In the often heated debates on homosexuality, the passage in 1 Corinthians 6 is frequently quoted. The passage is here:
"Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral nor idolators 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 Cor 6: 9-10
I have mentioned this passage in previous posts about the Bible and homosexuality (see here for example:
http://musingmonk.blogspot.co.uk/2009/05/homosexuality-and-bible.html). However, I would like to recap on this passage.
On the surface, it seems crystal clear, and those who like to refer to the "plain reading" of Scripture will no doubt think any attempt to consider this passage differently will be just doing theological gymnastics in order to satisfy a worldly viewpoint.
The problem is that if we don't apply any study and discernment to this passage, we have some other uncomfortable logic to apply. The logic is as follows: anyone who slanders others will not be saved. Also, anyone with an addiction to alcohol or food will not be saved.
Now immediately, most sane people will say "ah, but if these people repent of their ways then God will forgive". But what if the person does not deal with their addiction in their lifetime? What if the alcoholic is in denial as so many are? What theological gymnastics must we make here to reconcile these words with those of the same author in Romans 3:28 "For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from observing the law".
There are some who genuinely believe that unrepentant homosexuals will not achieve salvation, and they often use this passage to justify this view. However, by unrepentant, they do not mean a repentant sinner who has put his or her faith in Jesus Christ, but they mean someone who is unrepentant about their sexuality.
When asked what of a man or woman who professes Jesus as Lord and Saviour who is also at peace with their (non-repressed) homosexuality, the reply is often that they cannot truly be in relationship with Jesus if they persevere in their so-called sin. This is in part because of a logic loop that says if you do X you are not saved, if you are saved you do not do X, therefore if you claim to be saved and do X you must not truly be saved.
Presumably, to have integrity of logic, this argument would also apply to an alcoholic or a greedy man or woman.
So where does this leave us now? Well, it means that if this passage is to be read out of context at face value, then no greedy person or drunkard can be a saved Christian. The only way for salvation is if the person stops being an alcoholic or greedy.
And that to me sounds scarily like salvation by works.
So is there another possible meaning of this passage?
Yes.
Paul is writing to a city known for its sexual promiscuity. With over 12 pagan temples, including the infamous temple of Aphrodite, known for temple prostitution and having hundreds of sacred prostitutes, the Church was against a backdrop of licentious living. Paul wants the church to stand out as a beacon of purity. The chapter before he condemns the man who was having sex with his father's wife (a breach of the ten commandments and even considered shocking by the standards of the day). He then addresses an issue of lawsuits among believers, and curiously, it is here that Paul mentions the passage I quoted above. So why does Paul jump from telling people to not take other believers to court to condemning (apparently) homosexuality?
Well, Paul is contrasting the Church with the world outside, which in this context includes temple prostitution, orgies and the like. Now, in that context, let's re-read the opening quote.
"Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral nor idolators 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."
Paul is quite clearly referring to the pagan temple prostitution and licentious ways of the people of Corinth. He then goes on to say "And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God".
When a person commits their life to Jesus, they are washed, sanctified and justified. This includes homosexuals (and alcoholics and greedy folk and greengrocers and tax collectors and prime ministers... Who we were is irrelevant).
This to me is quite clearly (and plainly) not a list of unforgivable sins. It is a comparison between the Church and the pagan idolatry outwith. The offence is not being a practicing homosexual, it is worshipping false gods, rejecting Jesus and abusing sexuality in acts of worship (prostitution, both givers and receivers). We must remember also that the word "homosexual" is an invention of the 19th century, and therefore is a choice of 20th century translators to best encapsulate the meaning of Paul in this passage. Paul was describing the sexual acts within the temple orgies/prostitution (some translations called it sodomites). In much of the 20th century, homosexuality was illegal and frowned upon by society as a whole. It therefore is a good translation attempt. In centuries to come as we appreciate homosexuality in a new light, Bible translators of the 21st and 22nd centuries will undoubtedly begin to rephrase this concept to help the modern reader understand Paul's usage - the primary job of a good translator.
Paul goes on to emphasise this point - "Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ himself? Shall I then take the members of Christ and unite them with a prostitute? Never!"
It is understandable how at first glance, these verses appear to be denouncing all homosexuality, particularly when read out of context. But with a little discernment we can see that the clearer reading of this passage is that Paul is telling the readers that as holy people, set apart for God (not like the temple prostitution rings around) then these people should have the maturity to resolve their own disputes internally without taking brothers and sisters to court. Why else would Paul suddenly mention homosexuality in a response to legal disputes? He also wants them to act honourably in all things, especially their relationships with one another.
The teachings of 1 Corinthians 7 can then be understood to include, rather than exclude homosexual Christians (Paul is not likely to have been thinking of homosexual Christians when writing that teaching, but we as Christians today need to consider how we apply his teachings to a wider range of issues in order to bring glory to God in all our relationships).
(To view my thoughts on the application of 1 Cor 7 in the same sex marriage debate, view this post:
http://musingmonk.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/a-biblical-rationale-for-same-sex.html)
Our brothers and sisters in Christ who are homosexual are equally seeking to honour God in their relationships and as a Church we need to help them do so, without misapplying scriptures that back up our own prejudices (I include myself and my own prejudices).
This is not to say that all relationships (whatever our sexualities) are godly or God-honouring. We each need case by case discernment with the help of the Holy Spirit.
It is time, however (in my personal opinion), to stop using verses like these out of context to cause immeasurable suffering to our brothers and sisters in Christ.
