Last time it was shown that there is absolutely no reason to assume that Paul’s use of the word “malakoi” has any apparent connection to homosexuality. A better possibility is the next word in the list in I Corinthians 9, “arsenokoitai”, which at least shows up also in I Timothy 1:10. Similar to malakoi, the translations of arsenokoitai are varied depending on the translation (although at least they not conflicting this time). The King James in both translations is “abusers of themselves with mankind”, while the New International Version is more specific than this with “homosexual offender” in Corinthians and “pervert” in Timothy, and the English Standard Version is still more specific by maintaining in the footnotes the arsenokoitai are the active males in gay sex.
So what does this word really mean? Unlike malakoi, which has no inherent connection to sexual activity, arsenokoitai does indicate something sexual since arsenokoitai is built from the words “male” and “sex.” However, Paul never explains what he has in mind, and so we are left to speculate.
If we know that some word that involves “male” and “sex” is condemned, can’t we assume that Paul is condemning homosexuality? Absolutely not! By far the most common form of male same-sex activity in Ancient Greece was pederasty. Pederasty was a disgusting practice in which an older man “partnered” with a younger man for a mutual exchange: the older man would get the delights of the younger’s body in exchange for being a tutor in whatever field of knowledge in which the disciple was interested. This practice was normal and not at all shameful. In fact, the men who participated were some of the most well-respected men in the community, and they had normal families. Today we would call this child abuse. This exploitive practice was very common in Paul’s day, and certainly deserved a rousing condemnation. Could it be that when Paul condemns arsenokoitai he is condemning adult males who exploit children sexually? If so, then we still don’t know Paul’s feelings about homosexuality. He simply does not tell us here. Further evidence for this interpretation is the remainder of the list in I Timothy, in which nearly all the practices condemned there are exploitive practices, and so it seems that a condemnation of pederasty fits in naturally.
And of course, condemning pederasty is no more to condemn homosexuality than condemning heterosexual sexual abuse of minors is to condemn heterosexuality. These translations are guilty of the same sloppy scholarship, hasty conclusions, and homophobia that I accused them of in their attempted translation of malakoi. For this reason, I have great respect for the translators of the King James Bible – they knew that malakoi and arsenokoitai are ambiguous, and they preserved this ambiguity in their English translation. If Paul were thinking about something specific, we simply don’t know because he never tell us. Of course, that doesn’t stop the translators of the ESV and NIV. They apparently have special knowledge about the meaning of malakoi and arsenokoitai that God never shares with us mere mortals.
