Is 'Homosexuality' A Bad Translation?

YOUTH WORKER DISCUSSION GUIDE:
1. The NASB translation of 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 (1968) simply says "homosexuals." What weakness does that translation have?
2. In our day "homosexuality" may refer to several things: same-sex attraction, sexual orientation, sexual identity, or behavior. Which of these does Paul have in mind?
3. What cue in the text points to behavior?
4. Sean suggests that "same sex sexual behavior" communicates Paul's intent. Compare recent translations: NIV, ESV, NET (see translation notes), NLT, CSB, CEV and HCB. Which are clearer? Which focus on behavior?

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

FOLLOW ME ON SOCIAL MEDIA:
TikTok: @sean_mcdowell

[MouseCrusader]

I think a lot of people are misunderstanding doctor McDowell here. He's not advocating homosexuality. What he's saying is that having same sex attraction isn't necessary the sin. It's more so the temptation. Much like how if someone is sexually attracted to someone who's married (is not their spouse). The attraction itself is not the sin, it's the engagement of that attraction that's the sin.

There are plenty of brothers and sisters in Christ that have left LBGTQ lifestyle, yet still experience same sex attraction. But because they are surrendered to Christ, and want to honor him, some choose to remain celibate.

There are some cases though that God changed their affections and are now married to someone of the opposite sex.

All in all, God wants us to live in A holy lifestyle regardless of whatever temptations we may have. Whether it be same sex attraction, or temptations of pride, lying, promiscuity, drunkenness, etc.

[DIBBY]

It's ok to be naturally left-handed as long as you don't actually use your left hand. This is what this sounds like to me when Christians are talking about homosexuality.

[gerryquinn]

I don't think it is either a bad translation or that it is misunderstood. People know exactly what paul means - they just don't like what he says. They don't like what the Bible has to say on the matter of morals. Today, people do not want to be called out; they do not want to be judged, even by God. They want to excuse themselves.

[joshuajacob]

I was just speaking with two atheist about this about 3 days ago. Amazing how the LORD had you release this video and for it to be suggested. God is amazing.

[ryanburr]

Other translations say 'men who have sex with men'. This is a more accurate translation and makes it clear that it is the behaviour that is wrong.

Still I don't think we should push this too far because Jesus said in Matthew 15:19 that "For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, slander. These are what make a man `unclean'". So it is our thought life and our inner desires that need to be sanctified first which will then lead to repentance; the changing of our actions to meet God's standards. This comes from a desire to please Him and not to earn his favour as this is impossible and thankfully unnecessarily due to what Jesus did for us on the cross, paying the penalty of our sins.

Many men (and women) like me struggle with lust which comes all too naturally to us. It seems to me this isn't greatly different to what same-sex attracted Christians struggle with. While you may say it's different because we have traditional marriage open to us in reality many are not in a position to be able to marry and for others that do it isn't the cure to the problem that they hoped it would be. I don't want to deny the unique struggle that same-sex attracted Christians go through but it's also true that we all need God's help to sanctify us so that we can live pure and holy lives.

[thebronzebaron]

I personally think it was 'male proustites', because if you look at books like Job you will notice that that was a much more common practice back in biblical times, unless someone can prove that Paul was referring to Leviticus 18:22.

[SSym]

We will all give an account for every single word we say, and the souls who are mislead because of what we say. Any soul who forfeits eternity with Jesus based on what they watched here, and any other place with such heresies, you will give an account for it. Repent.
May God have mercy on you in Jesus Name.

[utubota]

This passage specifically refers to male homosexual behavior. Is there like passages that apply to females? Is this a reflection of the time in which this was written?

[andygraning]

Sean - Honest question, wasn't it common during this time for senior Roman/Greek soldiers to "bed" younger soldiers as a right of passage? It wouldn't be necessarily because they would even identify themselves as gay, like we would think of today. Could that be what this passage is alluding to? I remember reading that in a text book one time. We're projecting our modern definition of homosexuality to a society from 2, 000 years ago. Proper context is key.

[tompeers]

If married, if your spouse said to you that they were sexually attracted to a certain person at work of the opposite sex ... would you consider that morally neutral (neither good nor bad)? Would you tell them, "Well honey, that's not wrong"? My point: It's not just the act, even same-sex attraction itself is NOT morally neutral and is part of human fallenness.

[squarecircles]

Maybe the problem isnt changing the translated word to fit modern usage rather modern terms should rather be clearly elucidated because i know what classically homosexuality is. Are we then going to change the word again if later homosexuality is "modernly" equated to "wise men"??

[bradwinward]

I dont understand what the importance of this distinction is. Could someone explain the significance to me please?

[Jennifer.villezcas]

Actually that's how it's translated in spanish (reina valera 1960) "men who lay with men"

[nicholascelia]

As a heterosexual Man in Christ, it's confusing enough I would imagine to be gay let alone the insistence if you fall in love with a gay man, you can't marry or have sex.

[maggieatlas]

I am still confused zero clarification for me

[grgodu]

I agree that homosexuality in this passage should be eliminated the word itself. But I also disagree with your suggested interpretation unless you add as follows: "heterosexual men who have sex with other men". That way the context and contexts is/are honored.

[anthonyfava]

Just because, in our sin, we've created new categories of identity and sexuality doesn't negate that the traditional understanding of this verse being correct. Since this video takes the verse out of context, it should always be read in addition to it's surrounding verses. Verse 11 goes on to add "as some of you were." Therefore you are not in Christ if you identify as your sin or sinful desires. Furthermore, the desires themselves are sinful. Jesus makes clear in the sermon on the mount that your very sinful desires make you guilty of sin. So no, you can't be a "gay Christian" but you can be a "formerly gay Christian." Sanctification is a process. It's not easy.

[MBSax]

This is a confusing presentation from a man eminently more qualified than me. Knowing original languages and having a mountains of theological papers. However, in my simplicity I understand religion to not merely being an outward service, but a spiritual life manifested by a holy living.

[ChristianMotivationMedia]

“The greatest want of the world is the want of men—men who will not be bought or sold, men who in their inmost souls are true and honest, men who do not fear to call sin by its right name, men whose conscience is as true to duty as the needle to the pole, men who will stand for the right though the heavens fall.”EGW

[mathewsimpson]

genuine question: if Paul says that specific actions will prevent someone from inheriting the kingdom of god, how he used to support salvation through grace alone theology? Paul seems to be making claims about Jewish law practices not being required, not that actions don't ultimately matter....