Various interpretations of this verse: (Continued):
Other common liberal Christian Interpretations:
Some English translations of this passage condemn both gay and lesbian sexual relationships. This is a
mistranslation. It refers only to male-male sexual behavior.
This passage does not refer to gay sex generally, but only to a specific form of homosexual prostitution in Pagan
temples. Much of Leviticus deals with the Holiness Code which outlined ways in which the ancient Hebrews were to be set
apart to God. Some fertility worship practices found in early Pagan cultures were specifically prohibited; ritual same-sex
behavior in Pagan temples was one such practice. 1
The status of women in ancient Hebrew culture was very much lower than that of a man and barely above that of children
and slaves. When a man engaged in sexual intercourse with a woman, he always took a dominant position, as a penetrator; the woman
would take a submissive posture. When two men engage in sexual intercourse, one of the men, in effect, takes the role of a woman.
When a man takes on the low status of a woman, the ancient Hebrews regarded the act as making both ritually impure.
Many would regard "abomination," "enormous sin", etc. as particularly poor English translations
of the original Hebrew word which really means "ritually unclean" within an ancient Israelite era. The Greek
Septuagint translation of the Hebrew Scriptures (circa 3rd century
BCE) translated "to'ebah" into Greek as "bdelygma," which meant ritual impurity. If the writer(s) of Leviticus had wished to
refer to a moral violation, a sin, he would have used the Hebrew word "zimah."
This verse says nothing about consensual same-sex activity today. It only condemns same-sex religious prostitution
in Pagan temples.
Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches: This is a
conservative Christian denomination with a special outreach to gays, lesbians, bisexuals, transgender persons and transsexuals.They
enlarged on the condemnation of the ritual uncleanness of homosexual
sexual behavior in Pagan temples:
"The seriousness of this idolatry in
Hebrew eyes was compounded by the belief that 'to lie with a man as with a
woman' violated the dignity of the male sex. Women were [considered]
property but men were the direct image of God. To treat a man the way a
woman was treated was to reduce him to property and, thereby, to violate
the image of God. The issue was idolatrous activity which failed to
acknowledge God's creation." 1
National Gay Pentecostal Alliance (NGPA)interpretation: The NGPA has produced a word-for-word translation of the original Hebrew.
2 In English, with minimal
punctuation added, they rendered it as: "And with a male thou shalt not lie down in beds of a woman; it is an
abomination. That is, "... rather than forbidding male homosexuality, it
simply restricts where it may occur."
This may seem a strange prohibition to us today, but was quite consistent with other laws in Leviticus which involve improper
mixing of things that should be kept separate. e.g. ancient Hebrews were not allowed to mix two crops in the same field,
or make cloth out of two different raw materials, or plow a field with an ox and a donkey yoked together. A woman's bed was
her own. Only her husband was permitted there, and then only under certain circumstances. Any other use of her bed would be a
An argument against this interpretation is that it would not blend well with
the next verse. Leviticus 18:23 discusses a man or a woman engaging in
bestiality. The traditional translations would make a smoother text. However,
in defense of the NGPA translation, there is already a break in topic between
verses 21 and 22. So a second break between 22 and 23 is not unreasonable.
Author Jacob Milgrom suggests that the two passages do not prohibit homosexual behavior generally, but only:
for ancient Israelites, or to inhabitants of Israel, and
who are engaging in anal intercourse, and
who are men, not lesbians, and
(perhaps) who are of the same kinship connections that would prohibit heterosexual relations. 3
Arthur Waskow, a writer and rabbi, points out that: "The whole structure of sexuality in Torah assumes a dominant, male and a subordinate woman."4 In a male homosexual act of anal intercourse,
one partner may be viewed as taking a passive role - the role normally played by a woman. Thus anal intercourse between two gay men would
be as improper in Biblical times as a workplace situation in those days during which a woman supervised a man. Also, because woman were considered to
play such an inferior role in society, sex between two lesbians are not condemned in the Old Testament.
All women were of low status and thus neither would be seen as adopting a dominant or a subservient role during sexual encounters.
This interpretation would obviously make the verse refer only to the tribal
culture of the time, and not to today's western culture.
Waskow cites two alternative meanings to the passage:
"Do not lie with a man as if it were the same thing as lying with a woman."
That is, when two gay males have a sexual encounter, they should continuously be aware
that it is different from a male-female coupling. It might be interpreted to mean: "Set up a parallel set of
institutions for dealing with this kind of sexual relationship, different from those that apply to sexual relationships
between a man and a woman."
"Do not sleep with a man as it were with a woman."
That is, if two males engage in a sexual act, neither
should pretend that the passive partner is like a woman. They should be fully aware of their sexual orientation and
maleness. i.e. they should come out of the "closet" and recognize their gayness.
He concludes that if this passage condemns some forms of homosexual behavior, it may
refer only to the ancient Israelites, not to North America today. He writes that perhaps:
one time of human and Jewish history the path avoided gay male sexuality, and at a later
time this avoidance might be null and void? Can the circle of the beloved community widen
as we mature?"
Traditional Jewish and Christian belief is that God dictated the Torah to Moses. Thus
every word was included for a specific reason. If God wished to ban all gay homosexual
acts then it could be argued that the passage would have read "You shall not lie
with a male." The addition of the phrase "as with a woman"
must have been included for a specific reason. Perhaps it was added to give the passage
one of the above meanings.
A second Jewish writer, Rabbi Gershon Caudill, wrote that he is:
that the biblical passages (here in Leviticus 18: 22 and also in
Leviticus 20: 13) refer to homosexual activity that is within a
monogamous, stable, and loving relationship."
He suggests that the
passages refer to sexual promiscuity, not to homosexual activity within
a committed relationship: 5
He notes that Leviticus 18:22 is located in a section of Leviticus
that deals with incest and bestiality.
It is not usual for a gay man to have sex with another man as if he the
latter were a woman. If he were to do so, then he would be pretending that he
was with a woman and not with another man. Thus, he would not be in a homosexual
relationship at all. The passage actually refers to a heterosexual male who is
forcing himself to fantasize that he is having sex with a woman in order to be
able to complete the act. In modern terms, this would be considered as a male
heterosexual violating his own sexual orientation -- his own basic nature.
At the beginning of the chapter that includes this passage,
Leviticus 18:3 states:
"After the doings of the land of Egypt,
wherein ye dwelt, shall ye not do: and after the doings of the land of
Canaan, whither I bring you, shall ye not do: neither shall ye walk in
Here, God is saying that the Hebrews are not to
follow the practices of the Egyptians or of the Canaanites. Homosexual
ritual sex in temples of both countries was common. Thus, one might
assume that Leviticus 18:22 relates to temple same-sex rituals --
something that was considered ritually impure.
The following information sources were used to prepare and update the above
essay. The hyperlinks are not necessarily still active today.
"Free to be gay: A brief look at the Bible and homosexuality,"
Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches, at: