Same-sex relationships
Christians disagree about whether Leviticus 18:22, Romans 1:24-27, and 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 prohibit all same-sex sexual relationships or address only ancient practices. The debate also asks whether these texts speak to modern sexual orientation at all.
The passage
Scripture · New Consensus Bible
Leviticus 18:22
22And with a male you shall not lie the lyings of a woman; it is an abomination.Study Leviticus 18 →
Romans 1:24-27
24Therefore God gave them up in the desires of their hearts to uncleanness, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, 25who exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. 26For this reason God gave them up to shameful passions. For even their females exchanged the natural function for that which is contrary to nature; 27and in the same way also the males, leaving the natural function of the female, were inflamed in their lust toward one another, males with males working out what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.Study Romans 1 →
1 Corinthians 6:9-11
9Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor the effeminate, nor men who sleep with men, 10nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor slanderers, nor extortionists, will inherit the kingdom of God. 11And these things some of you were. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, and in the Spirit of our God.Study 1 Corinthians 6 →
The question
What do these texts say about same-sex relations, and do they address orientation as understood today?
Background
Historical background
Leviticus 18 belongs to the Holiness Code (Leviticus 17–26), a priestly collection concerned with Israel's separation from the practices of Egypt and Canaan. The chapter prohibits sexual relations within certain kinship boundaries and other acts; verse 22 uses Hebrew terms traditionally rendered as lying with a male as one lies with a woman, and the phrase is part of a list of sexual acts that defile the land. Romans 1 is from Paul's letter to the church in Rome, written around the mid-50s CE, and in verses 24-27 Paul describes idolatry leading to God's judicial handing over of humanity to dishonorable passions; the Greek vocabulary includes 'para physin' ('contrary to nature') and language of exchanging natural use. First Corinthians 6 is from Paul's earlier correspondence with the Corinthian church, and in verses 9-11 he includes a vice list; the two debated Greek terms are 'malakoi' (literally 'soft' or 'effeminate') and 'arsenokoitai' (a compound related to the Septuagint of Leviticus 20:13).
The texts come from different settings — Israelite holiness legislation, a diaspora letter to Rome, and a letter addressing divisions in Corinth. Scholars and traditions all note that the biblical writers did not have the modern concept of sexual orientation as a deep-seated identity; they write about acts, desires, and passions within ancient social and cultic frameworks. Debates therefore center on whether the prohibitions are universal moral absolutes rooted in creation or culturally conditioned judgments tied to ancient purity, patriarchal, and anti-idolatry concerns.
How the traditions read it
Each tradition’s interpretation
Catholic
Sees all three texts as natural-law prohibitions of every same-sex sexual act.
The Catholic Church holds that Leviticus 18:22, Romans 1:26-27, and 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 belong to the enduring moral law accessible to reason and confirmed by revelation. Thomas Aquinas and later magisterial teaching treat these verses as condemning same-sex genital acts as intrinsically disordered, while distinguishing the inclination from the act; the Catechism teaches that same-sex attraction is not chosen but that same-sex acts are grave matter. Romans 1 is read as showing that abandoning the Creator leads to sexual disorder, and 1 Corinthians 6:11 declares the possibility of cleansing and sanctification in baptism. Canon law and pastoral care call all persons to chastity and to lives conformed to this teaching.
Catholic views on other disputed passages →Eastern Orthodox
Receives them as ascetic-moral condemnations of same-sex acts as passions needing healing.
Eastern Orthodox patristic readers, especially John Chrysostom, interpret Romans 1's 'God gave them up' as permissive withdrawal, not divine causation, and describe the darkening of the nous that leads to disordered passions. Leviticus 18 is received as enduring moral law, not ceremonial legislation, and 1 Corinthians 6's vice list is treated as a diagnostic of spiritual disease. The tradition does not ordinarily speak of a modern 'orientation'; it addresses acts and passions, offering repentance, ascesis, and participation in the sacraments as therapy. Same-sex sexual activity is consistently treated as incompatible with the mystery of marriage and the temple of the body.
Eastern Orthodox views on other disputed passages →Oriental Orthodox
Reads these passages as binding canonical and ascetic teaching on sexual purity.
The Oriental Orthodox tradition integrates Leviticus 18 into marriage canons and moral discipline, and reads Romans 1 as the tragedy of the intellect turned from God to creatures. 1 Corinthians 6's language of the body as temple and member of Christ grounds strict chastity; Shenoute of Atripe treated sexual immorality as desecration of a divine sanctuary. Same-sex acts are included among the works that exclude inheriting the kingdom, while baptism and repentance restore the penitent. The tradition's ascetic theology presents sexual purity as part of the restoration of human nature in Christ.
Oriental Orthodox views on other disputed passages →Anglican / Episcopal
Communion divides: traditionalists see universal prohibition; some Western provinces see culturally specific texts.
The 1998 Lambeth Conference Resolution 1.10 and the Global South/GAFCON movement read Leviticus 18:22, Romans 1:26-27, and 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 as enduring, creation-based moral law condemning all same-sex sexual acts. Progressive voices in provinces such as the Episcopal Church argue that the texts condemn ancient exploitative practices—pederasty, cult prostitution, or coercive excess—not faithful same-sex unions, and that the modern category of sexual orientation was unavailable to the authors. They also appeal to baptismal dignity, reason, and experience within the Anglican threefold cord. The dispute affects liturgy, ordination, and Communion structures.
Anglican views on other disputed passages →Lutheran
Lutheran bodies divide: LCMS / confessional churches see universal law; ELCA allows same-sex marriage.
Confessional Lutheran bodies such as the Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod read Romans 1 as the unmitigated Law exposing sin, including all same-sex acts, and Leviticus 18 as enduring moral law; they teach that same-sex sexual behavior is contrary to God's design. The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America has formally recognized and permitted same-sex marriage and ordains partnered LGBTQ ministers, holding that these texts do not necessarily address modern, loving, consensual relationships. Both wings share the law-gospel hermeneutic but differ on whether the biblical prohibitions apply universally to same-sex practice. Congregations and synods therefore hold different teaching and pastoral practice.
Lutheran views on other disputed passages →Reformed / Presbyterian
Presbyterian bodies divide: PCA and conservative Reformed see universal prohibition; PC(USA) permits same-sex marriage.
Conservative Reformed and Presbyterian bodies, such as the Presbyterian Church in America, read Romans 1 as general revelation and total depravity, with verses 26-27 a clear creation-order prohibition; Leviticus 18 is assigned to the moral law because Canaan was judged for these acts. The Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) has removed categorical prohibitions and permits same-sex marriage and ordination, with many in that body arguing the passages address exploitative or idolatrous contexts. The two sides both claim the Reformed principle of Scripture as the final authority but apply different hermeneutical conclusions to these texts. Church order and ministerial standards differ accordingly.
Reformed views on other disputed passages →Baptist
Most Baptist confessions read these texts as universal moral law prohibiting same-sex acts; some bodies differ.
The 1689 Second London Confession and the Baptist Faith and Message 2000 treat the sexual prohibitions as rooted in creation and the moral law, not temporary purity codes; Leviticus 18, Romans 1, and 1 Corinthians 6 are cited to teach that marriage is only between a man and a woman. Many Baptist preachers and ethicists, including John Gill, read Romans 1 as showing that idolatry leads to sexual disorder and that same-sex acts are among the sins excluded from the kingdom. Some Baptist conventions or national unions, particularly in Western contexts, allow congregational autonomy and contain congregations that affirm same-sex relationships, though they do not claim to speak for the historic confessions. The majority Baptist tradition continues to present these texts as binding.
Baptist views on other disputed passages →Methodist / Wesleyan / Holiness
Tradition divides: traditionalist Holiness churches see universal prohibition; some United Methodist progressives re-evaluate.
Traditionalist Wesleyan and Holiness bodies, and the Global Methodist Church, read Leviticus 18:22, Romans 1:26-27, and 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 as core moral law and treat Scripture as primary in the Wesleyan Quadrilateral. Progressive wings within the United Methodist Church have used reason, experience, and historical criticism to argue the texts do not condemn consensual same-sex relationships, and some annual conferences and clergy have conducted same-sex marriages. The United Methodist Church has removed its categorical bans and now permits same-sex marriage and ordination in some regions, while many traditionalist congregations have joined the Global Methodist Church. Both sides claim Wesley's concern for holiness and the transforming power of grace.
Methodist views on other disputed passages →Anabaptist / Mennonite
Most Anabaptist communities uphold traditional sexual ethics; some Mennonite Church USA / Canada differ.
Anabaptist hermeneutics read the Old Testament through the New Testament; therefore some Mennonite scholars place Leviticus 18 within Israel's purity code, while still affirming chastity as background to New Testament ethics. Many Anabaptist conferences and the broader conservative Mennonite movement continue to teach that same-sex sexual activity is sin, based on Romans 1 and 1 Corinthians 6. However, some area conferences of Mennonite Church USA and Mennonite Church Canada have adopted affirming positions or permit congregations to do so. The tradition emphasizes nonconformity, church discipline, and the body as the temple of the Holy Spirit.
Anabaptist views on other disputed passages →Classical Trinitarian Pentecostal
Classical Pentecostal denominations read these texts as universal moral law; same-sex acts are sin.
Classical Trinitarian Pentecostalism shares the broader conservative evangelical reading, treating Leviticus 18:22, Romans 1:26-27, and 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 as enduring moral law. Denominational position papers from bodies such as the Assemblies of God affirm marriage as exclusively between a man and a woman and call same-sex sexual behavior contrary to Scripture, though the Holy Spirit can transform and empower chastity. The tradition emphasizes conversion, holiness, and the body as the temple of the Holy Spirit. Some independent Pentecostal churches have adopted different stances, but the historic denominational tradition remains broadly traditional.
Pentecostal views on other disputed passages →Seventh-day Adventist
Seventh-day Adventists read these texts as universal moral law and health-message warrant.
Adventist theology treats Leviticus 18 as revealing the moral law that predates Sinai; Romans 1 is read within the great controversy as showing how rejecting God leads to moral collapse; 1 Corinthians 6 grounds the teaching that the body is the temple. The denomination's official statements and writings by Ellen White uphold a sexual ethic limited to heterosexual marriage. Same-sex sexual practice is considered a violation of God's creative order, while the church calls for pastoral care and redemption. The tradition links bodily purity and spiritual wholeness in its health and lifestyle teachings.
Adventist views on other disputed passages →Restorationist / Churches of Christ
Churches of Christ use Leviticus 18 as trans-dispensational moral law and 1 Corinthians 6 as baptismal cleansing.
The tradition holds that the Law of Moses is fulfilled, but Leviticus 18 is binding by necessary inference because Canaan was judged for these acts; J.W. McGarvey linked the Jerusalem Council's prohibition of porneia to Leviticus 18. Romans 1 is read as Paul's warning against idolatry and sexual disorder, and 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 as the pre-baptism life from which verse 11 says believers are washed. Churches of Christ overwhelmingly teach that same-sex sexual activity is sin and incompatible with the kingdom, though some more progressive congregations have emerged. The tradition emphasizes baptism as the point of cleansing from the sins listed.
Restorationist views on other disputed passages →Latter-day Saint
Reads these passages as part of the eternal Law of Chastity restricting sex to heterosexual marriage.
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints holds that sexual intimacy is sacred and only lawful between a man and a woman married; Leviticus 18 preserves an ancient expression of that law. Romans 1:26-27 is read as condemning departure from 'natural use,' and 1 Corinthians 6 reinforces the body as temple, bought with a price. The Family: A Proclamation to the World formalizes this as revealed truth. Same-sex attraction is acknowledged but same-sex sexual behavior is considered a serious transgression; the church encourages compassion while maintaining its doctrinal standard.
Latter-day Saint views on other disputed passages →Jehovah's Witnesses
Sees these verses as immutable moral principles; unrepentant same-sex practice warrants disfellowshipping.
Jehovah's Witnesses believe the Mosaic Law covenant was abolished, but the underlying moral principles remain binding; Leviticus 18:22 is cited as God's design for sexuality. Romans 1:26-27 is treated as definitive proof that same-sex sexual behavior is unnatural and unacceptable to God, a result of rejecting Jehovah's sovereignty. 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 forms a legal and moral basis for congregational discipline, with baptism requiring abandonment of such practices. Unrepentant baptized Witnesses who practice same-sex activity may face a judicial committee and disfellowshipping; repentance and change are offered.
Jehovah’s Witness views on other disputed passages →Jewish
Torah prohibits male anal intercourse; rabbinic law extends it; movements differ on same-sex unions.
Classical Jewish interpretation reads Leviticus 18:22 as forbidding male-male anal intercourse; female same-sex activity is not explicitly in this verse but is rabbinically prohibited as an improper practice. The verse is read on Yom Kippur afternoon to teach boundaries and purity, and is one of the sexual transgressions for which one must give up life rather than transgress. Modern Jewish movements diverge: Orthodox Judaism retains the traditional prohibition; Conservative Judaism has moved toward permitting same-sex marriage and ordination through halakhic re-evaluation, while Reform and Reconstructionist Judaism affirm same-sex relationships. Romans 1 and 1 Corinthians 6 have no canonical authority in Judaism, though scholars study them as Second Temple Jewish texts.
Jewish views on other disputed passages →Historical-critical scholarship
Historical-critical scholarship sees these texts as ancient boundary markers, not direct statements about modern orientation.
Scholars note that the modern category of sexual orientation was not present in ancient Israel or early Christianity; Leviticus 18:22 belongs to the Holiness Code's concern with purity, land, and patriarchal gender roles, and Saul Olyan argues it condemns treating a male as a female, thereby violating gender hierarchy. Romans 1 uses Hellenistic Jewish polemic against idolatry, and its language of 'natural' and 'contrary to nature' reflects ancient cultural assumptions; scholars debate whether it condemns all same-sex activity or particularly excess and lust. In 1 Corinthians 6:9, the terms malakoi and arsenokoitai are disputed, with some arguing they refer to specific exploitative practices such as pederasty or economic prostitution and others to broader Levitical prohibitions. This scholarship informs translation and hermeneutical debates but does not itself settle theological questions.
Scholarly views on other disputed passages →The text and its translation
Historical background
Leviticus 18:22 has no major manuscript variant, but the Hebrew phrase often rendered 'lyings of a woman' has been discussed; some argue it specifically denotes a particular type of act, though most traditions read it as male-male intercourse. In Romans 1, no significant textual variants affect the meaning of verses 26-27; the key terms are the Greek 'physiken chresin' ('natural function/use') and 'para physin' ('contrary to nature'), whose ancient background is debated. In 1 Corinthians 6:9, the Greek 'malakoi' and 'arsenokoitai' are translation and semantic disputes; 'malakoi' can mean 'soft,' 'effeminate,' or a passive partner, and 'arsenokoitai' appears built from Leviticus 20:13, but its exact first-century reference is contested. The New Consensus Bible uses 'effeminate' and 'men who sleep with men,' but other translations differ.
Common ground
AI explanation
The traditions represented here generally agree that these passages have played a central role in Christian moral teaching on sexual conduct, though they disagree about what exactly is condemned. Most historic Christian communions have read at least some same-sex sexual practice as prohibited by these texts, while a number of modern bodies and scholars argue that the texts address ancient practices and lack the concept of sexual orientation. All sides acknowledge that the ancient authors did not use the modern category of orientation; the debate is about whether the texts' prohibitions are universal or context-bound.
Why it matters
AI explanation
These passages shape decisions about marriage, ordination, church membership, and pastoral care. For traditions that read them as universal prohibitions, they ground teaching that marriage is only between a man and a woman and that same-sex sexual acts require repentance. For traditions that read them as context-bound, they permit blessing same-sex unions and ordaining LGBTQ people, and they shape pastoral responses to LGBTQ members. The dispute has divided Anglican, Lutheran, Methodist, and other denominational families, and it affects interfaith conversation with Jewish communities and public Christian witness.
Questions people ask
AI explanation
What do Leviticus 18:22, Romans 1:24-27 and 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 say about same-sex relations?
Christian traditions disagree about what these texts prohibit. Many historic communions read them as condemning all same-sex sexual acts, while others argue they address ancient practices such as pederasty, cult prostitution or coercive excess rather than faithful same-sex relationships. Both sides note that the biblical writers did not use the modern category of sexual orientation.
Do these passages address sexual orientation as understood today?
The article explains that no tradition claims the ancient authors had the modern concept of orientation as a deep-seated identity; they write about acts, desires and passions in ancient social and cultic settings. The debate is whether the prohibitions are universal moral absolutes rooted in creation or culturally conditioned judgments tied to ancient purity and patriarchal concerns.
Why do churches disagree about these verses?
Denominational families have divided over whether the prohibitions are enduring moral law or context-bound, and the article sets out Catholic, Eastern and Oriental Orthodox, Anglican, Lutheran, Reformed, Baptist, Methodist, Anabaptist, Pentecostal, Adventist, Restorationist, Latter-day Saint and Jehovah's Witness readings. Anglican, Lutheran, Methodist, Presbyterian and Mennonite bodies in particular contain both traditionalist and affirming wings. The disagreement shapes teaching on marriage, ordination, membership and pastoral care.
Which Greek words in 1 Corinthians 6:9 are disputed?
The contested terms are malakoi, which can mean 'soft,' 'effeminate' or a passive partner, and arsenokoitai, a compound related to the Septuagint of Leviticus 20:13 whose first-century reference is debated. Translations render them differently, and scholars disagree over whether they name specific exploitative practices or broader Levitical prohibitions. The article notes this is a translation and semantic dispute, not a manuscript one.
How do Jewish readers understand Leviticus 18:22?
Classical Jewish interpretation reads the verse as forbidding male-male anal intercourse, with female same-sex activity prohibited rabbinically rather than in the verse itself. Orthodox Judaism retains the traditional prohibition, Conservative Judaism has moved toward permitting same-sex marriage and ordination, and Reform and Reconstructionist Judaism affirm same-sex relationships. Romans 1 and 1 Corinthians 6 carry no canonical authority in Judaism, though scholars study them as Second Temple Jewish texts.
Related disputed passages
- Women teaching in the church
The passages have been read as restricting women's speech and authority in worship, but traditions divide over whether these rules are timeless or specific to first-century assemblies.
- Faith and works
How the New Testament passages about justification by faith and the necessity of works are read together—or held apart—shapes Christian teaching on grace, obedience, and social responsibility.
- Predestination
Does God choose who will be saved, and on what basis? Romans 9:10-24 has been read as teaching unconditional individual election, corporate election, or something else, and the answer shapes Christian assurance and practice.
- Purgatory and prayer for the dead
Scripture passages in 1 Corinthians and 2 Maccabees have been read for centuries as either teaching or ruling out a purification after death and the practice of praying for the departed. The debate shapes worship, funeral rites, and Christian hope.
Scripture is quoted from the New Consensus Bible, an AI rendering. The article is AI-generated from this project’s records of how each tradition reads these passages; it describes their positions and does not rule between them.