Introduction
According to the Bible, homosexuality is clearly a sin; or maybe it's not. The verses dealing with the subject are complicated and loaded with contradictions; or maybe they're perfectly clear. POV asked two Bible scholars who've written extensively on these issues to offer their interpretations.
We asked both of our experts to choose three passages that are key to understanding what the Bible has to say about homosexuality. Each scholar then provided commentary on the full list of selections.
About the participants
Dr. James B. DeYoung is Professor of New Testament Language and Literature at Western Seminary in Portland, Oregon. He is the author of Homosexuality: Contemporary Claims Examined in Light of the Bible and Other Ancient Literature and Law (Kregel Publications, 2000).
Dr. David M. Carr is Professor of Old Testament at Union Theological Seminary in New York City. He is the author of The Erotic Word: Sexuality, Spirituality, and the Bible (Oxford University Press, 2002).
Genesis 2: 4-25
What the Bible says...
Genesis 2:4-25 (excerpt)
[4] This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created.
When the LORD God made the earth and the heavens- [5] and no shrub of the field had yet appeared on the earth and no plant of the field had yet sprung up, for the LORD God had not sent rain on the earth and there was no man to work the ground, [6] but streams came up from the earth and watered the whole surface of the ground- [7] the LORD God formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.
[18] The LORD God said, "It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him."
[19] Now the LORD God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field and all the birds of the air. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name. [20] So the man gave names to all the livestock, the birds of the air and all the beasts of the field.
But for Adam no suitable helper was found. [21] So the LORD God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man's ribs and closed up the place with flesh. [22] Then the LORD God made a woman from the rib [he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man.
[23]The man said,
"This is now bone of my bones
and flesh of my flesh;
she shall be called 'woman,'
for she was taken out of man."
...and how it can be interpreted
This passage is foundational to all questions regarding sexuality. It is the Bible's description of how God formed Eve to be the companion of Adam, what role Eve was to play, and what the meaning of marriage is. The passage rests on the much shorter text of Genesis 1:26-27 where God clearly indicates his intent to make humanity -- "male and female" -- in his image and likeness, and that human beings were given the responsibility of "ruling" the remainder of creation (verses 28-30). Both man and woman were to serve God by carrying out a faithful stewardship of the rest of the created world, both animate and inanimate.
hapter one makes it clear that from the very beginning it was God's intent to make humanity to consist of male and female in order to display his image and likeness, and to carry out God's stewardship.
Chapter one makes it clear that from the very beginning it was God's intent to make humanity to consist of male and female in order to display his image and likeness, and to carry out God's stewardship. Certainly such stewardship would eventually mean the establishment of the home, work place, the state, and the church. It seems clear that two males or two females would not reflect the divine image and likeness, and could not carry out the divine stewardship entrusted to them.
In chapter 2 Eve is described as a female made from Adam the male, to correspond to or be a helper for him. Verse 24 suggests the sexual unity brought about by the intercourse of a man and a woman. Its terminology suggests universality in contrast to the historical, limited nature of the account describing Adam and Eve that surrounds this verse.
These passages teach that God's plan for the propagation of the human race is for a man and a woman to form a sexual bond, which we call marriage. Two men or two women do not form such a bond. But such a union isn't limited to the purpose of propagation. Rather such a union alone reflects the divine image and likeness. Without one or the other, or having two of the same sex, the divine image is incomplete or distorted. We cannot see or know God correctly by any other union, such as a homosexual union or a union of humans with animals. Also this heterosexual union alone provides the complementary aspect implicit in the text, that one is the helper of the other. This implies emotional and inner bonding without any sense of shame because of nakedness. Since this pattern is carried over to chapter 3 it is implicit that only such a union has the pleasure and blessing of God, evident in the words of verse eight and the following verses that God had fellowship with these two.
The text of Genesis 2 is cited by Jesus and by Paul as setting forth the authoritative view of marriage in their day. Any deviation from this union of man and woman would not produce "one flesh" and was understood to be sin, violating what God had joined together (Matthew 19:1-6). Further such a union of one flesh alone pictures the relation of Christ and the church (Ephesians 5:31-32).
This text presents God's vision of human intimacy, an intimacy that includes sexual love. It affirms that humans were made for loving, that God's primal wish for the first human was for him not to be alone, but to work, cleave to and "become one flesh" with someone made from his own flesh. Humans were made for lovemaking. Yet this is not an "anything goes" vision. Instead, the story depicts a union of peers (no sexual violence), where the woman, in contrast to the animals, "corresponds" to the first man.
Read in context, this text also stands over against those who insist that all homosexuals be celibate and the church exclude "practicing homosexuals." Rather, the God we find revealed in Genesis 2 creates embodied people for sexual intimacy with each other. Humans were not made to be alone.
Read in context, this text also stands over against those who insist that all homosexuals be celibate and the church exclude "practicing homosexuals." Rather, the God we find revealed in Genesis 2 creates embodied people for sexual intimacy with each other. Humans were not made to be alone.
Yes, Genesis 2 focuses on a man and woman as any ancient text like this would. Heterosexual relationships are the most common in every human culture, and they were especially important in an ancient agricultural society like Israel, where children were desperately needed. Nevertheless, Genesis 2 is distinguished from other creation stories in the following way: it never mentions children -- a primary product of male-female sex -- as the aim of sexuality. Only after the couple have eaten the forbidden fruit, does God sentence the woman to endless childbearing. The first and primary aim of sexuality, however, is intimacy, an intimacy which some need find in shared life and love with another of their own sex.
Genesis 19:1-29
What the Bible says...
Genesis 19:1-29 (excerpt)
[1] The two angels arrived at Sodom in the evening, and Lot was sitting in the gateway of the city. When he saw them, he got up to meet them and bowed down with his face to the ground. [2] "My lords," he said, "please turn aside to your servant's house. You can wash your feet and spend the night and then go on your way early in the morning."
"No," they answered, "we will spend the night in the square."
[3] But he insisted so strongly that they did go with him and entered his house. He prepared a meal for them, baking bread without yeast, and they ate. [4] Before they had gone to bed, all the men from every part of the city of Sodom-both young and old-surrounded the house. [5] They called to Lot, "Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us so that we can have sex with them."
[6] Lot went outside to meet them and shut the door behind him [7] and said, "No, my friends. Don't do this wicked thing. [8] Look, I have two daughters who have never slept with a man. Let me bring them out to you, and you can do what you like with them. But don't do anything to these men, for they have come under the protection of my roof."
[9] "Get out of our way," they replied. And they said, "This fellow came here as an alien, and now he wants to play the judge! We'll treat you worse than them." They kept bringing pressure on Lot and moved forward to break down the door.
...and how it can be interpreted
The crucial verses are 19:5 and 19:8. In 19:5 it is emphasized that the men of Sodom sought to have Lot's male visitors (who were actually angels disguised as men) brought out to them that they might "know" them. The Hebrew word for "know" (yada') usually has the meaning of intellectual knowledge, but on some occasions, as here, it means to have sexual knowledge. For example, the same term in Genesis 4:1, 17, 25 refers to the sexual intercourse of Adam with Eve. Here the context of 19:8 confirms that sexual knowledge is intended, for Lot identifies his daughters as those who have not "known any man." Clearly this must refer to sexual intimacy. Thus the men of Sodom sought to sexually assault the men in Lot's house.
This interpretation is also confirmed by the Greek translation of this text as found in the Septuagint (often symbolized by LXX). In 19:8 the LXX, like the Hebrew, uses the common word for "know" (ginosko). But in 19:5 the term used in the LXX is synginomai, which occurs only once elsewhere in the LXX, of Joseph's refusal to sleep with the wife of Potiphar (see Gen. 39:10). It also occurs in three places in the Apocrypha (Judith 12:16; Susanna 11, 39), all with a sexual meaning. To try to define the idea of "know" in 19:5 and 19:8 as some kind of knowledge other than homosexual assault is futile.
In the immediate context we are told that Sodom is a place of wickedness (13:13: "the men of Sodom were wicked, and were sinning greatly against the Lord"; 18:20: "the outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is so great and their sin so grievous").
Lot characterized the men's desire for the angels disguised as men as a "wicked" thing (19:7 -- and this verdict comes from one whose own morals were compromised -- see v. 8). Yet the only sin of the sodomites described in the narrative itself is homosexual assault.
Lot characterized the men's desire for the angels disguised as men as a "wicked" thing (19:7 -- and this verdict comes from one whose own morals were compromised -- see v. 8). Yet the only sin of the sodomites described in the narrative itself is homosexual assault. Later, when Ezekiel describes the sins of Judah under the symbol of Sodom he names them as pride, excess of food, prosperous ease, failure to help the poor and needy, and being haughty and doing abominations or detestable things before God (16:49-50). The word "abominations" is a term used in Leviticus 18 and 20 to describe homosexual conduct (see the discussion of these texts). In the rest of Old Testament and New Testament Scripture Sodom becomes a code word for sexual perversion and the accompanying pride which motivates it (see 2 Peter 2:7-10; Jude 7). Even Jesus, who mentions Sodom ten times, assumes the story of Sodom to be true and deems it an example of God's judgment on wickedness on a par with the Genesis Flood (Luke 17:26-32).
This text is the origin point for the term "Sodomy" still used by many to refer to the homosexual acts they condemn. Yet the main point of this story is not homosexuality, but the inhospitality of the people of Sodom in threatening to rape Lot's guests. We see this already in the way this text is linked to the preceding story of the angels' visit to Abraham in Genesis 18. Abraham and Lot positively respond to the angels' visits, while the people of Sodom are distinguished by their wish to violate the guests sexually.
The main analogy today to this text is not consensual sexual relationships between men or women, let alone committed relationships between people of the same sex. Instead, better analogies would be situations in our society where people, say prisoners or homeless women, are put in situations where they are particularly vulnerable to homosexual or other rape.
To be sure, the text focuses here on attempted homosexual rape. Sadly, ancient societies like Israel were far less sensitive to the problem of heterosexual rape than homosexual rape. That is clear even in this text's positive depiction of Lot's offer of his own daughters for sexual violence in place of his guests (Genesis 19:8). Remarkably, the Bible does not separately name or condemn heterosexual rape. Instead, it focuses here and in Judges 19 on assaults on male honor and hospitality by other males. Christians now know the importance of moving beyond the Bible in recognizing the broader scope of sexual violence.
Leviticus 18:22; 20:13
What the Bible says...
Leviticus 18:22
[22] Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable.
Leviticus 20:13
[13]If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.
...and how it can be interpreted
This passage occurs in a section of Leviticus called the "law of holiness" (chs. 18-20); the emphasis is on moral precepts rather than ceremonial and ritual matters as in the rest of the book. In literary form, chapter 18 resembles the universal texts containing the Ten Commandments (Exodus 20; Deuteronomy 5).
The pivotal verse (18:22) says: "Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable" (or "an abomination"). This prohibition and evaluation is repeated in 20:13, with the addition that the penalty of death is assigned. Not even homosexual apologists deny that homosexual behavior is forbidden here. Yet these interpreters dismiss this text as ritualistic, as limited to Israel's concern for purity and having no universal significance. This misses the mark. Universality is in these chapters, since the second greatest commandment (19:18: "You shall love your neighbor as yourself") is derived from this section of Leviticus and is cited by Jesus (Matthew 22:37-40), James (2:8) and Paul (Romans 13:8-10; Galatians 5:14). In addition, Paul cites 18:5 (Romans 10:5; Galatians 3:12) and 19:19 (2 Corinthians 6:14ff.); Jesus cites 19:12 (Matthew 5:33); and Peter cites 19:2 (1 Peter 1:14-16). Clearly the New Testament found this section meaningful for Christian morality and behavior. Even within chapters 18 and 20 the Canaanites and Egyptians are indicted for the sins listed and punished for them (18:3, 24-30; 20:23), even though they had not been given Israel's ceremonial and legal statutes. The word "abomination" or "detestable" is from to'eba and covers, in the Old Testament, not only ritual impurity but idolatry and here in chapter 18 homosexuality, incest, child sacrifice, bestiality, etc. (see v. 29). Of all the sins, only homosexuality is twice identified as "detestable." While the prohibition of eating unclean food is also here (20:25), along with other stipulations affecting only Israel, these are not assigned a penalty in chapter 20 and are distinguished from the universal sins (as confirmed by their never being repeated in the New Testament).
Finally, no Israelite man or woman was to serve God in the temple by being a prostitute. Since this usually took the form of men called "dogs" who serviced males in their devotion to pagan female deities, it was especially "abominable" or "detestable" to do this in a religious place, God's temple (see Deuteronomy 23:18; 2 Kings 23:1-7ff.). This suggests that it is particularly detestable to use the cloak of religion to mask homosexual behavior.
These texts are the only explicit prohibitions of homosexual acts in the Old Testament. Both focus exclusively on one activity: male-male intercourse where a man "lies with another man the lying down of a woman." Most scholars believe it aims to preserve the purity of Israel through protection of male hierarchy and honor. In honor cultures like ancient Israel it was/is a severe affront for one man to have sex with another man like a woman. This would help explain the exclusive focus here on male-male intercourse.
Meanwhile, the Bible prohibits sex during menstruation in the very same chapters (Lev 18:19; 20:18), but few Christian conservatives have mounted a campaign to expel people who violate that commandment.
Of course, many now live in quite different cultures. But that has not stopped some from selectively using regulations like Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 to support their condemnation of homosexual intimacy. Meanwhile, the Bible prohibits sex during menstruation in the very same chapters (Lev 18:19; 20:18), but few Christian conservatives have mounted a campaign to expel people who violate that commandment.
Readers of the Bible's diverse sexual regulations -- whether liberal or conservative -- are and need be selective. The Old Testament allows married men to have sex with prostitutes, slaves and other unmarried women not under the protection of their fathers. It never condemns female homosexuality, nor does it condemn male-male sex aside from intercourse. The Bible's world of sexual mores is not ours. Anyone claiming to be advocating pure Biblical ethics has not taken a close enough look at them. Prayerfully, Christians must build on and beyond the Bible.
Mark 12:28-34
What the Bible says...
Mark 12:28-34 (excerpt)
[28] One of the teachers of the law came and heard them debating. Noticing that Jesus had given them a good answer, he asked him, "Of all the commandments, which is the most important?"
[29] "The most important one," answered Jesus, "is this: 'Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one. [30] Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.' [31] The second is this: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' There is no commandment greater than these."
[32] "Well said, teacher," the man replied. "You are right in saying that God is one and there is no other but him. [33] To love him with all your heart, with all your understanding and with all your strength, and to love your neighbor as yourself is more important than all burnt offerings and sacrifices."
[34] When Jesus saw that he had answered wisely, he said to him, "You are not far from the kingdom of God." And from then on no one dared ask him any more questions.
...and how it can be interpreted
In this particular text Jesus discusses what is the most important commandment (to love God with one's entire being; see Deuteronomy 6:5 and following verses) and what is the next greatest commandment (to love one's neighbor as oneself; Lev. 19:18). These are more important than ritual sacrifices. All the rest of the teaching of the Old Testament, Jesus says, hangs on these two commands (see Matthew 22:40).
Clearly Jesus' words have universal significance. For all time and for all people, they provide the standard of love for our relationships, first to God, then to people. Apologists for homosexual behavior cite these as the only, or chief, concern that we should have for what it means to please God. Yet what does it mean to love God? The rest of the NT, including Jesus himself, makes it clear that love equals obedience and the doing of God's will. Jesus said: "Whoever has my commands and obeys them, he is the one who loves me... If anyone loves me, he will obey my teaching... He who does not love me will not obey my teaching" (John 14:21, 23-24). Thus love is identified by obedience, and obedience assumes a standard of truth to be obeyed. Jesus not only emphasized love but also the truth: "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me" (John 14:6).
We can assume that homosexuality comes under sexual immorality. Jesus' words to a homosexual person would be what he said to the adulterous woman: "Go now, and leave your life of sin " (John 8:11).
What is the truth, the teaching of Jesus, regarding homosexuality? While Jesus never mentioned homosexuality, this is not an obstacle to discovering what his view would be. Jesus never mentioned incest (but Paul identifies it as sin, 1 Corinthians 5), nor circumcision (but the Church saw it as unnecessary to becoming a Christian, Acts 15), nor bestiality, child sacrifice, rape, abortion, etc. He did list evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, and slander as sins (Matthew 15:19). We can assume that homosexuality comes under sexual immorality. Jesus' words to a homosexual person would be what he said to the adulterous woman: "Go now, and leave your life of sin " (John 8:11).
For centuries Christians have found in this text (and parallels) a guide to how to apply the morals of the Bible. Amidst all of the rules of the Old and New Testaments, Jesus lifts up just two as primary: 1) Love the LORD your God with all your heart, soul and strength (Deuteronomy 6:4-5); and 2) You shall love your neighbor as yourself (Leviticus 19:18). Some contemporary Christians have taken the first command ("love the LORD") to mean an unquestioning acceptance of a particular, selective reading of the Bible. Nevertheless, this command originally urged a devotion to God that replaced worship of "idols," material images of God. Contemporary analogies to such ancient idols could include love of money, an addiction, or even devotion to the Bible in a way that interfered with love of God and neighbor.
Romans 1:26-27
What the Bible says...
Romans 1:26-27
[26] Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. [27] In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.
...and how it can be interpreted
Clearly Paul is condemning both lesbianism and male homosexuality. The verses come in a context in which Paul describes the general course of pagan Gentile behavior. Without excuse (v. 20) Gentiles suppress the truth of the knowledge of God revealed in the creation (v. 18-20), turn to idolatry (vv. 21-23), and degrade their bodies (v. 25). He goes on to say that such people are given over by God to a depraved mind and become filled with every kind of wickedness (verses 28-31). Worst of all they approve this behavior in others (v. 32).
Paul is like Jesus here in affirming that Christians should leave their lives of sin (see also 1 Corinthians 6:9-11). If people are oriented toward homosexuality, they should stop the behavior and seek to change their orientation.
Various attempts are used to water down the stern disapproval of homosexual behavior here. Some dismiss it as a diatribe against idolatrous Gentiles, whereas modern homosexuals may not be idolatrous (but Paul speaks more generally, not linking directly the two). Some say that Paul's words refer to ritual impurity (but such is not in the context); or that they do not condemn people who are homosexual "by nature"; he only condemns those who leave their natural orientation (yet Paul's words about "unnatural relations" parallel those used by non-Christians, such as Aristotle and Plato, to describe homosexuality in such terms). Paul indicates that all homosexuality is a departure from the created order of Genesis 1-2. Others say that Paul knew nothing of homosexual orientation, of those born with a homosexual inclination, nor did he know anything of (and thus does not condemn) life-long mutual homosexual commitment. Yet starting hundreds of years before Paul, Plato (see his Symposium) and others spoke of such mutuality, orientation and life-long commitment. It is inconceivable that Paul was ignorant of homosexual behavior and orientation, or that he would approve of such. Elsewhere, Paul "insists" that the Ephesian Christians "no longer live as the Gentiles do," who "have given themselves over to sensuality and indulge in every kind of impurity and continually lust for more." The Christians "did not come to know Christ that way." They were "taught to put off their former way of life" (which he describes in detail). There must "not be even a hint of sexual immorality or of any kind of impurity" since "these are improper for God's holy people." It is "shameful even to mention what the disobedient do in secret" (see Ephesians 4:17-5:16). Paul is like Jesus here in affirming that Christians should leave their lives of sin (see also 1 Corinthians 6:9-11). If people are oriented toward homosexuality, they should stop the behavior and seek to change their orientation.
Here Paul is describing how God punished the Gentiles by "giving them over" to various forms of sexual immorality and "every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity." As for other Jews of his day, one of Paul's prime examples of Gentile immorality is male-male sex (1:27). He also condemns "unnatural relations" by women (1:26), but the meaning of this is unclear. This may be sex between women, but recent research suggests that it more likely concerns women playing an unnaturally "aggressive" role in sex.
It is striking how contemporary Christians using Romans 1:26-27 fall into the same trap: focusing on the immorality they see in others when they should be seeking God's grace and love for themselves.
Paul's distaste for excessive female sexual dominance and male-male sex correspond with other ancient aspects of his thought, like his command that women not cut their hair or pray with their heads uncovered (1 Corinthians 11:5-6).
Those who isolate this as a proof text for condemning homosexuality, often ignore the point to which Paul is driving in this passage. As becomes clear in Romans 2, Paul is condemning someone for proclaiming the truth of God's judgment on Gentile sinners when "you do the same things" (Romans 2:2-3). This unknown judge is focusing on Gentile immorality when he should be focusing on his own forms of wickedness. Given this context, it is striking how contemporary Christians using Romans 1:26-27 fall into the same trap: focusing on the immorality they see in others when they should be seeking God's grace and love for themselves.
I Corinithians 6:9-1
What the Bible says...
I Corinithians 6:9-1
[9] Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders [10] nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. [11] And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.
The chief discussion of this passage concerns the terms "homosexual offenders." In the Greek it is one compound word, which never occurs in any writing before the Apostle Paul (he uses it once more in 1 Timothy 1:8-10). The term arsenokoitai literally means "male beds." Paul probably coins the word (as he coins others in his Epistles) and derives it from Leviticus 20:13 (similar to 18:22) where in the Greek text of the LXX the two terms arsenos and koitein are back-to-back in the sentence: "If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable" (literally, "If a man makes a bed with a man...").
By drawing on Leviticus Paul's meaning cannot be limited to male prostitutes, pederasts, perverts, etc., for he thinks more broadly with his biblical worldview. All homosexual behavior and orientation, written about hundreds of years before Paul, must be included.
By drawing on Leviticus Paul's meaning cannot be limited to male prostitutes, pederasts, perverts, etc., for he thinks more broadly with his biblical worldview. All homosexual behavior and orientation, written about hundreds of years before Paul, must be included. With the preceding word translated "male prostitutes," Paul gives us the passive and the active terms for same-sex behavior, following the pattern of the words of Leviticus 20:13, as even the rabbis and Philo interpreted the passage. Following the pattern of Leviticus 18 and 20, where incest is condemned before homosexuality, Paul's list here follows his condemnation of incest earlier in 1 Corinthians 5:1-13.
This text is important for several reasons. It affirms that homosexuals and other unrepentant sinners have no place in God's kingdom (which must include heaven in its meaning). Also, people who come to Christ are expected to change from their past evil behavior and identity by the power of Jesus and the Holy Spirit. Finally, the same term occurs in 1 Timothy 1:8-10 where Paul deals with what is unlawful, ungodly and unholy (using legal, religious and moral categories). This suggests that homosexual behavior is a proper object of restriction by the law, faith, and public morality.
This list illustrates just how far Paul's world was from ours. None of its terms refer to the sort of "homosexual identity" under debate now. The term translated "male prostitutes" in the above NIV translation more likely refers to the passive partner of a male-male sexual relationship. The word translated "homosexual offenders," is an obscure expression made of the Greek words for "male" and "bed." If it refers to "offenders,"
People cite vice lists of this sort from Paul while ignoring his broader ambivalence toward all sexuality. As is clear in 1 Corinthians 7, Paul does not just want his congregation to avoid sex between males. He would be happiest if they avoided sex and marriage altogether.
It would be males who sexually abuse boys, but it may well refer to another form of male-male sexual relations. However interpreted, this list of vices agrees with the Old Testament in ignoring female-female sex.
People cite vice lists of this sort from Paul while ignoring his broader ambivalence toward all sexuality. As is clear in 1 Corinthians 7, Paul does not just want his congregation to avoid sex between males. He would be happiest if they avoided sex and marriage altogether. To be sure, he tells married men and women to stay married and to have sex as needed to prevent other sorts of sexual immorality, but this he says "as a concession, not as a command" (1 Corinthians 7:1-6). He wishes others were celibate like him, and he encourages the unmarried to stay unmarried (1 Corinthians 7:7-27). Marriage is a distraction from "affairs of the LORD" (1 Cor 7:32-33). Like many contemporaries, Paul was ambivalent about sex, certainly male-male and female-female sex, but also sex between husband and wife. Those finding a pro-family agenda in Paul must ignore his broader attitude about sex and marriage.