Lexically annoyed

My wife clued me in to an online article worthy of comment. The article looks at two passages Matthew 8:5-13 and Luke 7:1-10 in order to say that the Centurion was asking Jesus to heal his partner in a homosexual relationship. The article very badly misuses the Greek language in order to ‘prove’ that Jesus approved of the Centurion’s 'alternative lifestyle.' I don’t approve of homosexual practice, but it really grinds my corn when language gets abused to make anybody’s point. The article bases its conclusion, that Jesus approves of homosexual practice, on the use of the Greek word pais in the above passages.  The most egregious comment in the article states: “But pais does not mean ‘servant.’ It means ‘lover.” I call baloney.

Allow me to justify my calling of baloney on this interpretation. It’s basic semantic range time, people. 

Words have a ‘range’ of possible meanings. Consider the English word ‘trunk,’ and you’ll see a great example of a broad semantic range. It ‘means’ a lot of very different things: the back end of the car, the main axis of a tree, the nose of an elephant, a chest used to hold belongings while one travels, and so forth. The particular use of the word ‘trunk’ relies on the context in which the word occurs. Other words have a much narrower semantic range, like ‘George Washington.’ I realize it’s two words, but it refers to a single person, namely the first American president. 

The same thing is true of the ancient Greek language used to write the New Testament. In the present example, the word pais is being considered. The author of the article claims that it ‘means’ lover without any consideration of the word’s semantic range. There are several ways to proceed: I could survey the lexicons from the Classical and Koine periods (boring) to show the possible range of pais’ meanings: (male or female child, servant or slave). But someone could argue for bias in the lexicons, so the more interesting way to deal with this claim is to test the article’s claim by applying their meaning of the word to various New Testament contexts in which the word appears (not boring).

Example number one: Matthew 2:16 “Then Herod, when he saw that he had been tricked by the wise men, became furious, and he sent and killed all the male children in Bethlehem and in all that region who were two years old or under, according to the time that he had ascertained from the wise men.”

Here the word pais clearly refers to children two years old and under. These were obviously not homosexual partners. 

Example number two: "Behold, my servant whom I have chosen, my beloved with whom my soul is well pleased. I will put my Spirit upon him, and he will proclaim justice to the Gentiles.”

Here the word pais is used in an Old Testament quote applied to the person of Jesus in his relationship with God the Father. 

 Imagine using the word 'trunk' in a similar way. If you say that trunk 'means' an elephant's nose, then confusion ensues every time you talk about the main woody axis of a tree, or when you direct your child to put his suitcase in the rear of a car. What will you pack your belongings in for a trip? A congested elephant takes up too much room, and I dare say that elephant snot is distasteful to cleanse from your laundry. Language has become absurd when semantic range is ignored.

There are other examples of pais in the New Testament, primarily in the Gospels and Acts, but you get the point. Words have a range of meaning. It may be possible that pais refers to a homosexual partner, but it is not necessarily so, unless information from the context leads to that interpretation. Of the 24 instances in the New Testament none refers to a homosexual partner and many references clearly refer to children. Thus the claim that pais means ‘lover’ is misinformed at best and intentionally misleading at worst.