IS THE BIBLE AGAINST HOMOSEXUALITY?

A scholarly response on what the Hebrew and Aramaic Bible says concerning LGBTI people.

Desktop View: Clicking the aqua colored references should direct you to a different website for the Bible quotation. You can close the pop up window afterwards to return to my website. I generally only linked the Deuterocanonical references where I didn't fully write out the verse.
Mobile or Tablet View: If you click on the Bible reference, just click on the back "button" on your Android phone or the back "arrow" on your Tablet to return to my website. (Sorry, I don't know what the button looks like on an iphone or ipad). Please download and add the Bible Scripture Tagger Chrome Extension. That way you can still see the Bible reference verses during any INTERVAL between when I republish my website with the updates and the re-adding of the Bible Reference Tagger later.
1st Corinthians 6:9
21. “Do you not know that the wicked shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not misled; neither the immoral (prostitutes) nor idolaters nor adulterers nor the corrupt, nor [men] who lie with males ...” (1 Corinthians 6:9 Lamsa). The Aramaic word mḥab-le (plural) is a participle noun which Dr. Lamsa translated as "the corrupt" here. That masculine spelling and pronunciation is the same for its active and passive meanings. Both its active and passive meanings fit the "wicked" who won't inherit the kingdom of God. So I believe both the active and passive meanings are meant here because Paulus could have singled out the active meaning by using the word mḥab-la-ne "corrupters (destroyers, harmers)" (Ex. 12:23; Jer. 22:7; 1 Cor. 10:10; etc.). Or he could have singled out the passive meaning by using the word mith-ḥab-la-ne "the corrupted ones (depraved, debauched)" or literally: "those being corrupted" or "those becoming corrupted (depraved)." Participle Nouns carry the personified meaning(s) of the Pael verb conjugations, Participle(s), etc. - feminine or masculine plus either active or passive. So, as an active participle noun, mḥab-la [מחַבּלָא] (MS) is from the Pael Masculine Singular Active Participle mḥab-bil [מחַבִּל] "acting corruptly" or "corrupting (destroying, etc.)." A final "a" was added at the end to make it a noun; which also altered the pronunciation a bit. Thus mḥab-le [מחַבּלֵא] (MP) means: "those acting corruptly" (cf. Neh. 1:7) or "those acting lawlessly" (GrkOT Translation) or "those offending" (cf. Job 34:31) or "those corrupting (harming, destroying)" (cf. Eccl. 5:6; Isa. 10:27; 13:5; etc.) and "those causing to be corrupted" (cf. Ben Sira 49:4 [5]; 2 Chron. 27:2 - Heb. Hiphil root: hish-khith). The passive participle noun mḥab-la [מחַבּלָא] (MS), is made from the Pael Masculine Singular Passive Participle mḥab-bal [מחַבַּל] "corrupted" or "a corrupted one." A final "a" is also added at the end to make it a Definite Participle Noun; which altered its pronunciation. Mḥab-le [מחַבּלֵא] (MP Noun) refers to those corrupted by heresy or have wrong opinions. It's in the intensive form; so these people are really "corrupted." The statement mḥab-bal rai-ya-neh "his mind was [is] corrupted" refers to "one of corrupt opinions, i.e. a heretic" (see 2 Cor. 11:3). Subsequently, a person's conduct can also be corrupted (see Gen. 6:11, etc.); and hence mḥab-le also refers to "the morally corrupt(-ed)" or "the debauched (depraved)." This would be the closest in meaning to how it was translated into Greek as malakoi "the morally weak, those lacking in self-control, unrestrained, voluptuous, etc."
Sometimes when a verb conjugates or makes a participle, the resulting word matches the same spelling and pronunciation of other words; but they are different words and can be of the opposite gender. For example, as a participle noun, Mḥab-bil [מחַבִּל] is the indefinite spelling for: "a corrupter." MḤAB-LA [מחַבּלָא] "the corrupter (etc.)" is the definite pronunciation. MḤAB-LA [מחַבּלָא] is also the definite pronunciation for: "the corrupted one." This participle noun as indefinite is mḥab-bal [מחַבַּל] "a corrupted one." Thirdly, MḤAB-LA [מחַבּלָא] is also the feminine indefinite pronunciation for: "[a] corrupted [-one]" [past tense] and "a corrupter (one corrupting)" [active tense]. The feminine definite pronunciation is Mḥabil-ta [מחַבּלתָּא]. I give a couple examples of this (FS) Participle in the next paragraph. It has the same meanings as either a participle verb, an adjective or as a participle noun as the (MS) participle noun here at 1st Corinthians. The Aramaic Feminine Participle appears at the following two places. As an active participle, mḥab-la (singular), means "destroying" at (Bar Sira 21: 2 [3]); which says: "Falsehood (a lie, treachery) is like the teeth of the lion. And it destroys the souls of men." As a passive adjective, mḥab-la (singular), means “corrupted” at Titus 2:7-8; which says: “... and in your teaching, let your word (statement, message) be whole (sound), which is sincere (correct) and not corrupted; and no one shall be despising it [i.e. your message (teaching)], that he who stands against us shall be ashamed when he will not be able to speak against us [any] hateful thing.” (Peshitta). The Masculine Participle appears at (Isaiah 1:4) and describes Israel as "corrupting children," i.e. “children [who are] acting corruptly (mḥab-le).” At (Matt. 6:19), we read that the treasures on the earth are what the moth (worm, maggot) and the rust (eater) destroys (mḥab-lin) ..." It appears as a participle noun at (Song 2:15); which says: "Catch for us the foxes, the foxes which are small, the destroyers (spoilers) of the vineyards ..." We see from that verse that mḥab-le [מחַבּלֵא] is equivalent to the Hebrew Participle [-Noun] me-ḥab-be-lim or me-khab--lim [מְחַבְּלִים]. Mḥab-le also refers to the "crazy ones" or those who do abnormal things. This last meaning was given to me by a native Aramaic speaker. This meaning has some merit because Aramaic participle nouns have the personification meaning(s) of their verb root, and sometimes, as in this case, the combined meaning of their verb root and the accompanying noun. Smith's Syriac Dictionary has the verb root ḥwal [חבַל] in the Ethpaal (Ithpaal) form (i.e. ith-ḥab-bal [אִתחַבַּלו]) in the statement ai-len ith-ḥab-bal pur-sha-nay-hon "those whose divisions were corrupted" and refers to "those who have lost their reason." So Mḥab-le is also a good word to portray a picture to us of "crazy, depraved lawless persons;" which make up these people. However, I don't believe Paul is referring to people that are just "crazy" and not "wicked." That doesn't make any sense because people can't help it if they are crazy.
There is no evidence that m'ḥab-le means “effeminates” or “homosexuals” anywhere in the Bible. 1st Note: At Isaiah 1:4, the Aramaic word mḥab-le has the active meaning based on the source Hebrew text. It describes Israel as "corrupting children," i.e. “children who are acting corruptly (corrupting, etc.);” which Dr. Lamsa translates as: “children that are corrupt.” For Titus 2:8, a believer's word and teaching are to be correct “and not being corrupted;” is what the Aramaic literally says. The children who are acting corruptly (lawlessly) could also be committing ḥawulah or ḥavulah [חֲבוּלָה] "a hurtful act (crime)" (Dan. 6:22 [23] BDB). Some of them could be: "children who are harming." We see that verb having that meaning elsewhere. Plus there are the Shemitic words khe-vel [חֶבֶל] / ḥwala [חבָלָא]: "harm, hurt, destruction, etc.."
2nd Note: Mḥab-la [מחַבּלָא] (MS or FS noun, Participle or Adjective and Active Verb) is from the root verb ḥwal [חבַל]; which means: “to destroy, corrupt, writhe, etc.” The Aramaic letter beth has a "b" and a "w" sound. The Aramaic word ḥwal is the same as the Hebrew word kha-val [חָבַל] (Or Strong’s pronunciation: kha-bal, #2256). Kha-ḅal has the same meanings of ḥwal that I have seen in the Aramaic Bible. The Hebrew QAL and Piel conjugations = the Aramaic Pael conjugations of the verb root (ḥwal) in the second paragraph verb examples. The Hebrew root word sha-khath is also a synonym for kha-val and is likewise translated into Aramaic with the PAEL conjugation of ḥwal (i.e. ḥab-bil [חַבִּל], ith-ḥab-bal [אִתחַבַּל], mḥab-la [מחַבּלָא], etc.).
3rd Note: The Aramaic word Mḥablutha literally means: "corruption (destruction, depravity)" [Wis. 11:20; Bar Sira 12:11; etc.]. The ending part -utha puts a verb or participle in "the state of being" form. That means a final ending of "-ion, -ity, -ness or sometimes -ing" is added to a past tense verb or participle. So in this case, the final -ed of the passive participle "corrupt•ed" is deleted and the ending -ion is added. Corruption means: "the state of being corrupted." Its synonym is mḥablanutha. I'm adding this note because Biblical usage doesn't define this word as: "sodomy" and neither is that meaning implied by this word. So don't assume it has that meaning or that the participle noun mḥab-la means: "sodomite." Mḥab-la-na (Active Participle Noun) and mith-ḥab-la-na (Passive Participle Noun) are mḥab-la's synonyms or variant same words. The ending part -na is from ha-na "this (the)." It's another way to make the participle "definite" plus show us that the participle noun is masculine versus feminine. The feminine word for "this (the) is ha-de.
The Aramaic pronunciation of shach-bay am dich-re is translated as [men] who lie with males (Lamsa). Dr. Lamsa adds the word men in our English translation and gives the literal meaning of the Aramaic words; which isn't correct in this case. The Aramaic word shchu (shchew) [ܫܟܸܒܼ] or shcheb (shchab) [ܫܟܲܒ) ܫܟܸܒ)] (Syriac Pron. / Smith’s Syr. Dict.) has a good and a bad meaning. These Aramaic words as voweled (pointed) should read: “those who commit rape with men,” or simply “those who rape men.” Or translated as "those who rape a man," with the last word re-voweled into the singular pronunciation since there isn’t any extra grammar indicating that the word is plural. This interpretation will be discussed further down. The bad meaning is correct because the context is about the "wicked" who will not enter the kingdom of God. Or if Paul is referring to the gang rape of a man, then the construction and joining of the following two words would also be an indicator that shchuw carries the meaning of "to rape" and not: "to lie (have sex) with [consentingly]." There are at least three other Aramaic words that I am aware of that have a good and a bad meaning. They don't carry their literal meaning in certain contexts or when accompanied by a distinguishing word or words. I will give a few examples at the very end even though these words are rare in the Bible. Shchuw (Shcheb) carries the meaning of "rape" in the following instances. It appears in the Ithpaal form as ish-tac-cow in the Aramaic Targums of Isaiah 13:16 and Zechariah 14:2. So even though ish-tac-cow literally means "to be lain with;" that meaning changes into "to be raped" in those contexts. Isaiah 13:16 says "their infants will be ripped up before their eyes, their households will be plundered, and their women will be raped." Zechariah 14:2 says "...and the women will be raped, and half of the city will go into exile..." Shchuw is also used in the phrase: “And one of them came seeking to rape the wife of that man” (A Dictionary of Jewish Palestinian Aramaic, first edition by Michael Sokoloff). Lastly, shchuw appears in the sexual usage at (Genesis 35:22) and appears to carry the meaning of "rape" based on Jacoḅ's negative prophecy of his son at (Gen. 49:4) and the statement at (1 Chron. 5:1). The book of Jubilees also details that it was rape (Jub. 33:4-7 [4-6]). There Bilhah screams (calls out) when she realized that she was raped. A sure sign that she protested his actions. Compare the laws concerning the rape of a betrothed virgin (Deut. 22:23-27). At verse 7 [6], Hebrew Jubilees specifically states that Reuḅen raped (ענה) her.
Shchuw is the same as the Hebrew word sha-cav. It should be noted that the Hebrew word sha-cav also has a good and a bad meaning, and hence also means "to rape" at (Zech. 14:2; Isa. 13:16; & possibly Deut. 28:30). Sha-cav appears in the Nifal form as tish-sha-cav-nah "they shall be raped" in the side margin of the Masoretic Text as a variant reading at those places. The text on www.chabad.org lists tish-sha-cav-nah as the original reading but that it is (written tish-sha-gal-nah). Furthermore, Aramaic and Hebrew don't have a separate word that specifically means "raped." They would use another word, which in a given context or with accompanying word(s), would make it mean "raped." For example, Hebrew could use the word a-nah "he afflicted [mentally or physically]." In a given context, that word could mean "forced, raped" (Judg. 20:5; 2 Sam. 13:12, 22). Or Aramaic could use the word "reproached." That word also means "raped" in a supporting context (Isaiah 13:16; Zechariah 14:2 P'shitta). Finally, Aramaic could also use the synonyms dmik am or shchuw am, which literally mean: "he laid with." Those words also mean "he raped" in a given context (see Gen. 35:22). In the context Paulus gives, without any other details, the best word for Paulus to use to express "rapers of men," would be to use a verb and word that means "to lie with." The reader would be able to tell if the "lying with" was "by force" or "by consent" because Paulus is talking about the bad (wicked) people. If Paulus had used the expression "reproachers of men" in this context, then those words could be misunderstood to mean: "those who reproach (insult) men" (see Lk. 11:45). Or if Paulus used the expression "afflicters of men," without any context to let us know if the "affliction" is mental, physical or sexual, then readers could misunderstand those words. Affliction can be "distress, torment, suffering, oppression, calamity, etc. This Aramaic phrase used here at 1 Corinthians 6:9 may have the interpretation of: “those who commit rape with a man” or simply “those who rape a man.” Generally, there needs to be a plural pronoun to let the reader know if the second noun is plural, though not always. A plural pronoun isn’t needed if the second noun’s plural spelling is different than its singular spelling. Or if the second noun is performing an action and the verb is written plural.
Most Aramaic nouns are spelled the same in their plural and singular form. Plural or singular pronouns attached to the verb will let the reader know if the noun is plural or singular. When the word “of” is used between a [verbal] noun and another noun, the absence of the pronoun them means the second noun is singular. If the pronoun them (usually attached to the first noun) appears before the second noun, then that second noun is plural. In the above example, the Aramaic literally says: “rapers of with a man (dich-ra).” The verbal noun (rapers) is in the plural construct form, so it is clearly plural. Since there is no plural pronoun afterwards to indicate that the second noun is plural, then it may not be. The following are a few examples of the regular or normal way to express a statement which has two plural nouns connected with the word “of.” “…the souls of the disciples…” (Acts 14:22) is literally in the Aramaic: “the souls of them - of the disciples …” “…the words of the prophets…” (Acts 15:15) is literally in the Aramaic: “…the words of them – of the prophets …” A third example is at Acts 15:10: “the necks of the disciples…” The Greek translator translated the word “necks” in the singular though, as “neck.” The meaning of both the Aramaic and Greek text here is the same. The Aramaic text isn’t saying that the disciples have more than one neck. Neck is plural here because there is more than one person spoken of in the phrase. Here are some examples of the same construction used in 1 Corinthians 6:9. In some of the examples I left the word “of” out. Revelation 17:8 says: “inhabitants (pl.) upon the earth (sing.).” Revelation 18:17 says: “all the passengers (pl.) in the ship (sing.).” Revelation 19:5 says: “worshippers (pl.) of His Name (sing.).” Additionally, there are some examples with this verbal noun form in which the second noun sounds like it should be plural to an English speaker, but it is not. We know this because at Revelation 22:15, the Greek text has the second noun in the singular form as in: “makers (pl.) of a lie (sing.).” And at Job 13:4, the phrase says: “speakers (pl.) of a lie (sing.).” We know that the word “lie” is singular because the original Hebrew text has the word “lie” in the singular form.
Additionally, there are some occurrences where nouns are pointed plural in the Aramaic New Testament when they should be pointed singular. I know they are singular because there is nothing in the text suggesting that the noun is plural. Additionally, the Greek New Testament translated those words singular. These errors occur frequently in the Aramaic Old Testament Translation and in Dr. Lamsa’s Translation. The Aramaic Old Testament is very often a literal translation of the Hebrew and doesn’t always have the additional grammar needed to let the reader know if the noun is singular or plural. Dr. Lamsa many times translated a noun plural when the Hebrew noun is singular and vice versa. Since the Aramaic Old Testament is a translation of the Hebrew, then the Aramaic noun is singular when the Hebrew noun is singular and plural when the Hebrew noun is plural (in most cases). I haven’t come across this problem of not knowing if a noun is singular or plural in the Aramaic New Testament; which was originally written in Aramaic and is very precise. Though I do have to say that I may not agree with how a noun is pointed (voweled) and translated. Thus I usually have my own opinion on whether I believe the noun is plural or singular. I'm undecided here at First Corinthians 6:9 though. Maybe both meanings are meant. We know from the Bible that there is such a thing as gang rape where men attempted or succeeded in lying with one or more person. The Bible gives examples of this in the story of Sodom and of the men of Gibeah.
 The following are a few words that have a good and a bad meaning, and hence their literal meaning isn't always meant. The Aramaic word row-ba can have a good meaning of "sound, shouting" (Rev. 21:4 Crawford; 2 Ki. 11:13) or a bad meaning of "clamor" (Eph. 4:31; Judith 6:1). The Aramaic word yaṣ-ra can have the good meaning of "disposition, inclination, bent" (Deut. 31:21) and the bad meaning of "the bad disposition [inclination, bent]" (4 Macc. 3:4). Ḥsa-ma can mean "zeal, competition" and "jealousy, envy, a grudge." The Comprehensive Aramaic LexiconShchuw [ܫܟܸܒܼ] – to rape (Galilean Aramaic), kill (Jewish Babylonian) Is the Bible Against Homosexuality? by Preacher Mattai © (Ɔ) 2016. All rights reserved.
Help financially support this Website so it will continue for future generations. The "Donate" allows you to give a one time or monthly donation.
FREE-WEBSITE-TRANSLATION, if you need it, initially translates the home page when the website address is copied & pasted into the box. It will translate the other pages also but you will need to paste in the full address of the other pages (i.e. /folder name/sub-page name).