Romans 1:26-27

²⁶ Because of this, God handed them over unto shameful passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for [relations that are] against nature, ²⁷ and in the same way also the men forsook the natural use of the woman.  They became enflamed in their desires for one another, men with men doing shameless deeds, and receiving in themselves the penalty which is due for their error.

In our day, this is probably one of the most difficult passages in the epistle, and not because the meaning is ambiguous. In fact, it’s because the meaning is quite unambiguous. As a result, it gets a lot of people upset, and Christian teachers and preachers get in trouble when they read and expound upon it. There are a couple of ways to deal with the passage. One is to dismiss it, either as culturally irrelevant, or mistaken. The other is to accept it and come to terms with it. For the Christian who believes in the inerrancy, sufficiency, and authority of Scripture, there really is no choice: we must accept it and deal with it.

In context, we’re looking at the ways in which the wrath of God is shown against the unrighteous. The shameless deeds Paul describes are a sign of God’s judgment against those who reject the inward testimony to His existence and His right to be worshiped. Clearly not every non-Christian man or women practiced the things Paul describes, but the fact that this behavior was practiced and considered acceptable demonstrated their rebellion against God, and God’s wrath toward them.

The way Paul describes these “shameless deeds” (Greek: aischêmosuai) is delicate, but clear. These are not intellectual sins, but they are “passions” (Greek: pathos, from which we get the English word “pathos”). The same word is used of “suffering” (hence Jesus’ death is often referred to His Passion), which I think reflects the fact that these are deep and strongly felt emotions. The Greek is literally “passions of shame,” a grammatical construction which is often better translated “shameful passions,” implying that passions need not always be bad. You can be passionate about your spouse or significant other, your schoolwork, your church, even passionate for Christ and His glory. But that intense feeling can also be channeled in bad ways, as seen in “crimes of passion,” and terrorism. Adulterous relationships begin when passions get out of control, and a married person develops intense feelings for someone other than his/her spouse. Paul clearly teaches that it is this misdirected intensity of feeling that drives people to commit the acts he is about to describe.

Paul first addresses the acts of “women.” Interestingly, the term Paul uses here, thêleiai, means strictly females. It is not also used of “wives” (as the Greek word gunê, which can describe a “woman” as well as a “wife”). And these women “exchanged natural relations for relations that are against nature.” I have smoothed the Greek out a little here, since literally it reads “exchanged natural relations for those against nature.” The word translated “relations” has a semantic range (i.e., a range of possible meanings) that includes “use” and “usefulness,” as well as “relations” (most often in terms of sexual relations). The context determines the most appropriate meaning, and I think Paul’s meaning is crystal clear. Among the godless, females exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. He doesn’t go on to describe why these relations are “unnatural,” but I think we can determine that from what he goes on to say about the men.

Paul links the men’s acts with the women’s by saying “similarly” or “in the same way” (Greek: homoiôs). As with the females, he uses a generic term for males (arsên). With the men, or males, instead of an exchange, there is an abandonment, or a giving up of natural relations. But this time, the word for “relations” is better translated “use,” given that it is followed by “of the woman.” The phrase “natural use of the woman” sounds at best cold and clinical, and at worse extremely chauvinistic. I don’t think that’s the intent. Paul is clearly trying to avoid getting into salacious detail while still making his point. Bearing in mind that the context is sexual relations (remember, “in the same way”), Paul is saying that men abandoned the natural use of the woman within the relationship. In other words, men no longer wanted women to fulfill that role they would, by nature, take in sexual relations. Instead, they “became enflamed in their desire for one another”–I think that speaks for itself. And in case there’s any doubt as to what Paul means by “for one another,” he spells it out: men with men.

“Doing shameless deeds” is as far as Paul will go to describe exactly how these men acted upon their desire for one another. It is implicit that these “shameless deeds” were deeds they should have been ashamed of, but in their state of rebellion against God and uncontrolled passion, they didn’t care.

“Receiving in themselves the penalty which is due for their error” again seems a little ambiguous. Paul could simply be referring back to the wrath of God which is revealed against them, making their sin both the manifestation of God’s wrath, and the punishment they receive. Those committing these acts certainly wouldn’t see them as punishment, but that doesn’t mean that they aren’t, and perhaps the fact they don’t recognize them as God’s punishment only further demonstrates God’s judgment against them. When Christians sin, even if that sin is pleasurable, they recognize they have disobeyed and offended God. The recognition of sin comes with conviction, then repentance, all of which are gifts God gives to His children. The fact these are denied to the non-Christian, and that God gives them over to their passions, demonstrates that God’s judgment is against them.

I know I’ve gone long with these few verses, but given their controversial nature, I wanted to be sure we clearly understood their meaning. How we then apply these verses is another matter. One thing I think is certain: there is nothing in these verses that justifies hatred or violence toward homosexuals. It is right and proper, from these verses, that Christians object to and oppose the homosexual lifestyle. But to leap from that to treating those practicing that lifestyle with anything but compassion, love, and respect, goes way beyond what Paul teaches here (or elsewhere for that matter). Notice that it is God who judges them. The work of the Christian is to declare what God has judged, and then lovingly reach out to those who need to know not only God’s judgment, but also God’s love, grace, and salvation.

Next time, the third of the “handed over” passages, verses 28-32.