Updated 18 September 2026
This essay examines the Greek word arsenokoitai, which appears in 1 Corinthians 6:9–10 and 1 Timothy 1:9–10. English Bibles have rendered the term in different ways, and those choices have influenced Christian discussions about same-gender relationships, exploitation and sexual ethics.
A note on historical language
The term's exact sense remains debated. This page describes major interpretive proposals rather than presenting one translation as settled fact. Historical discussions may use terms that are no longer preferred; the focus here is on the texts and their interpretation, not on labeling people.
Two approaches to the New Testament text
Readers commonly begin from one of two approaches:
- Translation-first reading. Some readers rely primarily on a familiar English Bible translation and understand its wording as a direct description of prohibited conduct.
- Language-and-context reading. Other readers return to the earliest available Greek witnesses and examine how words, social practices and literary surroundings may have shaped the passages. This approach is more demanding because the surviving evidence does not provide a universally accepted definition.
The word arsenokoitai
The word appears to combine arsen, commonly associated with “male,” and koitai, associated with beds or sexual relations. That construction alone does not establish the word's full meaning. A compound can acquire a narrower or broader sense through usage, and the surviving examples are limited.
Modern English terms for sexual orientation developed long after the New Testament period. Consequently, translating arsenokoitai with a modern identity label can make an ancient category appear more precise than the evidence allows. It may also obscure the difference between consensual adult relationships and abusive or exploitative practices.
Interpretive proposals
Scholars and translators have suggested several possibilities. They do not all carry the same evidential weight, and the proposals can overlap.
- Sexual exploitation. Some readings connect the term with coercive, abusive or economically exploitative sexual conduct.
- Commercial sexual activity. Other interpretations associate it with male prostitution or people who profited from prostitution.
- Abuse involving unequal power. Some commentators connect the term with relationships involving slavery, age imbalance or the abuse of young people. This proposal is concerned with exploitation, not with a blanket judgment about sexual orientation.
- A broader moral category. Some traditional translations understand the term more generally as male-male sexual conduct. Readers who adopt this view differ in how they apply it to modern relationships.
Because the word is rare, later occurrences and surrounding vocabulary are important but cannot remove every uncertainty. A responsible translation should distinguish what the text says from what later communities have inferred.
1 Timothy and questions of authorship
Most scholars date 1 Corinthians to the middle of the first century CE. The authorship and date of 1 Timothy are more contested. Many conservative Protestant readers attribute the letter to Paul and place it near the end of his life. Many other scholars place the Pastoral Epistles later and understand them as written by a follower or by an author writing in Paul's name.
That debate matters because vocabulary, social setting and theological emphasis may differ between documents from different periods. It does not by itself settle the meaning of arsenokoitai, but it explains why interpreters weigh the evidence differently.
References to Jesus in the Gospels
In the list of behaviors presented in Matthew 15:18–20, the Gospel writer names several forms of wrongdoing but does not separately mention same-gender sexual behavior. Readers draw different conclusions from that silence. Some see it as evidence that the issue was not central to Jesus' teaching; others caution that an omitted item cannot establish a complete ethical position.
The passage therefore contributes to the wider discussion, but it should not be used as a substitute for careful examination of the Pauline texts and their historical setting.
A careful conclusion
The New Testament passages are important sources for Christian moral reflection, but their interpretation involves ancient languages, limited evidence and disagreements about authorship and context. It is possible to take the texts seriously while acknowledging uncertainty about a particular word. Readers should avoid turning a disputed lexical question into a claim that any group of people is less worthy of dignity or equal treatment.