It is possible that Paul meant malakos to refer to men lacking of basic moral virtue, as some other authors might have used the term. But Paul was Jewish, and so was first-century author Philo, who used the term to refer to 'gay' type effeminate guys who simulated the more female type role. I read a lie from an LGBT activist that tried to make Philo out to be LGBT movement friendly. The opposite is true. Here are a number of quotes from Philo in translation on this site compiled,
https://www.mountainviewchapel.com/...omosexual-behavior-in-paul-s-letters-part-two
So if Paul did not break down the male 'gay sex acts' into two types of actors and just used arsenokoitai for those involved in male-male sex acts, why would that make it okay? That would not make it any less sinful. Paul's recommendation in the next chapter is that to prevent fornication let every woman have her own husband and ever man have his own wife. It's either that or celibacy. Male-male sex partners or female-female sex partners is not okay.
I looked up occurrences of 'malakos' where they show up in Greek literature, as many references as I could find, many years ago. In some contexts, the idea that it referred to men who lacked male virtue could fit. In others, it fits more with the same-sex sex stuff.
Something else to keep in mind is that scholarship is ongoing. If more modern translations-- which tend to be translated by committees--- see malakos as related to homosexual activity, there may be scholarly reasons for that. Back in the 1990's, all the extant Greek literature was put onto a CD, so now scholars can find all usages of a term easily, not like in previous centuries.
You do not offer much to comment on here. If 'homosexual' refers to orientation rather than actions, there is a problem with using that term in translation.
No commentary anywhere in the world? Have you checked them all?
That's a spurious argument.
Clearly another spurious argument. Arguing that Paul didn't mean X because he could have used another word that would do away with ambiguity-- I occasionally see that line of argument. It's poor reasoning.
Philo called 'catchers' or the equivalent without specification of whatever act performed 'malakos'.
The scholar who put it together may have focused a bit more on the classical period. It does mention 'effeminate.' But if the word refers to moral weakness in this context, arsenokoites is there. Given that Paul wrote to Timothy about activities forbidden by the law and 'arsenos koiten' clearly, you also have a weak case. And the two dudes on the pottery with the oral situation going on there with arsenokoites on the pot is another piece of evidence.
Why would I be surprised that an individual who wants people to think that two men having sex is moral want to make arguments to justify murdering babies in the womb? The abortion passage there in the Old Testament was translated that way in the LXX translation before Christians or modern 'fundamentalists' came along. The Didache also forbids abortions.
When I wish to know the meaning of a word in Scripture, I do as stated in the 1689 Baptist confession of Faith:
"The infallible rule of interpretation of Scripture is the Scripture itself; and therefore when there is a question about the true and full sense of any Scripture (which are not many, but one), it must be searched by other places that speak more clearly."
I look to Jesus when tempted by the devil in Matthew 4 where He replied 3 times: "it is written", "it is written" and "Again it is written". So, following Jesus' lead, I'll include the Septuagint as well as the Greek NT, in seeking the biblical use of
malakos; I'll compare Scripture to Scripture, not Scripture to non-Scriptural writings when possible.
"In long-suffering is prosperity to kings, and a soft(
malakos) tongue breaks the bones." (Prov 25:15, LXXE)
"The words of cunning knaves are soft(
malakos); but they smite even to the inmost parts of the bowels." (Prov 26:22, LXXE)
"But what went ye out for to see? a man clothed in soft(
malakos) raiment? Behold, they that wear soft(
malakos) raiment are in kings' houses." (Matt 11:8, ERV)
"But what went ye out to see? a man clothed in soft(
malakos) raiment? Behold, they which are gorgeously apparelled, and live delicately, are in kings' courts." (Luke 7:25, ERV)
The better translations of
malakos that fit the preceding are as follows:
Reverend Arthur Marshall in the NIV/Grk-Eng Interlinear, with the literal rendering:
"Or know ye not that unrighteous men will not inherit [the] kingdom of God? Be not led astray; not fornicators nor idolaters nor adulterers nor voluptuous persons(
malakos) nor sodomites," Literal from 1976 NIV/Grk-Eng Interlinear
"Do you not realise that people who do evil will never inherit the kingdom of God? Make no mistake -- the sexually immoral, idolaters, adulterers, the self-indulgent(
malakos), sodomites" the 1985 New Jerusalem Bible
"Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate(
malakos), nor abusers of themselves with mankind" (1Cor 6:9, KJV)
Definition from the 1828 Webster's Dictionary to explain the KJV "effeminate":
"1. Having the qualities of the female sex; soft or delicate to an unmanly degree; tender; womanish; voluptuous.
The king, by his voluptuous life and mean marriage, became effeminate, and less sensible of honor."
Reading the biblical use of
malakos in the preceding verses, I'm forced to understand
malakos as "effeminate", "voluptuous persons" or "the self-indulgent". The ESV footnote explaining
malakos as
"the passive partner in consensual homosexual acts" just does not fit. I've already given the LSJ Greek for a "catamite" and it is not
malakos.
I went to the web site you gave, and it argues against the religious LGBTQ interpretation of the verses; but I stick to the standard principles of interpretation in my Bible study. I will quote 3 lines that the web site gave for effeminacy/
malakos. I'll assume the words "effeminate" in the quotes given by the web site are actually
malakos in Philo's writings. Here are the lines:
"as to effeminacy and delicacy, became like women in their persons"
"...having their eyes penciled beneath, and having their skins anointed with fragrant perfumes…and being well appointed in everything that tends to beauty or elegance, are not ashamed to devote their constant study and endeavors to the task of changing their manly character into an effeminate one..."
"being a guide and teacher of those greatest of all evils, unmanliness and effeminate lust"
I do NOT see a passive partner in male to male sex in those quotes, not at all. It is describing what came to be called a "metrosexual" today which the American Heritage English Dictionary defines as:
"A heterosexual man who is sensitive to stereotypic feminine interests and is very concerned with personal appearance, as in grooming and dressing stylishly."
Many years ago a gentleman from the Princeton Theological Seminary wrote out the ancient texts using
malakos and placed them online. They all were just like the quotes given from Philo, and do NOT show
malakos refers to a gay male of any type. Having worked in a large factory for years, I heard so often sarcastic, cutting remarks made about certain males who were sissified and had no courage. The remarks went something like, "If he was not such a (crude term for female genitalia) he'd have stood up to the lead man!" The person was not saying the guy was a gay. Another phrase I heard at times, "If XXX isn't gay, he sure missed his chance", or some such. The guy was not saying the person was gay, but that he was so sissified and effeminate, he acted like one.
Heinrich Meyer in the 19th century understood such quotes in a similar manner when he wrote in his Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament on the trying to make
malakos mean a catamite: "no sufficient evidence from the usage of the language (the passages in Wetstein and Kypke, even Dion. Hal. vii. 2, do not prove the point); moreover, such catamites (molles) were called πόρνοι or κίναιδοι."
Those who wish to make
malakos mean a catamite; must stick to the definitions:
Merriam-Webster "catamite: a boy kept by a pederast"
Online Oxford: "catamite: A boy kept for homosexual practices."
"kept" as defined in the Oxford:
"3.4 Support (someone, especially a woman) financially in return for sexual favors."
If, and I mean IF
malakos means a catamite, the New American Bible, Second Edition, translates it correctly:
"boy prostitute". But, I am convinced by study that the word in Paul is not meant as any type of gay person.
.
