You've probably seen the signs at protests. Or maybe you've sat in a pew feeling your heart sink while a preacher thundered about "abominations." It's heavy stuff. When people start digging into bible verses about homos, they usually end up in one of two camps: either using the text as a hammer or trying to explain it away entirely. But here’s the thing. The Bible wasn't written in English. It wasn't written for 21st-century Americans with our specific ideas about sexual orientation and identity.
It’s complicated.
Most people point to about six or seven specific passages—often called "clobber passages" by those on the receiving end—to define the entire biblical stance on same-sex behavior. But if you look at the scholarship from folks like Dr. Robert Gagnon or, on the more progressive side, Dr. David Gushee, you realize the translation history is a total mess. We are talking about words that didn't even exist when the King James Version was being inked.
The Leviticus "Abomination" talk
Let's start with the big one. Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13. You know the drill: "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination." It sounds pretty cut and dry, right? In the original Hebrew, the word is to’evah.
Context matters here. A lot.
Leviticus is basically a giant manual for the Levite priests to keep Israel "pure" and separate from the surrounding nations like the Canaanites and Egyptians. These cultures practiced all sorts of rituals that the Israelites wanted to distance themselves from. Some scholars, like those at the Human Rights Campaign’s religion department, argue that to'evah usually refers to ritual impurity or idolatry rather than an inherent moral evil. Think of it like a dietary law for the soul. If you’re going to quote Leviticus to condemn someone, you kinda have to explain why you’re still wearing polyester blends and eating shrimp cocktails, since those are also "unclean" in the same book.
It's a consistency problem.
What really happened in Sodom?
Everyone thinks they know the story of Sodom and Gomorrah. It's where we get the word "sodomy," after all. Genesis 19 describes a mob of men demanding to "know" two male visitors (who were actually angels) staying with Lot.
But wait.
If you actually look at how the Bible itself interprets the sin of Sodom later on, it’s not about sex. Ezekiel 16:49 says it explicitly: "Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy."
👉 See also: Can You Wash on New Year’s Day? Why This Old Superstition Still Scares People
The "sin" was a radical lack of hospitality and attempted gang rape. Using a story about a violent mob to talk about a committed, loving same-sex relationship today is, frankly, a massive stretch. It’s comparing apples to violent, predatory oranges.
Paul and the "Clutter" of Romans 1
Then we hit the New Testament. Romans 1:26-27 is the most debated section. Paul writes about men giving up "natural relations" for "unnatural" ones. For a long time, this was the "gotcha" verse.
But here is where the history gets weird.
In the Greco-Roman world, "natural" usually referred to what was expected based on your social status or "nature." Paul lived in a world where pederasty (older men with boys) and master-slave exploitation were the primary forms of same-sex activity. The concept of two people of the same gender falling in love and sharing a life together? That wasn't even on the radar. Many historians argue Paul was actually attacking the excess of lust or the exploitation inherent in Roman power structures. He wasn't talking about sexual orientation because "orientation" is a modern psychological concept that wouldn't be invented for another 1,800 years.
He was a man of his time. We can't pretend he was a 21st-century sociologist.
The mystery of Arsenokoitai
In 1 Corinthians 6:9 and 1 Timothy 1:10, we see a weird Greek word: arsenokoitai. For centuries, translators struggled with it. Some old Bibles translated it as "abusers of themselves with mankind." Modern ones often just say "homosexuals."
🔗 Read more: Why What Katie Did Lingerie Is Basically the Only Reason Modern Pin-up Style Still Works
But there’s a massive problem with that.
The word "homosexual" didn't appear in a Bible translation until 1946 (specifically the RSV). Before that, the Greek was understood much differently. Arseno means man, and koite means bed. Paul likely coined the term himself, possibly drawing from those Leviticus verses we talked about. But because it appears in a "vice list" alongside things like greed and thievery, we don't have a narrative context for what exactly he meant. Was he talking about male prostitutes? Pimps? Economic exploiters? We honestly don't know for sure.
Looking at the "Silent" spaces
While we obsess over the handful of bible verses about homos, we often ignore the stories that push the boundaries of traditional gender. Look at David and Jonathan. Their souls were "knit together," and David famously said Jonathan’s love was "wonderful, passing the love of women."
Or look at the Ethiopian Eunuch in Acts 8. In that culture, a eunuch was a "third gender" figure—someone who didn't fit the binary of male/female or the expectations of family lineage. Yet, Philip baptizes him without demanding he change who he is.
The Bible is often more inclusive in its silence and its outliers than we give it credit for.
Navigating the tension
So, where does that leave you?
If you’re religious and trying to make sense of this, you’re basically looking at two main frameworks. One is the "Traditional" view, which holds that marriage is strictly between a man and a woman because of the "creation order" in Genesis. The other is the "Open and Affirming" view, which argues that the Bible’s overarching message of love, justice, and inclusion overrides specific cultural prohibitions from thousands of years ago.
Both sides have scholars. Both sides have "proof texts."
But the "truth" usually lives in the nuance. It's about recognizing that the Bible is a library of books written over a thousand years by dozens of authors. It’s a conversation. Sometimes the authors even disagree with each other.
Practical next steps for your study
If you are actually trying to figure this out for your own life or a loved one, don't just take a meme's word for it. Here is how to actually do the work:
- Get a Study Bible with footnotes. Look at the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) or the Common English Bible (CEB). These often include notes on translation disputes.
- Research the 1946 Project. Look into how the word "homosexual" actually entered the English Bible. There is a great documentary on this that shows how a translation choice changed the culture of the American church.
- Read the "Other Side." If you grew up conservative, read God and the Gay Christian by Matthew Vines. If you’re progressive, read the work of Wesley Hill, a celibate gay Christian who holds a more traditional view.
- Look at the fruit. Jesus said you’d know a tree by its fruit. Does a specific interpretation lead to life, love, and peace? Or does it lead to depression, suicide, and broken families? That’s a heavy metric, but it’s a biblical one.
Understanding bible verses about homos requires more than just reading English words on a page. It requires looking at the dust of the ancient world, the politics of the Roman Empire, and the heart of the person standing right in front of you.
🔗 Read more: Finding a Mother's Day Poem for Kids That Doesn't Feel Cheesy
Don't settle for easy answers. The text is too old and too complex for that.