan thought and Greek philosophy were forced on the bishops who assembled in Nicaea
(located in present day Turkey). Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that the Emperor weighed in against their view,
which was the position argued by Arius at the council, and, again, forced the church to follow.
Emperor Constantine
Constantine rose to supreme power in the Roman Empire in 306 A.D. through alliance-making and
assassination when necessary. It was under Constantine’s Edict of Milan in 313 A.D. that persecution of the
church ended and confiscated church properties were returned.
However, the nature of Constantine’s relationship to the Christian faith is a complex one. He believed that
God should be appeased with correct worship, and he encouraged the idea among Christians that he “served
their God.”6 It seems that Constantine’s involvement with the church centered on his hope that it could
become a source of unity for the troubled empire. He was not so much interested in the finer details of
doctrine as in ending the strife that was caused by religious disagreements. He wrote in a letter, “My design
then was, first, to bring the diverse judgments found by all nations respecting the Deity to a condition, as it
were, of settled uniformity; and, second to restore a healthy tone to the system of the world . . .”7 This resulted
in him supporting various sides of theological issues depending on which side might help peace to prevail.
Constantine was eventually baptized shortly before his death, against his will, and too weak to prevent it, and
his commitment to the Christian faith is a matter of debate.
Constantine participated in and enhanced a recently established tradition of Roman Emperors meddling
in church affairs. In the early church, persecution was the general policy. In 272, Aurelian removed Paul of
Samosata from his church in Antioch because of a theological controversy. Before the conflict over Arius,
Constantine had called a small church synod to resolve the conflict caused by the Donatists who argued for
the removal of priests who gave up sacred writings during times of persecution. The Donatists were rebuked
by the church synod. Constantine spent five years trying to suppress their movement by force, but eventually
gave up in frustration.
Then, the Arian controversy over the nature of Jesus was brought to his attention. It would be a complex
debate because both sides held Jesus in high regard and both sides appealed to Scripture to defend their
position. To settle the issue, Constantine called the council at Nicaea in 325 A.D. with church leaders mainly
from the West participating. Consistent with his desire for unity, in years to come, Constantine would
vacillate from supporting one theological side to the other if he thought it might end the debate.
What is clear is that Constantine’s active role in attempting to resolve church disputes would be the beginning
of a new relationship between the Roman Empire and the Christian Church.
Arius
Let’s look at the instigator of the conflict that resulted in the Council of Nicaea, a man named Arius. Arius
was a popular preacher and presbyter from Libya who was given pastoral duties at Baucalis, in Alexandria,
Egypt. The controversy began as a disagreement between Arius and his bishop, Alexander, in 318 A.D. Their
differences centered on how to express the Christian understanding of God using current philosophical
language. This issue had become important because of various supposedly heretical views of Jesus that had
crept into the church in the late second and early third centuries. The use of philosophical language to
describe theological realities has been common throughout the church age in an attempt to precisely describe
what had been revealed in Scripture.
Alexander argued that Scripture presented God the Father and Jesus as having an equally eternal nature. Arius
felt that Alexander’s comments supported a heretical view of God called Sabellianism which taught that the
Son was merely a different mode of the Father rather than a different person. Jehovah’s Witnesses argue today
that the position held by Arius was superior to that of Alexander’s.
Although some historians believe that the true nature of the original argument has been clouded by time and
bias, the dispute became so divisive that it caught the attention of Emperor Constantine. Constantine brought
the leaders of the church together for the first ecumenical council in an attempt to end the controversy.
It should be said that both sides of this debate held to a high view of Jesus and both used the Bible as their
authority on the issue. Some have even argued that the controversy would never have caused such dissension
were it not inflamed by political infighting within the church and different understandings of terms used in
the debate.

Arius was charged with holding the view that Jesus was not just subordinate to the Father in function, but that
He was of an inferior substance in a metaphysical sense as well. This went too far for Athanasius and others
who were fearful that any language that degraded the full deity of Christ might place in question His role as
savior and Lord. Some believe that the position of Arius was less radical than is often perceived today. Stuart
Hall writes, “Arius felt that the only way to secure the deity of Christ was to set him on the step immediately
below the Father, who remained beyond all comprehension.”4 He adds that whatever the differences were
between the two sides, “Both parties understood the face of God as graciously revealed in Jesus Christ.”5
Athanasius
The Council of Nicaea convened on May 20, 325 A.D. The 230 church leaders were there to consider a
question vital to the church: Was Jesus Christ equal to God the Father or was he something else? Athanasius,
only in his twenties, came to the council to fight for the idea that, “If Christ were not truly God, then he could
not bestow life upon the repentant and free them from sin and death.”8 He led those who opposed the teachings
of Arius who argued that Jesus was not of the same substance as the Father.
The Nicene Creed, in its entirety, affirmed belief “…in one God, the Father almighty, Maker of all things
visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of the Father, Light of Light, very
God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father; by whom all things were made;
who for us men, and for our salvation, came down and was incarnate and was made man; he suffered, and the
third day he rose again, ascended into heaven; from thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead. And
in the Holy Ghost.” 9
The council acknowledged that Christ was God of very God. Although the Father and Son differed in role,
they, and the Holy Spirit are truly God. More specifically, Christ is of one substance with the Father. The
Greek word homoousios was used to describe this sameness. The term was controversial because it is not used
in the Bible. Some preferred a different word that conveyed similarity rather than sameness. But Athanasius
and the near unanimous majority of bishops felt that this might eventually result in a lowering of Christ’s
oneness with the Father. They also argued that Christ was begotten, not made. He is not a created thing in
the same class as the rest of the cosmos. They concluded by positing that Christ became human for mankind
and its salvation. The council was unanimous in its condemnation of Arius and his teachings. It also removed
two Libyan bishops who refused to accept the creed formulated by the Council.
The growing entanglement of the Roman emperors with the church during the fourth century was often less
than beneficial. But rather than Athanasius and his supporters seeking the backing of imperial power, it was
the Arians who actually were in favor of the Emperor having the last word.
1. Grudem, Wayne, Bible Doctrine (Zondervan, 1999), p. 104.

2. Blomberg, Craig L., & Robinson, Stephen E., How Wide the Divide, (InterVarsity Press, 1997), p. 128.
3. Bruce McConkie in Mormonism 101 by Bill McKeever & Eric Johnson (Baker Books, 2000), p. 52.
4. Hall, Stuart G., Doctrine and Practice in the Early Church, (Eerdmans, 1991), p. 135.
5. Ibid.
6. Hall, Stuart G., Doctrine and Practice in the Early Church, p. 118.
7. Noll, Mark, Turning Points: Decisive Moments in the History of Christianity, (InterVarsity Press, 1997), p. 51.
8. Ibid., 55.
9. Ibid., 57.

The Gnostics did not believe in the Divinity of Christ or the Holy Trinity. They lost the vote. So, basically
the divinity of Christ was decided on by a vote. Those who refused to abide by the theology were hunted
down and executed.
In 393 CE, a Synod of Bishops in North Africa met to haggle, trade, wheel-and-deal to assemble the bible
similar to how we know it now. In 397 CE, another Synod held at Carthage made some changes to create
the Christian Bible pretty much as we know it today. The Christian Bible they had completed was sent
to the Pope Innocent the 1st in Rome, who OK’d it and decreed that every word was infallible (as if
written by Christ himself ). To me this is an THE SINGLE WORSE ABUSE IN THE HISTORY OF
THE CHRISTIAN FAITH.
The Second Council of Nicaea, Held in 787 CE, was the battle over the worshipping of ICONS, which
many considered to be the “worshipping of false IDOLS,” which is forbidden by God. The Iconoclastic
Controversy began in 726 when Byzantine Emperor Leo III forbade the worship of icons. The council
concluded that “Icons merited veneration and devotion, but not actual worship”—OH brother. This would
eventually Be a major element in the PROTESTANT REFORM MOVEMENT of Luther and Calvin.
THE EARLY CHRISTIAN CHURCH COURTS PAGANS

The Roman Emperor Constantine battled to win a fractured Roman empire. He decided to unite the
constantly squabbling Pagan factions under one unifying religion, Christianity. Emperor Constantine liked
that Christianity supported the Roman Patriarchal Society and Slavery. Nothing in the New Testament speaks
against Slavery, and a number of passages support slavery, which was very much a part of life in Judea, Galilee,
and in the rest of the Roman Empire during New Testament times, and up to the 19th century.
While in prison, Paul met a runaway slave, Onesimus, the property of a Christian, presumably Pheliemon,
and ordered him back to his owner (see Paul: Letter to Philemon).
In the King James Bible, the word for Slave was replaced by Servant or Maid, a very deliberate deception.
In the New Testament, you can find Paul’s infamous instruction for slaves to obey their owners in the same
way that they obey Christ (Ephesians 6:5-9). In Matthew 18:25, people in debt, and their children, should
be sold to make payment. In Mark 14:66, Priests owned slaves. Colossians 4:1 and 1 Timothy 6:1-3 give
instructions to slaves and slave owners in proper behavior. There are more passages...
THE CHRISTIANIZATION OF PAGAN HOLIDAYS

Emperor Constantine went further by incorporated the Pagan holidays and festivals into the Christian church
ritual—attracting the Pagans, but he gave the holidays and festivals new “Christian” names and identities—
thus appeasing the Christians. Christmas, Easter and Sunday services (which were normally celebrated on the
Sabbath, Saturday) were all actually Pagan holidays and celebrations.
SUNDAY SERVICES INSTEAD OF THE SABBATH

Early Christian believers kept Saturday as the Sabbath until March 7, 321 CE when Emperor Constantine

passed a law requiring believers to worship on Sunday, the day the pagans worshipped the sun-god. Believers
still kept Saturday as the Sabbath until another law was passed eleven years later. This law signed into decree
by Emperor Constantine forbid believers to worship on the Sabbath (Saturday) and it was punishable by
death by the Catholic Church. Many believers were burned to death by the Catholic Church for keeping the
Sabbath.
CHRISTMAS
Jesus was not even born in the winter, let alone December 25th (winter solstice), which was a major Pagan
holiday shared between many Pagan faiths, with roots from the Persians, Babylon, Arabia and Egypt. Every
sun-god was born on December 25th. Amun-Ra, Horus, Mithra, Tammuz, and Zeus were born on December
25th. Yule is the Babylonian name for Infant, in the Pagan festival commemorating the figurative birthday of
the sun and the renewal of its course. The Yule occult colors are Red & Green.
The Christmas tree is Nimrod revived—the slain God come to life again. The Christmas Tree was equally
common in Pagan Rome and Egypt. The mistletoe branch symbolized “the man, the branch” and was
regarded as a divine branch, a Babylonian representation of the true Messiah. Both Mistletoe and Holly were
considered fertility plants by the pagans. Candles which are lit on Christmas Eve and used throughout the
festival season, were equally lighted by the Pagans on the eve of the festival of the Babylonian God, to do
honor to him.
EASTER
The Easter Bunny and Eggs are all rooted in Pagan rituals, celebrations and holidays. One mythological
legend says that sometime after Semiramis died, a huge egg dropped from heaven. Out of the egg came a
re-incarnated Semiramis, now a Goddess. The Babylonian Talmud refers to her as Ishtar, or Easter. The
forty days of Lent symbolize one day for each year of Tammuz’ life. This period of time is celebrated in the
Christian church by giving up something, and by the Pagans to mourn the death of Tammuz, the son of the
Pagan Goddess Semiramis!
The Easter Bunny is the oldest Pagan symbol of Fertility—Semiramis. The date of Easter is also celebrated
by the Druids. In ancient times, eggs were used in the religious rites of the Egyptians and the Greeks, and
were hung up for mystic purposes in their temples… The classic poets are full of the fable of the Mystic Egg
of the Babylonians.
Even now, as you see Christianity practiced in Africa, South America, Australia, and other areas, you will see
the roots of their Pagan cultures embedded in their Christian traditions.
WHY THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH TARGETED HOMOSEXUALITY

Same-sex Sex was considered part of regular sexuality in the Greek, Roman and Persian Empires and most
of the Pagan world. Two men loving each other, and even having sex, would still be considered a form of
friendship. Plato called a man’s male lover A Divine Friend. The Greeks and Romans were Pagans and
same-sex sex was part of their normal sexuality. The Greeks even formed an army of nothing but Gay Male
Couples (The Sacred Band of Thebes), who were famed for their courage, and are still honored to this day.
Same-sex Sex was especially common in ancient Armies.

The Christian Church eventually came to see Same-sex Sex as a Pagan trait, since it was so common throughout
the Greek, Roman and Persian Empires.
Jesus was born, raised and lived in Judea until his mid thirties, which was part of the Roman Empire. There
were many Roman Garrisons (soldiers) and Roman Citizens in Judea at that time. Jesus was bound to have
known of Same-sex Sex amongst both the Romans and the Hebrews (it was more secretive amongst the
Hebrews). If Jesus felt that Same-sex Sex was a sin, surely he would have mentioned it.
THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH HITS HARD TIMES & USES FEAR-MONGERING &
HATE TO SOLIDIFY ITS POWER & BRING IN MORE PARISHIONERS & MONEY
The early Christian Church courted Pagans and even adopted some of their holidays and rituals. Once
Paganism was all but gone, and the church fell on more difficult times, the Church reversed itself and sought
to either convert any remaining Pagans, or wipe-out (murder) those who would not convert. Homosexuality
was linked to Pagan ways, since it was common in past Pagan cultures, and it was another way to form
Hatred and Fear of Pagans and Homosexuals, claiming Homosexuals would steal and molest your children,
converting them to evil, etc.
THE LITTLE ICE AGE: Western Europe experienced a sharp cooling of the climate between the years
1150 and 1460 and then a very cold climate between 1560 and 1850. This brought dire consequences to its
peoples. The colder weather devastated crops, impacted which crops could be grown, leading to hunger and
starvation, serious health problems, economic depression, social strife, emigration, and even impacted art
and literature. This even helped to set up perfect conditions for the Bubonic Plague to strike and decimate
the population. Increased glaciation and storms also had a devastating affect on those that lived near glaciers
and the sea.
Attendance at churches was down, which meant collections of money was down. The Catholic Church,
starting in the 11th Century, responded by creating common evil enemies that people would fear, thus
bringing them back into the fold. Going after Pagans and Homosexuals was a first step. But conditions got
worse. Starvation, hunger, disease, lawlessness and violence increased.
Also in the 11th century, Pope Innocent III (1160-1216) proclaimed he had a Vision from God that the Cathari
were Heretic and declared Holy War against them, killing, including Burning-at-the-Stake, approximately
40,000 children, women and men, GENOCIDE in the name of God. It was a time to find others to blame
for the problems of the day, and to help the Church consolidate power. Popes are Infallible?
In 1484, Pope Innocent VIII blamed the Little Ice Age on witches, leading to centuries of innocent women
and men being Burned-at-the-Stake, for nothing. He had inquisitors Heinrich Kramer and Jacobus Sprenger
systemize the persecution of witches. He said they could raise hailstorms, lightning, violent storms, wretched
cold… He did it because the people were suffering greatly, believing less in the Church, and had almost
nothing to give. Fewer people were going to church and giving less money. The Church was living high-on-
the-hog and had a lifestyle that had to be maintained at all costs.
Scapegoats are a tried and true method to solidify power, SHIFT BLAME, and unite people against a common
enemy. It inspires FEAR and ANGER in people, it brings people back into church, it fills the coffers with
donations and consolidates and centralizes the power of the church.

Homosexuals were, and continue to this day, to be Hunted, Burned-at-the-Stake, Executed, Murdered,
Tortured, Bashed (often for sport), Imprisoned, Discriminated Against, Arrested and otherwise treated
with Bigotry, almost ALL exclusively at the hands of Christians and Muslims. It continues to this very day.
Those who targeted Homosexuals did so for very malevolent reasons, be they Church Officials or regular
Christians. Even today, the American Republican Party has been stirring up Fear and Hate of Homosexuals
as a way to unite the Party and win elections, capitalizing on the Bigotry and Hatred of many Americans.
We are no better a species now than we were 500 years ago, 1,000 years ago. Presidents use Fear to stir up
blood-lust and ignite a war. President George Bush gained tremendous powers and unlimited funds by
capitalizing on the fear and anger generated by the 9-11 Terrorist Attacks on the United States. But instead
of targeting the actual enemy, he used it to start a war with a country that had none of the enemy in it.
-While the Early Christian Church courted Pagans and adopted the dates of their Pagan holidays, and
incorporated Pagan rituals in Christian traditions, the second century Christian Church was focused on
brutally and greedily consolidating it’s power and wealth. The Catholic church committed Genocide, then
targeted Homosexuals, then targeted Witches, who were for the large part, nothing but innocent women and
men accused of witchcraft, just to get rid of a competitor or someone you hated.
To this day, people are still willing and eager to jump on the wagon of Hate and Demonize a people, just as we
saw happen against Muslims in the United States, after 9-11, for which there is no justification. For me, the
raising children as CHRISTIAN SOLDIERS, trained to hate Homosexuals, trained to justify any criminal
or immoral act as necessary in their so-called God’s WAR, is no different from raising children as NAZIS.
They are both rooted in bigotry, righteousness, arrogance, and believing they know the only right way things
should be, which is their way. Both target entire groups of human beings for Discrimination.
CURRENT STATE OF CHRISTIANITY

ALL FORMS OF FUNDAMENTALISM HAVE THESE IN COMMON:
†† Religion
†† Restriction
†† Rigidity
†† Patriarchal Consolidation of Power
†† The Exclusion, Restriction, and Subjugation of Women
I believe that Christianity has caused more harm than good to mankind, Mass Torture, Genocide, Popes with
their own Assassins, destruction of science and art, destroying the cultures of Native Cultures ALL OVER
THE PLANET, leaving a wide path of BLOOD, all in the name of God. Horrible things were done to entire
classes of people throughout the history of Christianity, and a Bottomless Pit of suffering from it’s victims.
Many people who call themselves Christians, including Popes and other church leaders, are nothing more
than monsters inside. The National Catholic Reporter commissioned a survey by the Pew Research Center,
asking Americans how they feel about TORTURE. And Guess what, 72% of AMERICAN CHRISTIANS
APPROVE OF TORTURE, COMPARED TO 51% OF SECULARS.
See my Report here Christians Approve of Torture.

Christians also approve of the Death Penalty at a higher rate. Christians pushed through the laws that violate
the International Human Rights Treaty, imprisoning thousands of children for life without the possibility of
release. Until 2005, the United states was still executing children at a good clip, the Christian States of Texas,
Colorado, and others fought in the Supreme court to keep executing kids, and indeed speeded-up executions.
Christians supported the war in Iraq, where we PREEMPTIVELY ATTACKED another country (No self-
defense argument there) leaving over 300,000 dead civilians and counting.
PLEASE NOTE: I am not attaching Christianity, I am pointing to many Christians who call themselves
Righteous Christians, who live the opposite of Christ’s Teachings, ruled by Greed. There are Valuable Lessons
in the New Testament, like Christ’s Two Great Commandments, to Love God and to Love Your Neighbor.
In Washington State, USA, year after year, funds are cut for Social Programs, like programs for the Homeless
and the Hungry, and the schools are falling apart, teachers are paid too little, and the books are old and in
bad shape. Instead, the people voted for ONE BILLION DOLLARS for two brand new sports Stadiums—
Selfish Greed. Parents don’t even care about educating their own kids, but they will spend huge tax dollars
on Football and Baseball Stadiums.
Billions of dollars were supposed to be spent on AIDS in Africa, South America , Central America, and other
regions. The American Republican Party turned most of that money over to CHRISTIAN FAITH-BASED
Organizations, who went to these Countries and said, “If you want any of this money, you have to STOP
CONDOM PROGRAMS and STOP SEX EDUCATION PROGRAMS, except for Abstinence Programs,
and you have to stop NEEDLE EXCHANGE PROGRAMS. You can bet those Christians threw a lot of
parties congratulating themselves. Christians have the blood of millions of dead Africans on their hands.
Today in America, Half (50%) of ALL BOYS who attempt or succeed in killing themselves, are Gay or Bisexual.
If you include girls, 29% of ALL CHILDREN who attempt or succeed in killing themselves, are Gay, Lesbian,
Bisexual, or Transgender. 85% of ALL GLBTQ kids have thought seriously about committing suicide. Kids
all over the world are in a living hell at school, hiding who they are, being Bullied & Harassed, then go home
to a Toxic environment in their Christian or Muslim home, where they are taught that Homosexuality is a
Sin and they will burn in Hell, just for being Born as God intended them to be.
There are millions of Street kids, 1.6 million new ones a year. Each year, bout 640,000 Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual,
and Tansgender Children, are thrown out on the street by their CHRISTIAN PARENTS. There are NO
direct government program anywhere in the United States helping these kids, who are dying in large numbers.
Going to Church does NOT seem to have any effect on making most Christians DECENT HUMAN BEINGS.
REFERENCES
The Children Are Free: Reexamining the Biblical Evidence on Same-sex Relationships by Rev. Jeff Miner
http://www.amazon.com/Children-Are-Free-Reexamining-Relationships/dp/0971929602

What the Bible Really Says About Homosexuality by Daniel A. Helminiak
http://www.amazon.com/What-Bible-Really-About-Homosexuality/dp/188636009X
Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality: Gay People in Western Europe from the Beginning of the
Christian Era to the Fourteenth Century by John Boswell
http://www.amazon.com/Christianity-Social-Tolerance-Homosexuality-Fourteenth/dp/0226067114
Same-Sex Unions in Premodern Europe by John Boswell
http://www.amazon.com/Same-Sex-Unions-Premodern-Europe-Boswell/dp/0679751645
Jesus, the Bible, and Homosexuality, Revised and Expanded Edition: Explode the Myths, Heal the Church by
Jack Roberts http://www.amazon.com/Jesus-Bible-Homosexuality-Revised-Expanded/dp/066423397X
The Bible, Christianity, & Homosexuality by Justin R. Cannon

http://www.amazon.com/Bible-Christianity-Homosexuality-Justin-Cannon/dp/1438249616
Taking a Chance on God: Liberating Theology for Gays, Lesbians, and Their Lovers, Families, and Friends by
John J. McNeill http://www.amazon.com/Taking-Chance-God-Liberating-Theology/dp/0807079456
Sex as God Intended by John J. McNeill

http://www.amazon.com/Sex-God-Intended-John-McNeill/dp/1590210425
New Testament and Homosexuality by Robin Scroggs

http://www.amazon.com/New-Testament-Homosexuality-Robin-Scroggs/dp/0800618548
Thou Shalt Not Love: What Evangelicals Really Say to Gays by Patrick M Chapman
http://www.amazon.com/Thou-Shalt-Not-Love-Evangelicals/dp/0971468621
Bulletproof Faith: A Spiritual Survival Guide for Gay and Lesbian Christians by Candace Chellew-Hodge
http://www.amazon.com/Bulletproof-Faith-Spiritual-Survival-Christians/dp/0470279281
Gay by God: How to be Lesbian or Gay and Christian by Rev. Michael S. Piazza
http://www.amazon.com/Gay-God-How-Lesbian-Christian/dp/1887129103
Living in Sin?: A Bishop Rethinks Human Sexuality by John Shelby Spong

http://www.amazon.com/Living-Sin-Bishop-Rethinks-Sexuality/dp/0060675071
Openly Gay, Openly Christian: How the Bible Really Is Gay Friendly by Samuel Kader
http://www.amazon.com/Openly-Gay-Christian-Really-Friendly/dp/0943595789
Steps to Recovery from Bible Abuse by Rembert Truluck

http://www.amazon.com/Steps-Recovery-Bible-Rembert-Truluck/dp/188849316X
WEB SITES
The Bible & Homosexuality VERY EXTENTIVE, from the Ontario Center for Religious Tolerance
http://www.worldpolicy.org/projects/globalrights/sexorient/bible-gay.html

What the Bible says and means about homosexuality - http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_bibl.htm
What the Bible Says - And Doesn’t Say - About Homosexuality by Rev. Mel White, co-founder of Soulforce
http://www.soulforce.org/article/homosexuality-bible-gay-christian
Free Download of 24 Page Booklet here: http://www.soulforce.org/pdf/whatthebiblesays.pdf
The Bible and Homosexuality - Wikipedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bible_and_homosexuality
Homosexuality and the Bible - GayChurch.org

http://www.gaychurch.org/Gay_and_Christian_YES/gay_and_christian_yes.htm
The Bible and Homosexuality - MCC (Metropolitan Community Churches) The Original Gay Church
http://www.mccchurch.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Resources&Template=/CM/HTMLDisplay.
cfm&ContentID=2074
The Bible, Christianity & Homosexuality - www.truthsetsfree - http://www.truthsetsfree.net/study.html
What Does the Bible say about Homosexuality? www.twopaths.com LOOKS AT BOTH SIDES OF THE ISSUE -
http://www.twopaths.com/faq_homosexuality.htm
Homosexuality and the Bible - by Bruce L. Gerig - http://epistle.us/homobible.html
Saints Sergius and Bacchus - Wikipedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saints_Sergius_and_Bacchus
Christian saints, lovers and martyrs - http://everything2.com/title/Saint+Sergius+and+Saint+Bacchus
Sergius and Bacchus: the Gay Catholic Saints - http://muahhhhhhhhhhhhhh.blog.friendster.com/
THE END

New Testament and Homosexuality PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

New Testament and Homosexuality PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Table of Contents

THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS 1, 26 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

The New Testament & Homosexuality ii

ALL ONE IN CHRIST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

NEW TESTAMENT HISTORY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

THE EARLY CHRISTIAN CHURCH COURTS PAGANS . . . . . . . . . . . 21

WHY THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH TARGETED HOMOSEXUALITY . . . . . 22

The New Testament & Homosexuality iii

The New Testament & Homosexuality 1

Is the icon suggesting that a Same-Sex (Gay)

The New Testament & Homosexuality 2

The New Testament & Homosexuality 3

The New Testament & Homosexuality 4

The New Testament & Homosexuality 5

1 CORINTHIANS & 1 TIMOTHY

THE FIRST EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE CORINTHIANS:

THE FIRST EPISTLE OF PAUL TO TIMOTHY:

The New Testament & Homosexuality 6

MALAKOS, ARSENOKOIATI / ARSENOKOITES: MALE PROSTITUTES, THE SELF-

Arsenokoites is translated as Homosexual Offenders in 1 Corinthians, but as Perverts in 1 Timothy (New

ARSENOKOITES: HOMOSEXUAL OFFENDERS?

THE ETYMOLOGY OF ARSENOKOITES

THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS 1, 26

THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS:

The New Testament & Homosexuality 9

ROMANS 1:26-27 IS ALSO CLEARLY NOT SPEAKING ABOUT ALL SAME-SEX

3. Then God gave them over to sinful sexual desires.

4. Then the truth about God was replaced with idolatry.

The New Testament & Homosexuality 10

This King James Version translation of this verse is significant.

SEXUAL IMPURITY AND UNNATURAL RELATIONS

IF YOU ACCEPT WHAT PAUL SAYS ABOUT HOMOSEXUALITY,

THE FIRST EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE CORINTHIANS:

THE FIRST EPISTLE OF PAUL TO TIMOTHY:

THE FIRST EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE CORINTHIANS:

THE FIRST EPISTLE OF PAUL TO TIMOTHY:

PAUL DID NOT REALLY CARE FOR WOMEN:

THE FIRST EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE CORINTHIANS:

PAUL WAS NOT DISTURBED BY SLAVERY, PARTICULARLY IF THOSE IN BONDAGE

THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE COLOSSIANS:

THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE EPHESIANS:

The New Testament & Homosexuality 12

THE FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN:

THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS:

THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO MATTHEW:

THE FIRST EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE CORINTHIANS:

BUT OF LOVE, JESUS SAID:

THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO JOHN:

Love one another.

by your love for one another.

THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO MATTHEW:

You shall love your neighbor as yourself.

The New Testament & Homosexuality 13

THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS:

ALL ONE IN CHRIST

The New Testament & Homosexuality 14

WHAT DID CHRIST SAY?

In Matthew, we have Christ’s own commentary on Genesis 2:24.

WHO ARE THE EUNUCHS?

The New Testament & Homosexuality 15

MARRIAGE AND THE PURPOSE OF GOD

The New Testament & Homosexuality 16

NEW TESTAMENT HISTORY

3. Then God gave them over to sinful sexual desires. 

4. Then the truth about God was replaced with idolatry. 

Homosexuality and the Bible - by Bruce L. Gerig - http://epistle.us/homobible.html