1 CORINTHIANS REFLECTION- Week 2

I almost wasn’t going to write this blog.

I ended up having more on this week than normal and some of my usual slots for writing something got taken up! I thought, however, that this week’s readings are particularly worth commenting on.

1 Corinthians 5-6 is full of delicate and important theological matters.

Important for the church in Corinth 2000 years ago, and important for us today.

With passages like this, which can be understood in particular ways, there are a few different key questions which help us figure out how to read it.

The first key question is what is actually being said and why? Then, we can address what we can learn from it.

Paul kicks off by addressing concerns about sexual behaviour and attitudes among the church in Corinth. We know that, culturally speaking, Corinth was a place with looser sexual morals, including the understanding that use of temple prostitutes was fairly common. The church, it seems, was not impervious to the attitudes of the wider society, or perhaps they never quite shook those old habits from their lives as gentiles. Either way, Paul begins with the example of someone sleeping with his step-mother. This might seem extreme or rare, but if we remember the passages of Leviticus 18 with regards to sexual behaviour, it also specifies this exact situation and says not to do it!

‘Do not have sexual relations with your father’s wife; that would dishonour your father. – Lev 18:8

So these things did happen, it seems! And Paul isn’t messing around – he says he’s already passed judgement to ‘hand this man over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord.’

An interesting theological position there, but that’s Paul for you!

What is especially eye-catching, and of great importance to the wider context in which these passages have been used, is the end of chapter 5.

Paul clarifies a point from what would have been his previous letter – he had said not to associate with sexually immoral people. What he meant, interestingly, was only ‘anyone who bears the name of brother or sister who is sexually immoral or greedy or an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler.’

The church are reminded that they are not the judge of those who are not in Christ, and those people are not to be held to the same standards as believers. This echoes Jesus in John’s gospel:

"Jesus said, 'If you were blind, you would not be guilty of sin; but now that you claim you can see, your guilt remains.'" John 9:41

This idea probably warrants its own blog or more, but for now I’ll just leave you to reflect on that and what we, as the Church in 2024, could learn from this.

This ‘vice’ list is extended, and detail added, in 1 Corinthians 6. The additions are:

‘adulterers, male prostitutes, men who engage in illicit sex, thieves’ – 1 Corinthians 6:9 (NRSV).

If you’re reading a translation that isn’t NRSV, you might find alternative phrases included like ‘men who have sex with men’ (NIV), or ‘men who practice homosexuality’ (ESV, NLT) or even ‘sodomites’ (NKJV).

It’s clear that our translators aren’t in agreement about what is actually being said.

This hinges on two particular Greek words. People have written whole books on just these two words; μαλακοὶ (Malakoi) and ἀρσενοκοῖται (Arsenokotai).

Malakoi means ‘soft ones/soft people’. This is a euphemistic term and doesn’t make sense on its own. Coupled with Arsenokotai, however, it creates a context.

Arsenokotai is literally translated as ‘man who goes to bed’.

The traditional view was to interpret these phrases, together, as meaning both the ‘active’ and ‘passive’ participants in male-male sexual activity.

This understanding would consider the passage as being counter-cultural; in the wider Greek society, only the ‘passive’ man was condemned. Men were meant to dominate and to be ‘passive’ or ‘effeminate’ or ‘soft’ was to be weak and dominated, which is not how men were meant to be. A condemnation of both partners speaks against the way of the wider culture.

When it is translated simply as ‘homosexuals’ or similar, however, it is taking the two terms and translating them together, rather than using the best practice of translating two separate terms which have a relationship to one another. There is not actually a Greek word which translates as ‘homosexual’ – the concept that we have today did not really exist in the same way. Homosexual activity was common, but not viewed in such a way that it defined a person or was used as a label for someone.

A further reason for the confusion is that Arsenokotai is only found once outside of this passage, in 1 Timothy 1:10. Aside from that, there are no known instances of this word appearing in any Greek literature, biblical or otherwise.

It’s very difficult to make a case for condemning a modern understanding of homosexuality based on a term that appears to be made up by Paul here, and whose meaning is ambiguous!

Irrespective, our application of these translations can have massive implications, and it’s worth noting that understanding the bible isn’t always as straightforward as just reading the English words on our pages.

This is why the NRSV translation opts for a seemingly different translation, referring to ‘illicit sex’.

A recommended ‘best translation’, however, would be closer to ‘male prostitutes and those who hire their services’. The language itself suggests this, but also the text goes on to discuss this issue specifically in 1 Corinthians 6:15-16.

We know that this was an issue in Corinth (I mentioned briefly the infamy of the Temple of Aphrodite in last week’s blog post). Paul, it seems, is warning the Church in Corinth of the harm that these things can cause them!

If you are reading the Message version, the language is less specific, but perhaps helpful in getting to the heart of what is being said.

Don’t you realize that this is not the way to live? Unjust people who don’t care about God will not be joining in his kingdom. Those who use and abuse each other, use and abuse sex, use and abuse the earth and everything in it, don’t qualify as citizens in God’s kingdom. 

This sentiment is then elaborated on again at the end of chapter 6.

Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, which you have from God, and that you are not your own? 20 For you were bought with a price; therefore glorify God in your body. – 1 Corinthians 6:19-20

Having spent some time addressing one form of Temple in Corinth, Paul cleverly uses that language to direct these Christians to more beneficial and healthy ways of thinking and behaving. Rather than worshipping things that cause harm, our bodies are temples for worshipping God.

It is our duty as Christians to ‘glorify God in our bodies’. Paul cites both food and sex as things which can control us and encourages the church to fight against that ‘domination’.

So, after all of that, what can we take away?

Paul puts this message into more straightforward terms in what he writes to the church in Rome:

 I appeal to you therefore, brothers and sisters, on the basis of God’s mercy, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your reasonable act of worship. 2 Do not be conformed to this age, but be transformed by the renewing of the mind, so that you may discern what is the will of God—what is good and acceptable and perfect. – Romans 12:1-2

This is, then, a message that transcends his own context and can speak to us today.

We have the opportunity to worship God with our bodies; how we treat them and what we do with them. We cannot simply follow the cultural practices around us, but we should seek to discern what God wants for us and what is good for us!