The Meaning of Arsenokoitai

3/7/2014

One of the most common responses to the claim that the Bible condemns homosexuality as a sin is the counter claim that the word arsenokoitai used in I Corinthians 6:9 and I Timothy 1:9-10 is not a reference to homosexuals. Those making this claim have proposed a range of alternative translations for arsenokoitai ranging from male pederasts to the assertion that “we just don’t know what it means.” Over the past ten years, I’ve been confronted with this claim on several occasions, and I’ve put together a short list of resources that I turn to whenever it comes up.

The view that arsenokoitai is a reference to “homosexuals” is based on the simple fact that it is recognizable as a compound word which originated in the Septuagint translation of Leviticus 20:13 which speaks of a man who lies with mankind as with womankind. In Leviticus, the compound word arsenokoitai word is presented as two separate words – arsenos meaning “man” and koiten meaning “lay.” Paul merely joined these two root words together into a compound masculine participle which can only mean “men who lay with men.” For anyone who can read Greek, this word is so easy to understand that it is almost laughable to think that it could be a reference to anything other than male homosexuality.

Unfortunately, there are many discussing this word today who have no understanding of the Greek language and who are easily swayed by dishonest scholars who claim that its meaning is ambiguous. In response to those who insist that these scholars are correct, I usually point to two separate articles. The first is the paper by David F. Wright entitled “Homosexuals or Prostitutes.” This paper was published in the June, 1984, edition of the journal Vigiliae Christianae, and you can download a pdf of the complete article by clicking on the title. The second paper defending the translation of arsenokoitai as “homosexuals” is a paper submitted by James B. DeYoung to the Masters Seminary Journal under the title of “The Source and NT Meaning of Arsenokoitai, with Implications for Christian Ethics and Ministry.” Both of these papers do an excellent job of presenting the opposing claims and answering them in a way so as to leave no doubt as to which view is correct.

In addition to these two papers, I usually also reference a third paper which proves that the phrase which Paul adopted from the Septuagint is itself a correct translation of the Hebrew. This paper was Saul M. Olyan’s contribution the October, 1994, edition of the Journal of the History of Sexuality, and it is rather directly entitled “‘And with a Male You Shall Not Lie the Lying down of a Woman’: On the Meaning and Significance of Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 .” Olyan’s paper is a detailed examination of the Hebrew words used in Leviticus 20:13, and he more than adequately demonstrates that this verse is a condemnation of male homosexuality.

I have presented these three papers in various combinations on several occasions, and so far, I have not received any refutations of their content. In most cases, the individual arguing against the traditional translation of arsenokoitai just gives up and stops arguing. There have been a few cases in which they have responded with mere contempt, but I have not yet received a single, reasonable argument against the information contained in these articles. I hope that you will find them equally as helpful in your defense of the traditional Christian view of homosexuality.

24 Comments

Sean

2/5/2015 02:01:10 pm

Perhaps you've heard of the Queens James Bible, its interesting. I of course side alongside the reasoning you mentioned.

In their introduction to the QJV they say that the commands against men lying with men as they would a woman meant "in the temple of Molech" however then one could say "beasilaity is fine if it is not in the temple of molech.'

Basically they argue homosexuality is only wrong in paagan sex worship. However, I realized, even if the bible does not condem homosexuality it certainly doesn't approve if it. And the only sexual relations it approves are in marriage with a Man and a woman who " become one flesh." All other sexual relations are fornication are adultery and those practicing such will not inherit God's kingdom. This I think is an important point the QJV people miss.

They call it the Queen James Version since aside from their "corrections" it is the 1769 version of the KJV. They call it Queen since James was a known bisexual and had male lovers even while married. Thus is proo f they ignore the command against adultury (for even if homosexuality is okay he was still married and committed adultery) and honor an adulturer with a bible (though the KJV title does too, but the might not have known about his bisexuality and it cab also be called the ASV).

As for the argument that Ezekiel (I think) doesn't list homosexuality as a reason for Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah and Zeboim's destruction therefore homosexuality isn't condemned I thought of this: in certain scriptures Israel is exiled for oppressing the poor, child sacrifices, immorality, but later just for not keeping the sabaths, in the end it was for all of those reasons, the same for Sodom.

colson

3/5/2015 02:39:43 pm

God bless your work i wish more people would see this

RQC

3/9/2015 02:23:08 pm

Wow, deceptive much?

First, you misrepresent Olyan. If you read anything he wrote you'll would see he's a pro-gay Bible apologist. He never said "... this verse is a condemnation of male homosexuality."

Olyan see's the verse as only a prohibition of anal sex between two men and not a general prohibition of homosexuality. News Flash, anal sex is not homosexuality. Anal sex can be done between two men or a man and a women and this one act is not the sum of either orientation.

DeYoung is a lackey for the Baptist denomination who are far from impartial when it comes to a clear and fair look at the Biblical texts that footnote homosexuality in the contexts they are in and where never meant to mean a whole of a condemnation of homosexuality today.

Let's see if you really believe the quote from your blog header of Proverbs 1:5 with posting this. The fact there are no other comments here speaks volumes.

pwb

7/18/2015 04:16:44 am

Your ad hominem against DeYoung is unnecessary. Learn to write without using emotive language.

7/21/2015 07:30:41 am

Oh please. Be worried more about the content and less on how I say it.

If the shoe fits with DeYoung...

Don

6/29/2015 01:47:23 pm

Hmm... So you call someone a lackey because why. They disagree with you? And does someone's bias really change the definition of a word? One's opinions have no control over evidence. Otherwise, you obviously have a bias. So why should I believe your view on homosexuality is correct? You need to read Proverbs and get wise yourself dude.

7/15/2015 05:31:37 am

Good point in asking if a bias changes a word and it does. A perfect example is the koine Greek word "malakoi" in 1 Corinthians that is supposedly the partner to "arsenokotai." What happened to malakoi is a perfect example where you can point to and say this is a clear bias with translation. The Word never even hinted to homosexuality in prior translations until the 16th century Douay-Rheims translation and the word "homosexual" was stuck in the 1940's translation New Revised Standard version. Most Bible scholars, who don't come from Evangelical schools that answer to the church financing the school, disagree with DeYoung with making a better case. I do doubt anyone here will look for them when they have someone here who is happy to stroke their anti-gay bias, why would they need to look any further?.

bruce

1/26/2016 11:59:49 pm

have you ever heard of Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible with the Greek and Hebrew dictionary? the Strong's number for effeminate is: 3120, in the definition is the word catamite, do you know the definition of catamite? if not look it up!

Russell

6/14/2019 03:25:45 pm

Arsenokoitai is a compound word: arseno is the word for “a male,” and koitai is the word for “mat” or “bed.” Put the two halves together, and the word means “a male bed”—that is, a person who makes use of a “male-only bed” or a “bed for males.” And, truthfully, that’s all the information we need to understand the intent of 1 Corinthians 6:9.

The word meaning “bed” carries a sexual connotation in this context—the Greek koitai is the source of our English word coitus (“sexual intercourse”). The conclusion is that the word arsenokoitai is referring to homosexuals—men who are in bed with other men, engaging in same-gender sexual activity.

KWP

7/11/2015 03:02:12 pm

It seems that the link to the 3rd document is broken. Can you fix it?
This is what we need more of; genuine study and application that correctly reveals truth. These papers and your explanation are the clearest I've seen on this subject and remove the ambiguity that so many try to use to discredit scripture. Thanks for sharing this.

Bill Fortenberry

7/11/2015 09:58:05 pm

The link should be working now. I think the host may have restructured his website after I originally wrote this.

7/18/2015 04:19:06 am

Thanks for including a link to the Wright paper. It's almost impossible to find without paying an extortion fee.

JuhaniHolander

7/18/2015 03:58:03 pm

Some people say that against homosexuality generally has presented two places, whom are assumed condemning homosexuality as a sin. 1 Cor 6:9 and 1 Tim 1:10 is Greek word arsenokoites, and according to some it doesn't mean homosexuality. Some people say that the meaning of arsenokoites is also unclear in the midst of Bible scholars. There are also people who claim that apostle Paul made up this word, because we can't find this word from Greek texts before Paul.

Arsenokoites means homosexuality powerful evidence http://www.kotipetripaavola.com/arsenokoitesmeanshomosexuality.html

John

7/29/2015 07:31:51 pm

That was written in Hebrew language.

QUOTE:
The 6th c. astrologer Rhetorius Aegyptius used the term as women with the receptors: “arsenokoites (of women) and rapists of women.”
“One must also ask about the perplexing, beguiling, and shadowy sin of incest, of which there are not just one or two varieties but a great many very different ones. One type is committed with two sisters of the same father or mother (or both). [Jacob with Leah and Rachel]
Another involves a cousin; another the daughter of a cousin; another the wife of one's son; another the wife of one's brother. It is one thing with a mother-in-law or the sister of a mother-in-law, another with a stepmother or a father's concubine.
Some even do it with their own mothers, and others with foster sisters or goddaughters. In fact, many men even commit the sin of arsenokoitia with their wives.''

telzza

8/26/2015 02:25:39 pm

http://www.kotipetripaavola.com/arsenokoitesmeanshomosexuality.html

Septuagint and the Greek word arsenokoites:

Lev 18:22 (Septuaginta)

kai meta arsenos ou koimeeteesee koiten gynaikos bdelugma gar estin

Lev 20:13 (Septuaginta)

kai os an koimeetee meta arsenos koiten gynaikos bdelugma epoieesan amphoteroi thanatousthoosan enokhoi eisin

Arsenos means male and koiten means bed. Lev 18:22 and 20:13 teach that a man cannot lie (sexual act) with another man as he lies with a woman. The origin of the word arsenokoites means homosexual activity and homosexual. Lev 18:22 and 20:13 prove very clearly that arsenos koiten means homosexual sex, because the Jews scribes translated words' arsenos koiten describe men who have sex with other men (homosexuality), which is a sin and against the will of God. Apostle Paul didn't make up the word arsenokoites, but it was already as the concept in the Old Testament, where it meant homosexuality.

Nico van Niekerk link

10/12/2015 05:16:14 am

And so the ignorance proceeds unabated.

There are two distinct issues at play and unless we recognize them, we will continue to lose this debate regardless how many Bible texts we quote.

Firstly, there is the fallen nature which nobody can escape and which makes all of us capable of being liars, thieves, killers, adulterers, and homosexuals. This is our old nature, bearing fruit of the flesh, which we ought to crucify with Jesus and live according to our new nature bearing fruit of the Spirit.

Then, secondly, there is the deed of lying, stealing, killing, committing adultery and aresenokotai.

On the eve of Abel's murder, God came to Kain because of his propensity to being a murderer and warned him about the sin that crouches at his door but God admonished him to master it. (Gen 4:7). Because of his fallen nature he must struggle to prevent that the deeds, the fruits, proceed from his propensity to sin. He refused.

As long as we confuse these two distinct parts of the argument, we would continue to be at the losing end when we say that the Bible prohibits homosexuality. No, it does not. That does not mean the Bible condones homosexuality, it rather reveals it to us with all the other propensities we are cursed with. The Bible prohibits the sinful deeds that we are prone to practice because of our fallen nature, which is the bearing of the fruit of the flesh.

If we view the issue in this (correct) light it becomes clear that we can be loving Christians to homosexuals who strive to master the sinful act that they are prone to commit.

Just as the liar, thief, killer and adulterer who struggle to master the sin crouching at their door, homosexuals should find refuge and strength among believers too. They must also be in a struggle to master their sinful deeds, like the rest of us.

If they refuse, they ought to be cast from the congregation, not because they are homosexuals, but because they practice arsenokotai believing that God has not forbidden it. To push that agenda onto believers is to destroy the Christian Church, which is their real objective and the homosexuals would be the first to be thrown off buildings.

We have been so overrun by the proponents of the destruction of the Church that we believe because we cannot prove that the Bible prohibits homosexuality that it is OK to allow the sinful deed to be sanctioned by the congregation. That is exactly what they wanted to achieve and we have enabled them because we are unable to distinguish between the two core principles of sin.

natsumihanaki20

10/13/2016 11:00:01 pm

Homosexuality is not inborn though. Homosexuality alike other sexual sins are forbidden to occur even on the mind.

10/17/2016 07:29:27 am

I never said homosexuality is inborn. Regardless, it's irrelevant in this conversation.
You confuse actual sin with the state of sin we are in. Sexual sins in the mind can and should be repented of. Thoughts or desires that suddenly pop up in one's mind unsolicited, is proof of our fallen, corrupt nature. You cannot repent thereof because they will come back again and again without one wanting them to. Read Rom 7 especially v15. The Apostle gave the answer how to deal with those issues in v24, 25.

But practicing homosexuality is a deed, an act that one can repent of and flee from. Homosexuality, per se, is that inclination upon which one shouldn't act. Just like an inclination to violence, murder, poor judgment, or bad language should not be acted on.

Just saying I'm confused without stating how and where, is poor judgment.

10/13/2016 11:01:27 pm

You are confused

10/1/2017 06:39:31 am

The reason we give up arguing is because no one wants to see the possibility. People would rather remain ignorant to what was really being said in each piece of scripture. You are so tied to your carnal perspective that we are given no other choice but to leave it to the good Lord for your understanding.

John David Salons link

2/13/2019 04:09:26 pm

Since Colossians 2:14 has proclaimed that the Mosiac Law has been fulfilled and thereby annulled. Does this mean that if you break a mosiac law that it is no longer a sin?

6/29/2019 11:14:30 am

What do you think of this article?

https://www.forgeonline.org/blog/2019/3/8/what-about-romans-124-27

It argues the case that earlier translations, pre 1946 interpret ARSENOKOITAI as Boy Molesters and youndg boys and that the term homosexual wasn't applied until the 1980s.

Thanks for your thoughts

Daniel N Sloan

7/1/2019 06:48:13 am

So you think compound words have the exact same meaning as their fragments and don't understand how words earlier in a sentence often shade the meaning of words following them.

And you also think a bunch of Gentile Greeks will read a compound word after a slang word for catamites and associate it without any attribution from Paul, with a Levitical law they are freed from, rather than paederastic temple prostitution they see around them.

Perhaps you should open a history book and read about the boy prostitutes at the Temple of Aphrodite, perched on the highest hill in the city. Or you may want to explain why the compound word association link wasn't made until the 20th Century if it was so obvious. Because you're reaching.

Clary

1/27/2020 03:25:54 am

Homosexual behavior and relationships were rife in the Roman Empire, and if Paul wanted to condemn such things, there were common contemporary words his audience would understand. Why would he instead use an ambiguous word he appears to have created? The most logical assumption is that Paul meant something else, though what is unclear.

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.

The Meaning of Arsenokoitai

Leave a Reply.

Search

Topics

Archives