Kejadian 19:5

19:5 They shouted to Lot, ¹  “Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us so we can have sex ²  with them!”

Imamat 18:22-28

18:22 You must not have sexual intercourse with a male as one has sexual intercourse with a woman; ³  it is a detestable act. ⁴  18:23 You must not have sexual intercourse ⁵  with any animal to become defiled with it, and a woman must not stand before an animal to have sexual intercourse with it; ⁶  it is a perversion. ⁷ 

Warning against the Abominations of the Nations

18:24 “‘Do not defile yourselves with any of these things, for the nations which I am about to drive out before you ⁸  have been defiled with all these things. 18:25 Therefore ⁹  the land has become unclean and I have brought the punishment for its iniquity upon it, ¹⁰  so that the land has vomited out its inhabitants. 18:26 You yourselves must obey ¹¹  my statutes and my regulations and must not do any of these abominations, both the native citizen and the resident foreigner in your midst, ¹²  18:27 for the people who were in the land before you have done all these abominations, ¹³  and the land has become unclean. 18:28 So do not make the land vomit you out because you defile it ¹⁴  just as it has vomited out the nations ¹⁵  that were before you.

Ulangan 23:17-18

Purity in Cultic Personnel

23:17 There must never be a sacred prostitute ¹⁶  among the young women ¹⁷  of Israel nor a sacred male prostitute ¹⁸  among the young men ¹⁹  of Israel. 23:18 You must never bring the pay of a female prostitute ²⁰  or the wage of a male prostitute ²¹  into the temple of the Lord your God in fulfillment of any vow, for both of these are abhorrent to the Lord your God.

Yudas 1:22

1:22 And have mercy on those who waver;

Yudas 1:1

Salutation

1:1 From Jude, ²²  a slave ²³  of Jesus Christ and brother of James, ²⁴  to those who are called, wrapped in the love of ²⁵  God the Father and kept for ²⁶  Jesus Christ.

Kolose 1:9

Paul’s Prayer for the Growth of the Church

1:9 For this reason we also, from the day we heard about you, ²⁷  have not ceased praying for you and asking God ²⁸  to fill ²⁹  you with the knowledge of his will in all spiritual wisdom and understanding,

Efesus 4:19

4:19 Because they are callous, they have given themselves over to indecency for the practice of every kind of impurity with greediness. ³⁰ 

Efesus 5:12

5:12 For the things they do ³¹  in secret are shameful even to mention.

Efesus 5:1

Live in Love

5:1 Therefore, be ³²  imitators of God as dearly loved children

Titus 1:10

1:10 For there are many ³³  rebellious people, idle talkers, and deceivers, especially those with Jewish connections, ³⁴ 

Yudas 1:7

1:7 So also ³⁵  Sodom and Gomorrah and the neighboring towns, ³⁶  since they indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural desire ³⁷  in a way similar to ³⁸  these angels, ³⁹  are now displayed as an example by suffering the punishment of eternal fire.

Yudas 1:10

1:10 But these men do not understand the things they slander, and they are being destroyed by the very things that, like irrational animals, they instinctively comprehend. ⁴⁰ 

[19:5]  ¹ tn The Hebrew text adds “and said to him.” This is redundant in English and has not been translated for stylistic reasons.

[19:5]  ² tn The Hebrew verb יָדַע (yada’, “to know”) is used here in the sense of “to lie with” or “to have sex with” (as in Gen 4:1). That this is indeed the meaning is clear from Lot’s warning that they not do so wickedly, and his willingness to give them his daughters instead.

[19:5]  sn The sin of the men of Sodom is debated. The fact that the sin involved a sexual act (see note on the phrase “have sex” in 19:5) precludes an association of the sin with inhospitality as is sometimes asserted (see W. Roth, “What of Sodom and Gomorrah? Homosexual Acts in the Old Testament,” Explor 1 [1974]: 7-14). The text at a minimum condemns forced sexual intercourse, i.e., rape. Other considerations, though, point to a condemnation of homosexual acts more generally. The narrator emphasizes the fact that the men of Sodom wanted to have sex with men: They demand that Lot release the angelic messengers (seen as men) to them for sex, and when Lot offers his daughters as a substitute they refuse them and attempt to take the angelic messengers by force. In addition the wider context of the Pentateuch condemns homosexual acts as sin (see, e.g., Lev 18:22). Thus a reading of this text within its narrative context, both immediate and broad, condemns not only the attempted rape but also the attempted homosexual act.

[18:22]  ³ tn Heb “And with a male you shall not lay [as the] lyings of a woman” (see B. A. Levine, Leviticus [JPSTC], 123). The specific reference here is to homosexual intercourse between males.

[18:22]  ⁴ tn The Hebrew term תּוֹעֵבָה (to’evah, rendered “detestable act”) refers to the repugnant practices of foreigners, whether from the viewpoint of other peoples toward the Hebrews (e.g., Gen 43:32; 46:34; Exod 8:26) or of the Lord toward other peoples (see esp. Lev 18:26-27, 29-30). It can also designate, as here, detestable acts that might be perpetrated by the native peoples (it is used again in reference to homosexuality in Lev 20:13; cf. also its use for unclean food, Deut 14:3; idol worship, Isa 41:24; remarriage to a former wife who has been married to someone else in between, Deut 24:4).

[18:23]  ⁵ tn See the note on v. 20 above.

[18:23]  ⁶ tn Heb “to copulate with it” (cf. Lev 20:16).

[18:23]  ⁷ tn The Hebrew term תֶּבֶל (tevel, “perversion”) derives from the verb “to mix; to confuse” and therefore refers to illegitimate mixtures of species or violation of the natural order of things.

[18:24]  ⁸ tn Heb “which I am sending away (Piel participle of שָׁלַח [shalakh, “to send”]) from your faces.” The rendering here takes the participle as anticipatory of the coming conquest events.

[18:25]  ⁹ tn Heb “And.” The Hebrew conjunction ו (vav, “and”) can be considered to have resultative or even inferential force here.

[18:25]  ¹⁰ tn Heb “and I have visited its [punishment for] iniquity on it.” See the note on Lev 17:16 above.

[18:26]  ¹¹ tn Heb “And you shall keep, you.” The latter emphatic personal pronoun “you” is left out of a few medieval Hebrew mss, Smr, the LXX, Syriac, and Vulgate.

[18:26]  ¹² tn Heb “the native and the sojourner”; NIV “The native-born and the aliens”; NAB “whether natives or resident aliens.”

[18:27]  ¹³ tn Heb “for all these abominations the men of the land who were before you have done.”

[18:28]  ¹⁴ tn Heb “And the land will not vomit you out in your defiling it.”

[18:28]  ¹⁵ tc The MT reads the singular “nation” and is followed by ASV, NASB, NRSV; the LXX, Syriac, and Targum have the plural “nations” (cf. v. 24).

[23:17]  ¹⁶ tn The Hebrew term translated “sacred prostitute” here (קְדֵשָׁה [qÿdeshah], from קַדֵשׁ [qadesh, “holy”]; cf. NIV “shrine prostitute”; NASB “cult prostitute”; NRSV, TEV, NLT “temple prostitute”) refers to the pagan fertility cults that employed female and male prostitutes in various rituals designed to evoke agricultural and even human fecundity (cf. Gen 38:21-22; 1 Kgs 14:24; 15:12; 22:47; 2 Kgs 23:7; Hos 4:14). The Hebrew term for a regular, noncultic (i.e., “secular”) female prostitute is זוֹנָה (zonah).

[23:17]  ¹⁷ tn Heb “daughters.”

[23:17]  ¹⁸ tn The male cultic prostitute was called קָדֵשׁ (qadesh; see note on the phrase “sacred prostitute” earlier in this verse). The colloquial Hebrew term for a “secular” male prostitute (i.e., a sodomite) is the disparaging epithet כֶּלֶב (kelev, “dog”) which occurs in the following verse (cf. KJV, ASV, NAB, NASB).

[23:17]  ¹⁹ tn Heb “sons.”

[23:18]  ²⁰ tn Here the Hebrew term זוֹנָה (zonah) refers to a noncultic (i.e., “secular”) female prostitute; see note on the phrase “sacred prostitute” in v. 17.

[23:18]  ²¹ tn Heb “of a dog.” This is the common Hebrew term for a noncultic (i.e., “secular”) male prostitute. See note on the phrase “sacred male prostitute” in v. 17.

[1:1]  ²² tn Grk “Judas,” traditionally “Jude” in English versions to distinguish him from the one who betrayed Jesus. The word “From” is not in the Greek text, but has been supplied to indicate the sender of the letter.

[1:1]  ²³ tn Though δοῦλος (doulos) is normally translated “servant,” the word does not bear the connotation of a free individual serving another. BDAG notes that “‘servant’ for ‘slave’ is largely confined to Biblical transl. and early American times…in normal usage at the present time the two words are carefully distinguished” (BDAG 260 s.v.). At the same time, perhaps “servant” is apt in that the δοῦλος of Jesus Christ took on that role voluntarily, unlike a slave. The most accurate translation is “bondservant” (sometimes found in the ASV for δοῦλος), in that it often indicates one who sells himself into slavery to another. But as this is archaic, few today understand its force.

[1:1]  sn Undoubtedly the background for the concept of being the Lord’s slave or servant is to be found in the Old Testament scriptures. For a Jew this concept did not connote drudgery, but honor and privilege. It was used of national Israel at times (Isa 43:10), but was especially associated with famous OT personalities, including such great men as Moses (Josh 14:7), David (Ps 89:3; cf. 2 Sam 7:5, 8) and Elijah (2 Kgs 10:10); all these men were “servants (or slaves) of the Lord.”

[1:1]  ²⁴ sn Although Jude was half-brother of Jesus, he humbly associates himself with James, his full brother. By first calling himself a slave of Jesus Christ, it is evident that he wants no one to place stock in his physical connections. At the same time, he must identify himself further: Since Jude was a common name in the 1st century (two of Jesus’ disciples were so named, including his betrayer), more information was needed, that is to say, brother of James.

[1:1]  ²⁵ tn Grk “loved in.” The perfect passive participle suggests that the audience’s relationship to God is not recent; the preposition ἐν (en) before πατρί (patri) could be taken as sphere or instrument (agency is unlikely, however). Another possible translation would be “dear to God.”

[1:1]  ²⁶ tn Or “by.” Datives of agency are quite rare in the NT (and other ancient Greek), almost always found with a perfect verb. Although this text qualifies, in light of the well-worn idiom of τηρέω (threw) in eschatological contexts, in which God or Christ keeps the believer safe until the parousia (cf. 1 Thess 5:23; 1 Pet 1:4; Rev 3:10; other terms meaning “to guard,” “to keep” are also found in similar eschatological contexts [cf. 2 Thess 3:3; 2 Tim 1:12; 1 Pet 1:5; Jude 24]), it is probably better to understand this verse as having such an eschatological tinge. It is at the same time possible that Jude’s language was intentionally ambiguous, implying both ideas (“kept by Jesus Christ [so that they might be] kept for Jesus Christ”). Elsewhere he displays a certain fondness for wordplays; this may be a hint of things to come.

[1:9]  ²⁷ tn Or “heard about it”; Grk “heard.” There is no direct object stated in the Greek (direct objects were frequently omitted in Greek when clear from the context). A direct object is expected by an English reader, however, so most translations supply one. Here, however, it is not entirely clear what the author “heard”: a number of translations supply “it” (so KJV, NASB, NRSV; NAB “this”), but this could refer back either to (1) “your love in the Spirit” at the end of v. 8, or (2) “your faith in Christ Jesus and the love that you have for all the saints” (v. 4). In light of this uncertainty, other translations supply “about you” (TEV, NIV, CEV, NLT). This is preferred by the present translation since, while it does not resolve the ambiguity entirely, it does make it less easy for the English reader to limit the reference only to “your love in the Spirit” at the end of v. 8.

[1:9]  ²⁸ tn The term “God” does not appear in the Greek text, but the following reference to “the knowledge of his will” makes it clear that “God” is in view as the object of the “praying and asking,” and should therefore be included in the English translation for clarity.

[1:9]  ²⁹ tn The ἵνα (Jina) clause has been translated as substantival, indicating the content of the prayer and asking. The idea of purpose may also be present in this clause.

[4:19]  ³⁰ sn Greediness refers to an increasing desire for more and more. The point is that sinful passions and desires are never satisfied.

[5:12]  ³¹ tn The participle τὰ…γινόμενα (ta…ginomena) usually refers to “things happening” or “things which are,” but with the following genitive phrase ὑπ᾿ αὐτῶν (Jup’ autwn), which indicates agency, the idea seems to be “things being done.” This passive construction was translated as an active one to simplify the English style.

[5:1]  ³² tn Or “become.”

[1:10]  ³³ tc ‡ The earliest and best mss lack καί (kai) after πολλοί (polloi; so א A C P 088 81 104 365 614 629 630 al sy co), though the conjunction is found in several significant witnesses, chiefly of the Western and Byzantine texts (D F G I Ψ 33 1739 1881 Ï lat). Although it is possible that some scribes omitted the word, thinking it was superfluous, it is also possible that others added the conjunction for clarification. Judging by the pedigree of the witnesses and the inconclusiveness of the internal evidence, the shorter reading is considered to be most likely original. NA²⁷ puts the conjunction in brackets, indicating some doubts as to its authenticity.

[1:10]  ³⁴ tn Grk “those of the circumcision.” Some translations take this to refer to Jewish converts to Christianity (cf. NAB “Jewish Christians”; TEV “converts from Judaism”; CEV “Jewish followers”) while others are less clear (cf. NLT “those who insist on circumcision for salvation”).

[1:7]  ³⁵ tn Grk “as.”

[1:7]  ³⁶ tn Grk “the towns [or cities] surrounding them.”

[1:7]  ³⁷ tn Grk “strange flesh.” This phrase has been variously interpreted. It could refer to flesh of another species (such as angels lusting after human flesh). This would aptly describe the sin of the angels, but not easily explain the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah. It could refer to the homosexual practices of the Sodomites, but a difficulty arises from the use of ἕτερος ({etero"; “strange,” “other”). When this is to be distinguished from ἄλλος (allos, “another”) it suggests “another of a different kind.” If so, would that properly describe homosexual behavior? In response, the language could easily be compact: “pursued flesh other than what was normally pursued.” However, would this find an analogy in the lust of angels (such would imply that angels normally had sexual relations of some sort, but cf. Matt 22:30)? Another alternative is that the focus of the parallel is on the activity of the surrounding cities and the activity of the angels. This is especially plausible since the participles ἐκπορνεύσασαι (ekporneusasai, “having indulged in sexual immorality”) and ἀπελθοῦσαι (apelqousai, “having pursued”) have concord with “cities” (πόλεις, poleis), a feminine plural noun, rather than with Sodom and Gomorrah (both masculine nouns). If so, then their sin would not necessarily have to be homosexuality. However, most likely the feminine participles are used because of constructio ad sensum (construction according to sense). That is, since both Sodom and Gomorrah are cities, the feminine is used to imply that all the cities are involved. The connection with angels thus seems to be somewhat loose: Both angels and Sodom and Gomorrah indulged in heinous sexual immorality. Thus, whether the false teachers indulge in homosexual activity is not the point; mere sexual immorality is enough to condemn them.

[1:7]  ³⁸ tn Or “in the same way as.”

[1:7]  ³⁹ tn “Angels” is not in the Greek text; but the masculine demonstrative pronoun most likely refers back to the angels of v. 6.

[1:10]  ⁴⁰ tn Or “they should naturally comprehend.” The present tense in this context may have a conative force.

[1:10]  sn They instinctively comprehend. Like irrational animals, these false teachers do grasp one thing – the instinctive behavior of animals in heat. R. Bauckham (Jude, 2 Peter [WBC], 63) notes that “Though they claim to be guided by special spiritual insight gained in heavenly revelations, they are in fact following the sexual instincts which they share with the animals.” Jude’s focus is somewhat different from Peter’s: Peter argued that, like irrational animals who are born to be caught and killed, these men will be destroyed when destroying others (2 Pet 2:12). Jude, however, does not mention the destruction of animals, just that these false teachers will be destroyed for mimicking them.