one of the statements that i have made that has been the most controversial since i’ve started this account has been my belief that homosexuality isn’t a sin. shocker, right? well, today, i’m going to share this handy project debunking all of the verses that people usually bring out to justify their hatred, because i’m tired of having this conversation individually. so, stick around if you’re a fellow Christian lgbtq+ supporter, or if you don’t agree with me right now but are willing to challenge your views and learn! this is the fourth part in a series of projects that i’m making, each one focusing on debunking ‘Christian’ homophobia. you can find the others here: Genesis 19:1-14 and 24-26 - https://scratch.mit.edu/projects/629655126/ Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 - https://scratch.mit.edu/projects/629657799/ Romans 1:18-27 - https://scratch.mit.edu/projects/629659560/
I Corinthians 6:9-10 the original Bible does not contain a word equivalent to the english word “homosexual”. this is because the concept of modern homosexuality, in the sense of a sexual orientation or in the context of a caring relationship toward others of the same gender, was unknown in the ancient world. instead, this i corinthians list of vices includes words that reflect s roles that were part of male behavior in the culture of the first century. the first word is “m@l@k01”, which literally means “soft” and is translated in the nrsv as “male p.” in terms of morality, during the first century, m@l referred to attributes such as laziness, degeneracy, decadence or lack of courage, all traits that, in the patriarchal culture of the time, would have been viewed as feminine and deplorable. first century romans believed that any man who was more interested in pleasure than in duty, was woman-like. so paul may have been referring to men who were weak or eff3m1n, such as those unfit for military service; as further evidence, the kjv translates m as “eff3m1n”. the second greek word is “”, ambiguously translated in the nrsv as “s0d0m1t35”. this word is a combination of two greek words - “arseno”, meaning male, and “k01t35”, meaning bed. however, when these two parts of the word are put together, the meaning is consistently unclear. it may refer specifically to a man who has s with another man, or it may be referring to a man who has s with anyone, outside of marriage, including possibly a woman. the word “” appears in only one other place in the bible, Timothy, making it incredibly difficult to glean a solid definition of. there are, however, a few stories in non-biblical greek literature that suggest the word arsenokoites refers to instances where one male uses his superior power or position to take sexual advantage of another. once again, the problems here are based on abuse of power rather than homosexuality, just as has been scrutinised in my earlier analysis of Genesis. however, if paul had wished to refer exclusively to homosexual relationships, he would have several words right there and waiting for him already in the ancient greek language, the most common of which being p” and “” actually mean in this passage. the only thing that can be said with certainty is that the passage appears to condemn and 3xpl01t, a sentiment that is totally agreeable to anybody. given this uncertainty, the varying english translations of these obscure words are a very slender reed on which to rely in condemning all homosexuals as sinners. ancient, practices should not be used to justify the condemnation of consensual gay unions today, otherwise heterosexual people shouldn’t be allowed to be together on basis of the terrible acts historically committed against women in heterosexual marriages.
