re-work Ro 1:26.
Mamaditto speaks in blue.
************************************************
Because
of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged
natural (physin) relations for unnatural (paraphysin) ones. In the same way the
men also abandoned natural (physin) relations with women and were inflamed with
lust for one another. Romans 1:26
In the preceding passage the Greek words physin and paraphysin have been translated to mean natural and unnatural respectively. Contrary to popular belief, the word paraphysin does not mean "to go against the laws of nature", but rather implies action which is uncharacteristic for that person. An example of the word paraphysin is used in Romans 11:24, where God acts in an uncharacteristic (paraphysin) way to accept the Gentiles. When the Scripture is understood correctly, it seems to imply that it would be unnatural for heterosexuals to live as homosexuals and for homosexuals to live as heterosexuals.
διὰ τοῦτο παρέδωκεν αὐτοὺς ὁ θεὸς εἰς πάθη ἀτιμίας:
Through this gave beside them the God into passions of dishonor
αἵ τε γὰρ θήλειαι αὐτῶν μετήλλαξαν τὴν φυσικὴν
the and for females of them exchanged the natural
χρῆσιν εἰς τὴν παρὰ φύσιν
use into the(one) beside nature
This is an attempt to reason that homosexuality is wrong only when heterosexuals experiment with it and vice versa.
This approach is flawed for the following reasons:
(1)It presupposes that the Apostle Paul & his 1st century contemporaries had a 20th century politically-correct Western mindset. (It should be noted there are no words for "homosexual", "gay", "lesbian", or "sexual orientation" in Greek or Hebrew. The ancient world did not label people according to sexual proclivity.)
(2)Romans 1 deals with idolatry and the behaviors which stem from it due to the reprobate nature of the practitioners. The term "inflamed with lust" hardly describes someone merely participating in homosexuality for ceremony, ritual or convenience.
(3) The salient features of the Greek construction of this verse are the two words παρέδωκεν and εἰς. The former connotes the idea of giving up on something ; the latter of moving into a particular result. http://www2.mf.no/bibelprog/vines?ord=¯t0001194 ;
http://concordances.org/greek/1519.htm
(4) The Greek word ἀτιμίας literally means "negative honor" http://www2.mf.no/bibelprog/vines?word=¯t0000761
So, just from the first sentence of this verse, the Apostle Paul is presenting homosexuality as an illustration of behavior which results from the rejection of God's divine authority - despite the fact that He has revealed Himself in the minds of men and in the physical world. God, therefore, acquiesced, and let sin run its course.
First century extra-biblical history supports this view. For example,the hellenist Jewish philosopher Philo of Alexandria (20BC - 50AD) wrote of Sodom & Gomorrah thus: "... for not only did they go mad after women and defile the marriage bed of others, but also those who were men lusted after one another, doing unseemly things, and not regarding or respecting their common nature... the men became accustomed to be treated like women..."
On Abraham (commentary on the biblical texts of Moses) http://www.earlyjewishwritings.com/text/philo/book22.html
Another hellenist Jewish historian, Josephus ( 37-100AD), wrote of homosexuality: "But, then, what are our laws about marriage? That law owns no other mixture of sexes but that which nature hath appointed, of a man with his wife, and that this be used only for the procreation of children. But it abhors the mixture of a male with a male; and if any one do that, death is its punishment.
Against Apion an apology of Judaism. http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=J.+Ap.+2.25&fromdoc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0216
So, the modern-day revisionists are wrong. Both the literal Greek construction and first century secular history defend the traditional view that homosexual conduct is morally reprehensible.
