Romans 1:18-27 may be the most-used Clobber Passage of all. Virtually all North American gay and lesbian believers, once their orientation is known, have received it in a cut-and-paste email from concerned friends and acquaintances. If you’ve spent much time in the blogs you have probably seen the passage pasted into a thread, as though it actually constituted communication, ministry, witnessing or something.
Evangelicals don’t realize they are using Romans 1 for the exact opposite purpose that Paul wrote it. But they continue this egregious perversion of the text without ceasing. Paul’s intention for writing Romans 1 is easily demonstrated, but I’m sure they will somehow manage to avoid using the passage for the purpose Paul intended.
For the typical conservative minister, the primary use for Romans 1 is to prove that homosexuality is a vile sin, which proves to them that they must under no circumstance tolerate unrepentant gays and lesbians in their churches or, for some, in their families.
In fairness I must acknowledge that some evangelicals do struggle with the position their denominations and congregations expect them to uphold. One example of a conservative denomination beginning to grapple with their addiction to intolerance and judgmentalism is the Church of the Nazarene. While their recently published Pastoral Perspectives on Homosexuality is woefully inadequate, it is a beginning, It is evidence that God is speaking to them, and some number of them are beginning to listen.
Evangelicals use this passage to prove that non-celibate homosexuals are condemned by God and should not be tolerated in the church. Using Romans 1 as a pretext to pronounce God’s condemnation on homosexuals is like using a trowel as though it were an axe. They use the passage to do the exact opposite for which Paul intended it. Quite simply, they completely ignore the immediate context.
Repeat after me: “You’re taking the passage out of context.”
Any summarizing discussion of Romans 1 takes the passage out of context when there is no mention of Romans 2:1-4, which actually continues to verse 11. In Romans 2:1 Paul gives the “therefore” which explains the purpose for everything in the previous chapter. The word “therefore” tells you the reason Paul wrote everything that came before it. Everything leading up to Romans 2:1 is foundational to this main point.
Whereas…Whereas…Whereas…Therefore
Romans 2:1ff is what Paul wanted you to walk away with when you were finished. The first verse of Romans 2 is actually the conclusion of Romans 1.
Paul wrote Romans 1:18–2:1 to urge us to stop judging one another, but we manage to use it as the basis for judging people big time.. Here is Romans 2:1 in three translations:
Therefore, you have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge the other, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgment do the same things. (NIV)
Therefore you have no excuse, whoever you are, when you judge others; for in passing judgment on another you condemn yourself, because you, the judge, are doing the very same things. (RSV)
Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things. (KJV)
- Whereas all human beings are idolaters, and
- Whereas [most] human beings are fornicators, and
- Whereas [a few] human beings are homosexuals, and
- Whereas all human beings have a depraved mind,
- Therefore, stop judging one another.
So you see, in context, Paul was telling us that we are without excuse if, for example, we condemn homosexuals. because we are foolish gossips and heartless braggers, which are sins of the depraved, or useless. mind. (Interesting, the Greek word translated with the horrible sounding words ”reprobate” and “depraved” means “useless.”)
Paul did NOT write Romans 1 to prove how wicked gays and lesbians are. He wrote it to urge us all to stop all the judging and condemnation. If you insist on using Romans 1 to prove how evil homosexuals are, then “You are without excuse,” because your judgment is “inexcusable” (KJV). There is no excuse for judging one another. We have been warned.
All of us must stop judging one another. And I really do mean all of us.
Repeat after me, “You’re taking the passage out of context. Paul wrote that to teach us that judging one another is inexcusable–Romans 2:1.”
And if they go off on a tangent to justify their judging, simply repeat:
“That’s an interesting question, but you are taking the passage out of context. Paul wrote that to teach us that judging one another is inexcusable–Romans 2:1.”
“That may be, but you are taking the passage out of context. Paul wrote that to teach us that judging one another is inexcusable–Romans 2:1.”
Repeat as needed. If they remember nothing else you’ve said, they will remember that.
Romans 1 concludes with one of Paul’s famous sin lists. As you read the list, make a mental note of how many may apply to you.
Furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done. They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; they have no understanding, no fidelity, no love, no mercy. Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them. (Romans 1:28:32)
Romans 2:1 says that the person who judges another person, homosexuals for example, condemns himself because he who judges does the same thing. An evangelical asks, “So how does that work? I have never had sex with a man, but Paul says that I’ve done the same things gays and lesbians have done. What’s with that?”
That is fairly easy to explain. Look at the long list of “sins of the depraved mind.” There’s quite a variety there. I’m guilty of about half of them. I’m sure my friends would say I’m being too hard on myself, but I know my own heart. If I’m going to be brutally honest, I experience at various times 1) greed, 2) envy, 3) strife, 4) deceit, 5) malice, 6) gossip, 7) insolence, 8) arrogant, 9) boastful, 10) inventing evil, 11) foolishness, and 12) heartlessness, not to mention the 13) lust mentioned in Romans 1.
These are all sins of the mind that is reprobate, depraved, and useless. And why exactly do I have a reprobate mind, the mind that makes me a gossip and a fool? Paul says it is because I “did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God.”
Frankly this strikes me as a little odd, since I feel I do retain the knowledge of God, I do acknowledge God. It may mean that I am not consciously aware of God at all times, and those times when I am unaware of God cause me to slip back into my useless mind. There may be other explanations that work for other people.
What I have in common with murderers and liberals, rapists and fundamentalists, clergy and Jehovah’s Witnesses, is a depraved and useless mind.
It’s interesting. I’ve never had anyone say, “Ron, I’m concerned about you. You’re a gossip. Did you know that this is a sin of the depraved mind? Don’t you realize that because you gossip you deserve to die?”
“Ron, don’t you realize that your heartlessness toward that person is the product of a depraved and useless mind, and that because of it you deserve to die?”
“Ron, don’t you realize that the strife you cause is the product of a depraved and uesless mind, and that because of it you deserve to die?”
“Ron, don’t you realize that your foolishness is the product of a depraved and useless mind, and that because of it you deserve to die?”
But we are willing to mete out this logic of condemnation on others.
I know some of this sounds silly, but these sins of the depraved and useless mind really are the basis for Paul’s assertion that “you who pass judgment do the same things.”
And we all take turns forgetting to acknowledge God.
[Note: I know that many of you will find this discussion inadequate because it leave gays and lesbians as "sinners," and this is not acceptable to you. Well, it's not acceptable to me either. I don't believe that same-sex relationships are sinful, any more than heterosexual ones, which is why I am demonstrating the falsity of the Clobber Passages.
I may be wrong, and I'm sure many of you are certain that I am, but my suspicion is that Paul himself did believe that same-sex relationships were wrong, but he also believed that women were to keep silent in the church with their heads covered. If I am wrong, so be it, and please continue to share your understanding of what Paul is talking about with all that difficult language of his in your various venues.
I am also convinced that most gay males do not go through universal descent into sin described in Romans 1. I am persuaded that genetic, prenatal, and environmental factors are at work. But you know what? The why doesn't even matter to me. The overwhelming testimony in the gospels and epistles tell me not to judge and condemn. The topic of this post is to demonstrate the perverse misuse of Romans 1.
I have not analyzed the passage itself, but rather have refuted the use made of the passage by means of it's context.
What I think we agree on is that Christians are to refrain from judging and condemning one another. I am certain, from the passage's subsequent context, that Paul did not want us judging and condemning gays and lesbians.
[For more posts on the Clobber Passages, click here.]
[For posts on Gays and Lesbians in Luke, click here.]
[To return to Main Page, click here.]
Thanks, Ron! I really like this post. Some of us seem naturally inclined to think in analogies.
I picked up Love Wins via the BookPerk autographed copy offer. The interior format is a bit odd looking. I want to read one other book first (about fungus lol) and then I mean to read LW straightaway. I’m a little nervous that it will read like a TV infomercial. The format is spooking me. Please say something encouraging. Thanks.
Actually, Paul wrote Romans to the Gentile and Jewish church in Rome which was in inner revolt over who was in charge. Anything else we add to the text is our own doing, and out of context. I site two important books, What Paul Meant by Gary Wills, and In Search of Paul by John Dominic Crossan who states that Paul’s message, and that of Jesus was more an affront against imperial Roman Theology. In the 21st century, with all the scholarship available, its time to remove the “clobber” status, and no longer give it power.
Again, I have to admit I like that you are trying to defend homosexuality. But your explanation of this text is too off base for me to ignore and it is unfair to those who use it in good faith. Paul wrote many letters and said many things – and they’re often quite contradictory. In 1st Corinthians 5:1-8, Paul admonishes the Corinthians for not throwing a sexually immoral person out of the “church.” Is Paul judging? Or, in his mind, is he trying to keep fellow believers in right relationship? There is a difference between the radical judgement that Romans 1 is used for and those who, in good faith, use it to help their homosexual brothers and sisters see their lifestyle is not the right way. Romans 1 may not be able to be used as condemnation for a sin, but it is clear that it is used to clarify sexual immoralities as sins. Now, I disagree wholeheartedly with Romans 1 view of homosexuality since I believe it is based on a “Law” God had no part of, but the Christians who quote this are not all homophobic hatemongerers and using Romans 1 is not inherently homophobic or judgmental. If you are true to the text – not just Romans 1 or 2, but all of it as it is supposedly meant to be combined – you cannot just dismiss the implications it has against homosexuality.
I agree with much of your comment. I would like to reply to a couple of things.
First, I avoid rhetorical name-calling as much as possible. I don’t use the words “homophobic,” “homophobes” or their derivatives, I dont’ call people “haters” or “bigots.” I know for a fact that the vast majority of evangelicals feel no hatred, but have not reflected on the hatred communicated by their actions at the ballot box and the statements of their leaders. Name calling is destructive and only promotes shouting across the barriers.
Second, the focus of my post was to establish the illegitimate use to which Romans 1 is put. Unless I’m mistaken, I don’t think I dismissed the implications of Paul’s beliefs about homosexuality. There is, however, only so much you can do in the space of a single, 600-1200 word post!
If we acknowledge facts as we know them today, and start from a given that homosexuality is a natural part of God’s creation, we must read this verse of Romans in light of Paul’s knowledge and the customs of that day. We now know that homosexuality occurs naturally throughout nature and across all cultures in similar proportions. We now know psychological and social sciences all consider it as naturally occuring and do not look at it as deviant behavior. We can therefore only look at men giving up ‘natural relations’ as being unnatural for straight men . Homosexual men who have been attracted to the same sex since childhood have no such straight relations to give up. To use this verse of Romans as evidence that homosexualtiy is unnatural must start from that proposition itself, and is therefore projecting and preserving a prejudged position which has no basis in fact and knowledge we have today, which Paul did not have. He was likely not witness to commited, monogamous, loving same sex relations. He would have been aware of pagan practices where ‘natural relations’ were given up and men, women, and even children participated in communal orgies, giving themselves up to their passions, and of course he would have spoken against that. These people turned their back on God and wallowed in lust, so to speak. What is unnatural is for someone who was created differently than the majority, to act in a way that is contrary to their own nature. Orientation is no more a choice than is lefthandedness, whether you are gay or straight. Either choosing to act against their own nature is what is unnatural. That choice, going against who God made you to be, dishonors God’s own work, which is truly what those who use this passage and other clobber passages are doing when they use His word against His beloved creation. Who knows why God made ‘the gay’? The reality is that He did, for His wonderful purposes, which we can all see many of when we look with love. Gays bring love, mercy, care, nurture, creativity, balance, spice, all the living colors of the rainbow to a straight-jacketed, emotionally stilted, black and white thinking world. We are all the body just as we were made. Just imagine life without the richness of His diversity.
Romans 1:27 is a condemnation of bisexuality and, at it’s worst, forced prison sex. I’m sure we will see much more of Romans later.
@Ron – Fair enough, but I worry that your argument isn’t sound enough to liberate our gay brethren from Christian “clobbery.” At best, it just makes those who think it’s wrong realize they need to be a little nicer about it. Which, to the gay people I know, can be worse since the nicer ones can become self righteous and even more convinced they’re right because they’re supposedly correcting their fallen and unrepentant sinning gay friends in the same Christian love that Jesus would use. #barf
@John – a lot of what you say is assumed and unfounded. Plus, if you take Paul (or the Bible in general) in proper context, you would find certain liberal talking points to be irrelevant. First off, incest is “natural” across all species. Murder (or killing) is “natural” across all species. I question your use of the term natural because as you use it, tons of things are natural but that would never make them okay in a civilized society. I doubt you would even consider murder okay to God even though it is clearly “natural.” You are making bold, yet completely unproven claims about human nature. I would submit that sexuality (even the kind we find “deviant” like pedophilia) is nothing “natural” at all, but learned, and it just so happens certain kinds have already been pre-judged by society before we can even think about doing anything about what we “are.” Therefore, I think sexualities should be judged by their impact i.e. if two consenting adults make a decision, let them be. Scientists have not proven that homosexuality is “natural” from birth, so let’s not make arguments that potentially mislead people. And even if you didn’t explicitly say that, it is quite obvious that people listening to you will assume science backs up your comments, when it, as of today, does not.
Impulses are not the concern of the Hebrew text – tangible acts are. As such, I doubt that Paul fits your description – to say nothing of the fact that you have no idea whether or not Paul observed monogamous gay relationships. And, if we were to stay true to the information we actually have about Paul, we’d see it becomes highly more unlikely Paul would care about homosexual monogamy if he has (or hasn’t) seen it. Again, in 1st Corinthians 5:1-8, he urges the congregation to remove a man who is sleeping with his mother. Paul shares no concern about “love.” The act itself is disgusting to him, and the reason is irrelevant. He wants it to stop. Let’s not misuse Paul’s possible ignorance to give him a position we know, in good faith, Paul would never condone.
All of us have a remarkable capacity to shield ourselves from self truth. So I understand what you’re saying about “enlightened” fundamentalists and their “loving correction.” I have to agree with another poster that some of them (what percentage only God knows) make their declarations in good faith. Solomon might have thrown up his hands and said, “What is crooked cannot be straightened, what is lacking cannot be counted” (Ecclesiastes 1:15), that’s how complicated this mess is. Sometimes I’m tempted to, but so far I’ve managed to resist fatalistic resignation. Everyone is created in the Image of God, so God always has an inner witness, no matter what people are hearing from the pulpit.
It is not about what you think. Or even what I think. Or our host Ron. The enemy whispers lies to us all and I pray daily for wisdom and discernment.
Christopher, our God is living and powerful, and is able to speak to our hearts and minds through his Holy Spirit as we habitually live in love toward one another. Be cautious, my brother, and do not ascribe to Satan the work of the Holy Spirit. That is the one unforgivable sin.
You are absolutely right about not being judgmental. But your advice still overlooks the fact that homosexuality is list as an abomination (in Romans 1 and elsewhere). You are arming those who do not wish to deal with this particular sin.
Although homosexuality is listed as an abomination, there is nowhere that heterosexual marriage is ever listed in the same context. Brother, I think that alone speaks volumes. If it does not sound a shofur then maybe you need to revisit Genesis where male and female are created and are specifically instructed to form a bond of one flesh. There is no similar instruction to two males or two females.
Grant, you are absolutely correct about me arming people with scripture. When Satan the Accuser used scripture to dominate and intimidate Jesus, he responded with scripture. Young gay and lesbian believers often don’t know their Bible as well as those who make a hobby of attacking them from the pulpit, in political campaigns, and on the internet. The scripture tells me to speak up for these young people, the hapless gay and lesbian teenagers who sit in anti-homosexual churches and stakes.
Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves;
ensure justice for those being crushed.
Yes, speak up for the poor and helpless,
and see that they get justice. (Proverbs 31:8-9)
Conservative Christians closed ranks against my son when he came out in high school. He then attempted suicide three times. And he had never had sex–he was a virgin–but was eliminated from ministry in his high school Bible Club and in our church. He had not sinned by anyone’s standards, Grant, but these responsible Christians assumed he had, condemned him as guilty, and removed him from leadership.
Grant, I think you need to take another look at the Torah. Of course there are heterosexual marriages that are called abominations. I’m surprised that someone who seems to base his attacks on scripture would say such a thing. I have to assume you wouldn’t have made this sweeping misrepresentation of scripture if you had read the Torah for yourself. I could, of course, be mistaken. If you are going to use the Bible to falsely accuse gay and lesbian believers, please at least read the book you claim to base your accusations on.
(And if abominations bother you that much, please consider organizing a boycot of Red Lobster and Long John Silvers. Be real.)
Jesus is our Advocate, our Defense Attorney. “But if anyone does sin, we have an Advocate who pleads our case before the Father. He is Jesus Christ, the one who is truly righteous.”
Satan, on the other hand, is the Accuser of the Brethren, the Prosecutor.
Grant, if you are really interested in being Christ-like, then you should consider taking part in his ministry of advocacy and intercession. Like Jesus our Defense Attorney, start advocating for the people who, in your judgment, are so sinful, instead of siding with Satan and preparing the prosecution’s case.
And while you’re at it, ask yourself what it is that is so attractive to you about this accusing ministry, instead of the more Christ-like ministry of advocating for those who are being crushed, and are unable to speak for themselves. My son nearly died because of people who prefer this accusing ministry, relying on the testimony of false witnesses
I’ll address the anti-homosexualist addition of Genesis 1 to the Accuser’s case later.
THE OLD TESTAMENT SAYS “CURSED BE THE MAN WHO SLEEPS WITH ANOTHER MAN” ARE YOU SLEEPING WITH ANOTHER MAN?
Sorry Juan, but there is no verse in the Bible that says that in the OT or the NT. Is that something a friend or pastor quoted to you? He or she does not correctly handle the word of truth. Either that or you’re making things up.
I can tell you who is under a curse, however.
But those who depend on the law to make them right with God are under his curse, for the Scriptures say, “Cursed is everyone who does not observe and obey all the commands that are written in God’s Book of the Law.”
You are no longer under the Law, so don’t put other people under the Law either. The Law brings sin and death. Where there is no Law, sin is not taken into account–there is no transgression. Read Romans and Galatians, my friend.
Please follow this link: http://biblethumpingliberal.com/?p=457&preview=true
Sad to see such rationalizations and distortions.
Christopher, it’s easy to make general accusations, but far less easy to explain what you object to, and why you describe those things as rationalizations and distortions. It’s really quite impossible to reply to you..