What are your opinions regarding the verses of Romans 1:26-27?

Question

Old Testament texts have to be weighed against the New. Consequently Paul's unambiguous condemnation of homosexual behavior in Roman 1:26-27 must be the centerpiece of any discussion.

"For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. Their woman exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in their own persons the due penalty for their error."

Was Paul unaware of the distinction between sexual orientation, over which one has apparently very little choice, and sexual behavior, over which one does? Did he assume that those whom he condemns are heterosexual, and are acting contrary to nature, "leaving," "giving up," or "exchanging" their regular sexual orientation for that which is foreign to them?

Answer 1

Leviticus 18:22: "Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable."

Leviticus 19:27: "Do not cut the hair at the sides of your head or clip off the edges of your beard."

Translation? The bible is ridiculous and can't be trusted for rules to live by. Any god willing to send their beloved creations to eternal damnation for paltry offenses is obviously a raving psychopath.

Answer 2

I do like your theory, especially because the modern concept of sexual orientation is a VERY new thing, and would be so utterly foreign to Paul. Other arguments include the question of what authority Paul has. As I understand it, he wasn't too keen on women's rights either and would probably have a heart attack if he knew that women are allowed to divorce, and work, and choose NOT to be raped and all that. Besides; he never heard Jesus speak when he was alive, he just had an "experience" after Jesus' death. Any random person today could claim the same, and have exactly as much authority as Paul IMO.

Then again, this is all coming from a Catholic-raised agnostic. The most important thought I have on Romans is that because I'm not Christian, it shouldn't apply to me. And it DEFINITELY shouldn't be forced on me through my secular government.

Answer 3

"Was Paul unaware of the distinction between sexual orientation, over which one has apparently very little choice, and sexual behavior, over which one does?"

This distinction has been made up in our time...it's not truth.

"Did he assume that those whom he condemns are heterosexual, and are acting contrary to nature, "leaving," "giving up," or "exchanging" their regular sexual orientation for that which is foreign to them?"

Yes, because that assumption is true. Not intending to offend anyone, but the lies of this world twist minds to make them believe there is such a distinction. God mad man and woman, not question marks.

Read the passage in greater context. Paul isn't condeming anyone, he's speaking of people who's God wrath will come upon, he doesn't make any judgements, just states their behaviour.

When you read the Bible you cannot take it out of context, most of the books are arguments that build upon previous verses. In this phrase, Paul is saying something that no Jew or Christian (in that day) would disagree with. He's pointing out behaviour that all would have said is sin. He will then go on and say...how can you judge these people if you are like them? This continues to build throughout the book and is an attempt to get Christians to better understand their identity in Christ. This understanding tells Christians they should live differently than those who sin. It's not a judgement, it's intending to open Christians eyes to the truth of who they are as opposed to the lies of this world.

Answer 4

I am really not sure about what was in Paul's mind at the time that God inspired that text. I know that as a bi-sexual female, who has had no really positive relationships with men, I struggle with the innate sense of being wrong when I fanatize about women.

I do know that we now understand more about how people and their traits are decided. Knowledge that Paul didn't have. I can only pray that My Father knows that too and will love me anyway.

Answer 5

"Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolators, nor adulterers, nor HOMOSEXUALS, nor SODOMITES, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God." (1 Co 6:9-10)

"AND SUCH WERE SOME OF YOU. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God." (1 Co 6:11)

who are you to say when or if God Almighty might grace them, it may even take a lifetime. You do not know the plan of god Almighty!

Answer 6

I have no idea, nor is it pertinent to any discussion. If you are GLBT, just be so, you don't need to justify yourself to anyone.

And Paul had some rather serious sexual issues, that should be well obvious by the nature of many of his writings.

Answer 7

Actually I had to study this passage in depth for my philosophy class, and most of the research I did (even the footnote in the bible itself) said that the passage was more about public exhibitionism in pagan rituals than about homosexuality... Paul was condemning what he saw as idolatrous rituals.

Answer 8

In order to form an opinion on this passage, you need to look at the preceding passages as well as those that follow. Using Romans 1:26-27 is taking words out of context because Romans 1:26 begins with "For this reason" which means the previous passage which gives the reason is being ignored, and Romans 1:28 begins with the word "And", which means the following passage is also being ignored. This is an example of picking and choosing certain words to show a certain belief out of context.

Romans (RSV since that is what you selected in your question) 1:22-25...
"Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man or birds or animals or reptiles. Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed for ever! Amen."
& 1:28-31
"And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a base mind and to improper conduct. They were filled with all manner of wickedness, evil, covetousness, malice. Full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malignity, they are gossips, slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless."

People who dislike gay people are often full of things such as...

Deceit and malignity - by harmful, and often untrue statements about GLBT people...

Insolence and haughtiness and boastfulness - by being insulting and disrespectful towards GLBT people and arrogant by thinking that GLBT people are less important and that being straight is superior over being GLBT...

Inventing evil - by saying GLBT people are bad people...

Heartlessness and ruthlessness - by using words to put down and disparage GLBT people without regard towards the feelings of others.

By looking at the whole picture, it appears that people should not do what seems unnatural (such as gay people acting as if they are not gay) and that those who condemn gay people are wicked.

This seems a good argument against reparative (ex-gay) therapy.

Answer 9

The question would remain, are you Christian or Paulian?
Why would Paul's words be given more credence than the commandment "Let ye who is without Sin cast the first Stone," which was supposedly a quote from the one you call Christ?

Answer 10

Paul leaves me with the feeling or being bewildered and betrayed.