It may come as a surprise to some people, but the Bible never uses the word homosexual. Actually the Bible, in the original languages, is curiously devoid of any English words whatsoever. The GLBT population would like you to believe that they have definitive proof that the Bible does not really contain negative references to homosexual behavior. Since they are the ones who finally got people excited about marriage, it seems appropriate for me as a biblical Christian to at least attempt to address the issue this week. I do not have time to cover everything, but we can look at three short passages.
1 Timothy 1:8-11
In this passage, Paul is telling Timothy that the law is used to restrain lawbreakers. Lawbreakers are those who act contrary to sound doctrine according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God. One of the categories of people mentioned is translated variously as "men who practice homosexuality", homosexuals, perverts, and sodomites. The word is formed from two Greek words meaning "man" and "bed". The word we translate "bed" often is classically used as a verb coyly referring to the action a man performs with a woman in a bed. It refers to sexual intercourse or a seminal emission. In classical usage, when the two words appeared together, they were used in a phrase like "men bedding men like other men bed women." Paul squished these words together to make a new word roughly meaning something like "the man-bedders." I.e. men who have sexual intercourse with other men. So, no - the word "homosexual" does not appear in the Bible, but "man-bedder" does. I think it is the same thing really.
1 Corinthians 6:9-10
This is part of a larger, beautiful passage about our liberation from sinful bondage through Jesus Christ. The same word, "man-bedder", comes up again in 6:9 describing an unrighteous class of people that "will not inherit the kingdom of God." Today, I am not in the business of completely unpacking that phrase, but a brief word needs to be said - I think that homosexuals can become Christians. Verse 11 says simply that some Christians were previously "man-bedders." I differ from homosexuals in that I believe that once you accept Christ and his Mastery or Lordship over your life, you will cease homosexual behavior (like the others mentioned in verse 11). Whatever you think about Paul, it seems pretty clear that he was referring to homosexuals (defined as those men who have sex with other men).
Romans 1:26-27
This one is my favorite to refute because it gets at the heart of the worldview issue. Part of a larger passage about following God's desires and not selfish desires, these two verses are dealing specifically with idolatrous people who worship the creature rather than the Creator. Homosexuality is described as a selfish desire to please oneself, rather than God. This is the essence of sin. Paul describes homosexuals as having "degrading passions," and a "debased mind." Specifically though, we are concerned with whether or not the Bible refers to homosexuals, per se.
In verse 26, the word "lesbian" is not used, but the literal phrase is "for their females exchanged the natural function of sexual intercourse for that which is contrary to nature." Sure, this may mean something else, but in context the easy reading is that we are talking about lesbianism.
In verse 27, the words "gay" or "homosexual" are not used. But a literal rendering would be: "In the same way, men also abandoned the natural function of sexual intercourse with women, they were inflamed in their lustful passions for one another, men in men working out shameless acts." Whew. "Men in men working out shameful acts." Gotta tell ya, sounds like homosexuality to me.
So, briefly, we see instances of "man-bedders", "contrary to nature women", and "men in men." All these categories of behavior are condemned in scripture. To defend homosexual behavior by appealing to the lack of a word strictly meaning homosexual is linguisticly unjustifiable. Imagine a textbook from Sociology 101 in the year 3050 A.D. :
~ In the American times, there were many who denounced "gays" and "homosexuals." The gays were simply happy people - not any different than anyone else, but more pleasent to be around due to their liberal attitudes and flair for fashion and style. There was a different group called homosexuals - who apparently wanted to live "with the same sex." This practice of men living with men was common throughout the culture, particularly on college campuses in units known as fraternaties. There is no reason to interpret these terms as "men having sex with men." Let us state it strongly - there is no word in the ancient world that can be translated as the modern term manbedder. Attempts to discredit the current practices of manbedders by appealing to ancient literature is misguided and uninformed. ~Give me a break. Stop reading modern notions of gay theory into our ancient literature. Please stop with the "it is not really in there" lunacy.