An Academic Paper on a Controversial Topic

Please note: The following academic paper was originally researched and written in 2019 and submitted as a graduate paper while studying at Trinity Western University, Langley Campus, British Columbia. However, I have revised its conclusions to better represent the results of further research regarding the Bible itself as well as other passages used by some Christians and biblical scholars to justify a non-affirming stance regarding the LGBTQ+ community. Please read carefully with an open mind.

*******************************

What is Actually Prohibited by the Law in Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13?[1]

1. Introduction

In the evangelical world there is presently an intense and frequently acrimonious debate regarding the inclusion of those who identify as LGBTQ and Christian. In that debate, there are certain key passages of scripture that are referenced by some, and dissected by others, as proof that their position on the issue is “biblical.” Scholars, who represent virtually every point on the inclusion/non-inclusion continuum, give these passages the greatest attention: Genesis 19:1–11, Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13, Judges 19:22–30, Romans 1:26–27, 1 Corinthians 6:9 and 1 Timothy 1:10.

Of these passages, there are only two that are commandments: Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13. Genesis 19 and Judges 19 are narratives. Romans 1:26–27 is found in the context of Paul’s description of the real-life consequences of idol worship. 1 Corinthians 6:9 is a list of “those who will not inherit the kingdom of God.” 1 Timothy 1:10 is found in a list of those who are “lawless and disobedient.” Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 are laws, reputedly given to Moses by God. They are found in the broad context of the Holiness Code (Leviticus 17–26). The immediate context is introduced by the admonition to not do as was done in Egypt or Canaan. Rather, the Israelites are instructed, “You shall keep my statutes and my ordinances; by doing so one shall live. I am the Lord” (Lev 18:5).[2] There would be life for those who obeyed these laws and punishments for those who did not. In the midst of a list of laws that primarily denounce certain specific sexual encounters (chapters 18 and 20), we read these laws:

“You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination” (18:22).

“If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall be put to death; their blood is upon them” (20:13).

At first reading, in translation, these verses seem very straight-forward and numerous scholars regard as indisputable what is prohibited and thus what Yahweh thinks about all same-sex encounters. However, a closer reading and careful analyses of these texts indicates they are not as unambiguous in the Hebrew text as they appear to be in translation. In fact, I have found that the most read English translations are less literal. In being more interpretive, these translations suggest a meaning that cannot be confidently substantiated by careful lexical, grammatical and contextual analyses.[3]  

It is not the purpose of this paper to resolve all issues related to the inclusion versus non-inclusion debate. Clearly stated, the thesis of this paper is that close reading and analyses of Lev 18:22 and 20:13 raise legitimate questions regarding what activity was actually prohibited among the Israelites who lived in the land. Since these questions do not have easy or unequivocal answers, the use of Lev 18:22 and 20:13 by scholars, leaders of various Christian denominations or individual Christians, to support non-inclusion of persons who identify as LGBTQ and Christian is unwarranted. Such use of these verses belies a biblical hermeneutic that ignores or minimizes the linguistic complexities and contextual uncertainties that are obvious to many scholars.[4] My minimal goal is to demonstrate that these texts, at least at this chronological and cultural distance, are extremely challenging to translate and exegete with certainty. 

This paper begins with a close reading and various analyses of Lev 18:22 and 20:13. This is followed by a careful consideration of broader contextual issues. These analyses raise very specific questions about each text, and their contexts, the answers to which are essential to any attempt to understand what acts are prohibited.  In the final section, I offer what I think are the best answers to these questions and thus what is prohibited by Lev 18:22 and 20:13.

2. Close Reading and Analyses in the Immediate Context

In this section, because the law is stated quite similarly in the two chapters, I will compare 18:22 and 20:13 lexically and contextually. First, here are the Hebrew texts and my, quite literal, translation.[5]

Lev 18:22

וְאֶ֨ת־זָכָ֔ר לֹ֥א תִשְׁכַּ֖ב מִשְׁכְּבֵ֣י אִשָּׁ֑ה תּוֹעֵבָ֖ה הִֽוא

And with a male you will not lie down, beds (lyings) of a woman; an abomination it [is].

Lev 20:13

וְאִ֗ישׁ אֲשֶׁ֨ר יִשְׁכַּ֤ב אֶת־זָכָר֙ מִשְׁכְּבֵ֣י אִשָּׁ֔ה תּוֹעֵבָ֥ה עָשׂ֖וּ שְׁנֵיהֶ֑ם מֹ֥ות יוּמָ֖תוּ דְּמֵיהֶ֥ם בָּֽם

And a man who lies down with a male, beds (lyings) of a woman, an abomination they have committed. The two of them will surely be put to death. Their blood [is] on them.

It is of note that Lev 20:13 does more than simply restate this law found in 18:22 in a different format and add a specific punishment clause, but actually recontextualizes this law.  

2.1 Lev 18:22a cf. Lev 20:13a

וְאֶ֨ת־זָכָ֔ר לֹ֥א תִשְׁכַּ֖ב

“And with a male you will not lie down…” (18:22a)

וְאִ֗ישׁ אֲשֶׁ֨ר יִשְׁכַּ֤ב אֶת־זָכָר֙

 “And a man who lies down with a male…” (20:13a)

In biblical Hebrew there are three words used for the male of the human species, two of which are used in our texts. זָכַר (zakar)generally means “male” and is often coupled with “female” as in Gen 1:27.[6] In that passage, אָדָם (adam)is best translated as “humankind” (i.e., inclusive of both male and female). זָכַר (zakar) is “male” and נְקֵבָה (neqebah) is “female.”  זָכַר and נְקֵבָה are used in tandem throughout Genesis to refer to the two genders of the human species (see 5:2), but also to refer to the two genders of non-human species (see 6:19; 7:3, 9, 16). In Leviticus, זָכַר is most often used with reference to male animals being offered as sacrifices, that they are to be “without blemish” (see 1:3, 10; 3:1, 6; 4:23; 22:19). It is also used to refer to human males of any age from birth through death (see 6:18, 29; 7:6; 12:2, 7; 15:33; 27:3–7). In Lev 27:2–7, not only is it obvious that זָכַר is used for a male of any age, but also that נְקֵבָה is the word for female that is used in such contexts.

The main word used for those of male gender in Leviticus is  אִישׁ (ish) which is generally translated as “man.”[7]  Where, in the same context the female gender is referenced, the partner of אִישׁ is אִשָּׁה (ishah) translated as either “woman” or “wife.”[8] In Lev 18:22, אִישׁ is not used. Instead, the subject of the sentence is embedded in תִשְׁכַּ֖ב (tishkav) which is masculine in gender.[9] It is of note that Lev 20:13 reads, “And a man (אִישׁ) lies with a male (זָכַר)…” not “And a man lies with a man…” as most would expect.  

Both texts use the verb שָׁכַב (shakav) which means “to lie down” and, depending on context, it can refer to rest, sleep, sexual intercourse or death.[10] In this context, it is almost universally agreed among scholars that שׁכב has sexual connotations. Of the fifteen times שׁכב is used in Leviticus, ten times it is used to refer to sexual intimacy. It is of note that in chapter 18 שׁכב is used only once (v. 22), yet the majority of laws deal with sexual intimacy with close family members. In chapter 20, where essentially the same laws are presented in a different order, שׁכב is used in our verse and four others.[11] The multiple use of שׁכב in chapter 20 is significant because it makes clear that to שׁכב with someone is to עֶרְוָה גלה (galah ervah), that is “uncover nakedness.” Where שׁכב appears in chapter 20 without a reference to nakedness being uncovered, that result can be presumed. And where some form of עֶרְוָה גלה occurs in either chapter, we know that someone has laid down (שׁכב) with someone.

2.2.      Lev 18:22b and Lev 20:13b

מִשְׁכְּבֵ֣י אִשָּׁ֑ה

“…beds (lyings) of a woman…” (18:22b & 20:13b)

Most scholars refer to this expression as the most problematic phrase in both verses. Some would say that a literal translation is not difficult as both are common words. אִשָּׁה is the feminine singular noun meaning “woman” or “wife.” מִשְׁכְּבֵ֣י (mishkevey) is the masculine, plural construct of the noun מִשְׁכָּב (mishkav) which means a place of lying, such as a couch or bed, and thus can also be understood as the act of lying. In Leviticus, מִשְׁכָּב is most often translated (NRSV) as bed (see 15:4, 5, 21, 23, 24, 26). Only in 18:22 and 20:13 does the NRSV not bother to translate מִשְׁכָּב. I would have agreed with those who accept the most referenced English translations until I examined these verses in Hebrew. It then becomes obvious that these translations try to smooth out the Hebrew into clear English, but that in doing so they negate the unique and ambiguous nature of this idiom. The best translation of מִשְׁכְּבֵ֣י אִשָּׁ֑ה (mishkevey ishah) is “beds of a woman,” regardless of how cumbersome this more literal translation is in context.

The only other place in the entire Old Testament where this form of מִשְׁכָּב appears is Gen 49:4, where the NRSV translates it as “bed of,” while choosing to ignore that מִשְׁכְּבֵ֣י is plural, in other words, “beds of.” The context in Genesis 49 involves Jacob telling his sons what will happen to them in the days to come (49:1). Though Reuben was Jacob’s first born and should have received the greatest blessing, he was told that he would “no longer excel because you went up onto your father’s bed.”[12] Jacob is referring to the incident recorded in Gen 35:22 where “Reuben went and lay (שׁכב) with Bilhah his father’s concubine; and Israel heard of it.” The author of Genesis understood, “Reuben went and lay with Bilhah” ( וַיֵּ֣לֶךְ רְאוּבֵ֔ן וַיִּשְׁכַּ֕ב֙ אֶת־בִּלְהָ֖ה֙ ) to be equivalent to “you went up on the beds of your father” (עָלִ֖יתָ מִשְׁכְּבֵ֣י אָבִ֑יךָ). It is of note that this, only other, use of מִשְׁכְּבֵ֣י (“beds of”) is an incident of incest.

Getting back to Lev 18:22 and 20:13, we see that what has been added to almost all English translations of  מִשְׁכְּבֵ֣י אִשָּׁ֑ה are the words “as” and “with” and what is left untranslated is “beds of.” The entire expression is translated into English by virtually all scholarly translators, both by committee and individuals, “as one lies with a woman.” A few do not translate this Hebrew expression at all.[13] Even in consulting various commentaries that deal with the Hebrew text, most do not discuss this idiom. The commentators are either so confused by it that they do not want to tackle it—which is not very likely—or for them the meaning is so clear that they do not feel the need to discuss it.[14]

It is also worthy of note that the author of Leviticus used אִשָּׁ֑ה and not נְקֵבָה. נְקֵבָה is used for the female gender of animals and of humans, infant and adult alike (27:4–7). And it is used in tandem with זָכַר, as one would expect. Yet in Leviticus 18 and 20 only אִשָּׁ֑ה is used (not נְקֵבָה)   and is translated (NRSV) as “woman” (18:17, 18, 19, 22, 23; 20:13, 16, 18, 27)  or “wife” (18:8, 14, 15, 16, 20; 20:10, 11, 14, 20, 21) depending on context. זָכַר is found only in 18:22 and 20:13.    

Reading 18:22a-b and 20:13a-b results in some clarity and some confusion. There is no doubt that שׁכב, “to lie down,” in this context refers to an act of sexual intimacy. Questions, however, are raised about the use of מִשְׁכְּבֵ֣י אִשָּׁ֑ה. Just how the Israelites would have understood this idiom in this context is unclear.  

2.3       Lev 18:22c cf. Lev 20:13c

תּוֹעֵבָ֖ה הִֽוא

“An abomination it [is].” (18:22)

תּוֹעֵבָ֥ה עָשׂ֖וּ

“An abomination they have committed.” (20:13)

Whatever parts “a” and “b” of each verse mean—whatever act is prohibited—either “it is an abomination” (18:22) or “they have committed an abomination” (20:13). The key word here is תּוֹעֵבָ֖ה (toevah) most often translated “abomination.” It appears in Leviticus only in chapters 18 and 20 and specifically in 18:22, 26, 27, 29, 30 and 20:13. Other similar words are also found in these two chapters which pass judgment on various acts: זִמָּה (zimah 18:17; 20:14), translated as “a depravity;” תֶּבֶל (tevel 18:23; 20:12), translated “a perversion;” and, חֶסֶד (chesed 20:17), translated as “a disgrace.” For the author of Leviticus many acts are an abomination, a depravity, a perversion and/or a disgrace. And according to Lev 18:24–29, all the previously mentioned acts in the chapter are תּוֹעֵבָ֖ה (toevah). These include various types of heterosexual incest, sex with a menstruating woman, offering offspring to Molech, sex with an animal by either a man or a woman and lying with a male.

תּוֹעֵבָה is used by the biblical authors 121 times throughout the Old Testament, predominantly in Deuteronomy, Ezekiel and Proverbs. Many acts (and attitudes) are abominations and some are even referred to as תוֹעֲבַ֛ת יְהוָ֥ה, “an abomination to Yahweh.”[15] However, just because the acts listed in Leviticus 18 (and by comparison, the acts of Leviticus 20) are not specifically referred to “abominations to Yahweh,” does not in any way undermine the seriousness of this condemnation—as the punishments proscribed in both chapters indicate. However, neither can one conclude the act of a man “lying down with a male” is somehow more serious than any other acts identified as either “an abomination” or “an abomination to Yahweh.”[16]  Lings notes that תוֹעֲבַ֛ת “covers any abominable behavior that makes the men and women of Israel stray from the way marked out for them by YHWH, the sacred ineffable name attributed to the deity.”[17] The exegete should neither minimize this particular תוֹעֲבַ֛ת nor should it be overemphasized, as compared to other similar pronouncements.

2.4       Lev 20:13d

שְׁנֵיהֶ֑ם מֹ֥ות יוּמָ֖תוּ דְּמֵיהֶ֥ם בָּֽם

“The two of them will surely be put to death. Their blood [is] on them.”

In Leviticus 18, the consequence for any of these acts is the defilement of the person and the land. And just like the Canaanites, an Israelite who commits any of these iniquities, God will “punish” and he will be vomited out by the land (18:24–28). While defilement of person and land is something that happens with the violation of any of the above stated laws, the punishment, if it is comparable to what God did with the previous inhabitants, is completed, not immediately, but over time. It is God who will punish, and it is the land that will vomit out the guilty inhabitants. However, in Leviticus 20, many of the same laws, when violated, are punishable by death.[18]  Yet, even in chapter 20, for several other laws the stated punishment is either being “cut off from their people” (similar to chapter 18), being “childless” and/or simply being “subject to [unspecified] punishment.”[19]

There is a lot of discussion among scholars about what each of these punishments involves, when they are to be enacted and by whom. Perhaps the easiest answer to these questions is that one way or another, whether immediately carried out by the non-offending Israelites or over time by God, the end result is “death” of one sort or another; either physically by execution, socially and ethnically by exile or by the termination of one’s family line. In this respect, the punishments listed in chapter 20 do not differ from those laid out in chapter 18, in that all involve a “death” (i.e., a separation and/or an end). Lev 20:2–3 states that those “who give any of their offspring to Molech shall be put to death; the people of the land shall stone them to death. I myself will set my face against them, and will cut them off from the people…” Does this suggest that “they shall be put to death” and “they shall be cut off from the people” are one and the same punishment?

Specifically, with regard to Lev 18:22 and 20:13, we see that violating the commandment to “not lie with a male” is no less or more serious to Yahweh, based on the punishments prescribed, than violating any of the other commandments in Lev 18 or 20. This is important to consider in that at least some of these commandments, by Christian standards and practice today, are certainly not as serious as others are; especially 20:9, cursing your father or mother, and 20:18, having sexual relations with the woman who is menstruating. The other thing to notice with these commandments is that most of the Israelite patriarchs broke one or more of these commandments and did not suffer the penalty of death and, in most cases, there was no word of condemnation from Yahweh. These and other observations make one wonder about whether there is a rationale that pulls all these commandments together and whether they are meant to be binding on any other than the Israelite people while they lived in the land that Yahweh was giving to them.[20]

3. Broader Contextual Considerations

3.1       The Holiness Code and the Book of Leviticus

Our two passages are located in a section of Leviticus known as “the Holiness Code” which includes chapters 17–27. Jacob Milgrom notes that in the Holiness Code “two critical changes occur: ritual impurity becomes moral impurity; and the domain of the sacred expands, embracing the entire land, not just the sanctuary, and all of Israel, not just the priesthood.” Thus, there is a “decided emphasis on ethical behavior and the granting of civil equality to the resident alien.”[21] We can see this in chapters 18 and 19 in that the resident alien is held to the same ethical standards in terms of both blessing and punishment (18:26). As we have already noted, the individual can defile the land through his disobedience and thus, like the Canaanites before him, be vomited out by the land. Many scholars see the Holiness Code as a development of the earlier legal codes, probably written in the late eighth century BCE.[22] What is of note is that no other biblical law code contains any law even remotely related to same-gender sexual intimacy. It is only found within these two chapters of Leviticus.

3.2       Other references to same-gender sex in the Hebrew Bible

All scholars would agree that this law is not found elsewhere but would disagree on whether same-gender sexual intimacy is demonstrated or prohibited by means of other Hebrew Bible texts. The texts most often cited are Gen 19:1–11 and Judg 19:22–26. However, what seems quite obvious in these two, almost identical, narratives is that rampant homosexual desire was not the motivation of the towns’ people, but rather rampant pride, violence and prejudice. Their plan was not the result of same-sex attraction. Their intention was gang rape for the purpose harming, humiliating and dominating the strangers. According to the narratives, the Sodomites did not get a chance to carry out their plan—being blinded by the visiting angels—and the men of Gibeah took the Levite’s concubine and ravished her all night to the point of death.

The author of Genesis 19 makes it clear that the entire male population of Sodom gathered around Lot’s house demanding access to his guests (v. 4). If their motivation was unbridled homoeroticism, then other biblical texts that reference Sodom would point to its universal homoeroticism as “the”—or at least “a”—reason for its destruction. Sodom is indeed referenced in several other texts in the Hebrew Bible (and the New Testament) but not once is the reason for its destruction given as same-gender sexual intimacy.[23] Even in the extrabiblical literature of Second Temple Judaism, the sin of the Sodomites is never connected to their sexuality.[24]

David Gushee notes that “[t]he men of Sodom want gang rape…[and] I would also suggest that the men wanted to dominate, humiliate and harm the male visitors precisely by treating them like defenseless women…It is about a town that had sunk to the level of the most depraved battlefield or prison” (emphasis is Gushee’s).[25] As Bird concludes, these narratives clearly indicate that “male honor is threatened by homosexual intercourse” where “sexual behavior [is] governed by views of gender roles and sexual honor.”[26] The goal of the Sodomites’ and Gibeahites’ demand “to know” the foreigners was to dominate, humiliate and control. While the Sodomites were prevented from doing so by divine intervention, the Gibeahites did the next closest thing by ravishing the Levite’s concubine, thus humiliating him.

3.3       Ancient Near Eastern law codes, culture and same-gender sex

It is widely agreed that there is very little evidence of “same-sex erotic interaction” from the ancient Near East, but what there is supports the idea that in these patriarchal cultures maintaining defined gender roles was crucial. So, when it comes to male-to-male sexual acts, the penetrator takes on the active male role, while the penetrated is the passive “female.”[27] One briefly stated Middle Assyrian Law (A. 20) states, “If a man sodomizes his comrade and they prove the charges against him and find him guilty, they shall sodomize him and they shall turn him into a eunuch.”[28] As Martti Nissinen notes, “The Middle Assyrian Laws decrees that a man who has raped another man be raped and castrated himself; his manly honor was to be disgraced, and he was to lose his masculinity and change his gender identity permanently.”[29]

            In contrast to the paucity of Near Eastern same-gender references, there are numerous resources available to help us appreciate same-gender sexual relationships among the ancient Greeks and Romans. Nissinen notes that the composition of the Holiness Code “belongs to the post-exilic situation of the fifth century BCE, when the Jewish community attempted to detach itself from outsiders.”[30] Thus, it seems reasonable to consider the attitudes of the ancient Greeks. Among Greeks it was acceptable for male citizens to have same-sex relations with those of lower social status such as a youth, a slave, or a foreigner. However, to be sexually involved with another male citizen, the penetrator violated his partner’s masculinity and the citizen who allowed himself to be penetrated “detach[ed] himself from the ranks of male citizenry and classifi[ed] himself with women and foreigners.”[31]

            If Lev 18:22 and 20:13 are indeed a prohibition against all manner of man-to-male sexual intimacy, then certainly this biblical law contrasts with the cultures surrounding Israel in its past and present. But is this an all-encompassing prohibition or does it prohibit something more specific? Various other questions need to be asked and answered before a determination can be made.    

4. Questions that arise

The first two questions have to do with the idiom מִשְׁכְּבֵ֣י אִשָּׁ֔ה.  How should it be translated? Given the awkwardness of a literal translation, what words should be inserted to make it understandable in English without being overly interpretive? Another question relates to the gender differences. Why does the author say, “You will not lie with a זָכָר” (18:22) and “A אִ֗ישׁ who lies with a זָכָר” (20:13), especially since אִשָּׁה (woman), not נְקֵבָה (female) follows? Then, having to do with the various prescribed punishments: Why is it stated in 18:29  that, “For whoever commits any of these abominations…shall be cut off from their people,” whereas the punishment in 20:13 for both participants is that “they shall be put to death; their blood is upon them”? Along with that, one might ask: Based on Lev 20:2–3, is being “cut off from their people” somehow equivalent to “shall be put to death”? The next two questions have to do with context. Why does the redactor of the Holiness Code embed these two texts in the immediate midst of different laws? How, then, do the immediate contexts of each verse impact how we understand what act is prohibited? And finally, why, if Lev 18:22 and 20:13 prohibit all same-sex relations, is this law not found in any law context other than in Leviticus 18 and 20, where the majority focus is on proscribing incest?

            Lings notes, “All hermeneutical approaches to Leviticus 18.22 [and 20:13] have one thing in common … that the lawgiver expresses condemnation.”[32] Whatever interpretation an exegete determines is best, that person should acknowledge that these questions are justified and therefore provide some reasonable answers. There are some scholars who do not acknowledge that exegetical challenges exist and thus feel no need to provide answers. For these scholars, the texts simply “mean what they say,” because these laws are “concise and precise” and “clear.”[33] Others dig deeply into the Hebrew text, which they do not find to be clear or precise and thus strive to answer the questions that arise from their thoughtful analysis. At the very least, the unusual details mentioned above should cause one to pay close attention and perhaps consider the possibility that the authors/redactors of the Holiness Code knew exactly what they were doing. Keeping all this in mind, some conclusions are possible.

5. Conclusions        

I do agree with Wold when he writes, “The debate within the church [re: “the practice of same-gender sexual relations”] reflects diametrically opposed views of Scripture and the role that the Bible plays in determining sexual ethics.”[34] How an exegete views Scripture determines one’s hermeneutic and thus the method of interpretation one employs. However, there is a continuum of differing “views of Scripture;” not just two diametrically opposed views. I find that those who set up a dichotomy of views, tend to treat “the Bible as divine oracle or law, abstracting its words from their literary and social contexts and absolutizing them as statements of timeless rules or principles that stand over against changing social practices and values.”[35] To be clear, my view of Scripture is that it is a product of many human authors, editors, and compilers resulting in anthologies that are persistently pluriform and polyphonic in nature. Therefore, its meanings are diverse—often contradictory—and ambiguous. I also regard the biblical texts as products of patriarchal and hierarchical cultures, a fact that must be taken into account.

It seems clear to me that Lev 18:22 and 20:13 are neither precise or clear in prohibiting all same-gender sexual relations.[36] First, there is no mention of a woman lying with a female. This law, like so many others in these two chapters (and throughout the biblical law codes) have men as their subject. In places where a law applies to women as well, the female gender is often referenced specifically. Second, the numerous questions that arise from the close reading and various analyses of each verse are not insignificant and should give any interpreter reason to pause and thoughtfully try to provide reasonable answers. Those who insist that these laws clearly and unambiguously prohibit all same-gender sexuality for all people for all time, ignore or minimize the complexities/difficulties of the Hebrew text, misunderstand/misrepresent the meaning of תּוֹעֵבָ֥ה, and/or refuse to take the immediate context into consideration.[37]   

I agree with Friedman and Dolansky who write, “Above all, from this discussion we learn, at minimum, that understanding these passages is difficult. It is complicated. It is more difficult and more complicated than one might think when one first reads the verses.”[38] As Lings notes, “One thing remains clear: the original Hebrew is opaque. There is no satisfactory method for converting the unusual phrase “with a male you shall not lie the lyings of a woman” to good, idiomatic English,”[39] even though “[m]ost modern translations present this text as self-explanatory.”[40]

Of all the ways scholars have tried to explain why this prohibition exists, and thus what is being prohibited, one makes more sense to me than the others. Given that this is the only context in which a law regarding man-male sexual relations is stated, these laws are prohibiting incest between males who are related by blood or marriage.[41] For sure, there are several other laws also found within the confines of Leviticus 18 and 20 that are not about incest but the majority of laws in these two chapters have to do with prohibiting incest.[42] Also, in the reorganizing of the laws from Leviticus 18 to 20, 20:13 is found in the midst of other laws prohibiting incest.[43] I realize other explanations have been offered and are possible for why man-to-male sexual relationships are prohibited, but in my opinion, not one of these addresses the immediate context well.[44]

However, of this I am convinced: a close reading and analysis of Lev 18:22 and 20:13 raises serious questions, concerns, and issues regarding the traditionalist view—i.e., that these passages prohibit all same-gender sexual relations for all peoples and for all times. Therefore, for Christians, individually or collectively, who are striving to come to a “biblical” conclusion—i.e., as to whether the Bible supports a non-affirming or affirming position regarding those who identify as LGBTQ and Christian—due to their incredible linguistic and contextual ambiguity, neither Lev 18:22 or 20:13 can legitimately be used as proof-texts for a non-affirming position. It is clear, also, to this biblical researcher that neither Genesis 19 nor Judges 19 can legitimately be used to justify a non-affirming position.

Appendix A

 Various Translations of Lev 18:22 & 20:13

Committee Translations

Lev 18:22

• Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination. (KJV)
• Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination. (ASV)
• Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind; it is abomination. (JPS, 1917)
• Do not lie with a male as one lies with a woman; it is an abhorrence. (JPS, 1999)
• You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination. (ESV)
• You must not have sexual intercourse with a male as one has sexual intercourse with a woman; it is a detestable act. (NET Bible)
• You are not to sleep with a man as with a woman; it is detestable. (HCSB)
• Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable. (NIV, 1984)

Lev 20:13

• If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them. (KJV)
• And if a man lie with mankind, as with womankind, both of them have committed abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them. (ASV)
• And if a man lie with mankind, as with womankind, both of them have committed abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them. (JPS, 1917)
• If a man lies with a male as one lies with a woman, the two of them have done an abhorrent thing; they shall be put to death—their bloodguilt is upon them. (JPS, 1999)
• If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them. (ESV)
• If a man has sexual intercourse with a male as one has sexual intercourse with a woman, the two of them have committed an abomination. They must be put to death; their blood guilt is on themselves. (NET Bible)
• If a man sleeps with a man as with a woman, they have both committed a detestable thing. They must be put to death; their blood is on their own hands. (HCSB)
• If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads. (NIV, 1984)

Individual Translations

Lev 18:22

• And you shall not lie with a male like lying with a woman. It is an offensive thing. (Friedman, 2001)
• And with a male you shall not lie as one lies with a woman. It is an abhorrence. (Alter, 2004)
• Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable. (Hess, 2008)

Lev 20:13

• And a man who will lie with a male like lying with a woman: the two of them have done an offensive thing. They shall be put to death. Their blood is on them. (Friedman, 2001)
• And a man who lies with a male as one lies with a woman, the two of them have done an abhorrent thing. They are doomed to die. Their bloodguilt is upon them. (Alter, 2004)
• If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads. (Hess, 2008)

Appendix B

Grammatical Analyses and Literal Translations of Lev 18:22 & 20:13

Lev 18:22

• וְ – Conjunction: and, even, also, but
• אֶ֨ת־ – prep: with, together with
• זָכָ֔ר – MS noun of זָכָר: male (of humans or animals)
•  לֹ֥א– particle: no, not
•  תִשְׁכַּ֖ב– Qal, Impf, 2MS of שׁכב: to lie (down), to sleep
•  מִשְׁכְּבֵ֣י– MP Construct noun of מִשְׁכָּב: couches of, beds of, lyings of
•  אִשָּׁ֑ה– FS noun of אִשָּׁה: woman, wife, female 
•  תּוֹעֵבָ֖ה– FS noun of תּוֹעֵבָה: a disgusting thing, abomination, abominable
•  הִֽוא׃– 3FS pronoun: she, it

And with a male you will not lie beds (lyings) of a woman (wife, female). An abomination it [is].

Lev 20:13

• וְ – Conjunction: and, even, also, but
• אִ֗ישׁ – MS noun of אִישׁ: man, human, husband
•  אֲשֶׁ֨ר– Relative pronoun: who, which, what
•  יִשְׁכַּ֤ב– Qal, Impf, 3MS of שׁכב: to lie (down), to sleep
•  אֶת־– preposition: with, together with
• זָכָר֙ – MS noun of זָכָר: male (of humans or animals)
•  מִשְׁכְּבֵ֣י– MP Construct noun of מִשְׁכָּב: couches of, beds of, lyings of
•  אִשָּׁ֔ה– FS noun of אִשָּׁה: woman, wife, female 
•  תּוֹעֵבָ֥ה– FS noun of תּוֹעֵבָה: a disgusting thing, abomination, abominable
•  עָשׂ֖וּ– Qal, Pft, 3CP of עשׂה: to do, make, create
•  שְׁנֵיהֶ֑ם– Masc, Dual, Construct of שְׁנַיִם (with 3MP Suffix): two of, both of (them)
•  מֹ֥ות– Qal, Inf Abs of מות: to die, perish
•  יוּמָ֖תוּ– Hophal, Impf, 3MP of מות: to put to death
•  דְּמֵיהֶ֥ם– MP Construct noun of דָּם (with 3MP suffix): blood of (them)
•  בָּֽם׃– Preposition (with 3MP suffix): with, at, on (them)

And a man (human, husband) who will lie with a male beds (lyings) of a woman (wife, female), has done an abomination. Both of them shall surely be put to death. Their blood [is] on them.

Appendix C

(All laws related to incest are in italics)

Chapter 18 (NRSV)

The Lord spoke to Moses, saying:

Speak to the people of Israel and say to them: I am the Lord your God. You shall not do as they do in the land of Egypt, where you lived, and you shall not do as they do in the land of Canaan, to which I am bringing you. You shall not follow their statutes. My ordinances you shall observe and my statutes you shall keep, following them: I am the Lord your God. You shall keep my statutes and my ordinances; by doing so one shall live. I am the Lord.

None of you shall approach anyone near of kin to uncover nakedness: I am the Lord.

You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father, which is the nakedness of your mother; she is your mother, you shall not uncover her nakedness.

You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father’s wife; it is the nakedness of your father.

You shall not uncover the nakedness of your sister, your father’s daughter or your mother’s daughter, whether born at home or born abroad.

You shall not uncover the nakedness of your son’s daughter or of your daughter’s daughter, for their nakedness is your own nakedness.

You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father’s wife’s daughter, begotten by your father, since she is your sister.

You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father’s sister; she is your father’s flesh.

You shall not uncover the nakedness of your mother’s sister, for she is your mother’s flesh.

You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father’s brother, that is, you shall not approach his wife; she is your aunt.

You shall not uncover the nakedness of your daughter-in-law: she is your son’s wife; you shall not uncover her nakedness.

You shall not uncover the nakedness of your brother’s wife; it is your brother’s nakedness.

You shall not uncover the nakedness of a woman and her daughter, and you shall not take her son’s daughter or her daughter’s daughter to uncover her nakedness; they are your flesh; it is depravity.

And you shall not take a woman as a rival to her sister, uncovering her nakedness while her sister is still alive.

You shall not approach a woman to uncover her nakedness while she is in her menstrual uncleanness.

You shall not have sexual relations with your kinsman’s wife and defile yourself with her.

You shall not give any of your offspring to sacrifice them to Molech, and so profane the name of your God: I am the Lord.

You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.

You shall not have sexual relations with any animal and defile yourself with it, nor shall any woman give herself to an animal to have sexual relations with it: it is perversion.

Do not defile yourselves in any of these ways, for by all these practices the nations I am casting out before you have defiled themselves. Thus, the land became defiled; and I punished it for its iniquity, and the land vomited out its inhabitants. But you shall keep my statutes and my ordinances and commit none of these abominations, either the citizen or the alien who resides among you (for the inhabitants of the land, who were before you, committed all of these abominations, and the land became defiled); otherwise the land will vomit you out for defiling it, as it vomited out the nation that was before you. For whoever commits any of these abominations shall be cut off from their people. So, keep my charge not to commit any of these abominations that were done before you, and not to defile yourselves by them: I am the Lord your God.

Chapter 20 (NRSV)

The Lord spoke to Moses, saying: Say further to the people of Israel:

Any of the people of Israel, or of the aliens who reside in Israel, who give any of their offspring to Molech shall be put to death; the people of the land shall stone them to death. I myself will set my face against them, and will cut them off from the people, because they have given of their offspring to Molech, defiling my sanctuary and profaning my holy name. And if the people of the land should ever close their eyes to them, when they give of their offspring to Molech, and do not put them to death, I myself will set my face against them and against their family, and will cut them off from among their people, them and all who follow them in prostituting themselves to Molech.

If any turn to mediums and wizards, prostituting themselves to them, I will set my face against them, and will cut them off from the people.

Consecrate yourselves, therefore, and be holy; for I am the Lord your God. Keep my statutes and observe them; I am the Lord; I sanctify you.

All who curse father or mother shall be put to death; having cursed father or mother, their blood is upon them.

If a man commits adultery with the wife of his neighbor, both the adulterer and the adulteress shall be put to death.

The man who lies with his father’s wife has uncovered his father’s nakedness; both of them shall be put to death; their blood is upon them.

If a man lies with his daughter-in-law, both of them shall be put to death; they have committed perversion, their blood is upon them.

If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall be put to death; their blood is upon them.

If a man takes a wife and her mother also, it is depravity; they shall be burned to death, both he and they, that there may be no depravity among you.

If a man has sexual relations with an animal, he shall be put to death; and you shall kill the animal. If a woman approaches any animal and has sexual relations with it, you shall kill the woman and the animal; they shall be put to death, their blood is upon them.

If a man takes his sister, a daughter of his father or a daughter of his mother, and sees her nakedness, and she sees his nakedness, it is a disgrace, and they shall be cut off in the sight of their people; he has uncovered his sister’s nakedness, he shall be subject to punishment.

If a man lies with a woman having her sickness and uncovers her nakedness, he has laid bare her flow and she has laid bare her flow of blood; both of them shall be cut off from their people.

You shall not uncover the nakedness of your mother’s sister or of your father’s sister, for that is to lay bare one’s own flesh; they shall be subject to punishment.

If a man lies with his uncle’s wife, he has uncovered his uncle’s nakedness; they shall be subject to punishment; they shall die childless.

If a man takes his brother’s wife, it is impurity; he has uncovered his brother’s nakedness; they shall be childless.

You shall keep all my statutes and all my ordinances, and observe them, so that the land to which I bring you to settle in may not vomit you out. You shall not follow the practices of the nation that I am driving out before you. Because they did all these things, I abhorred them. But I have said to you: You shall inherit their land, and I will give it to you to possess, a land flowing with milk and honey. I am the Lord your God; I have separated you from the peoples.

You shall therefore make a distinction between the clean animal and the unclean, and between the unclean bird and the clean; you shall not bring abomination on yourselves by animal or by bird or by anything with which the ground teems, which I have set apart for you to hold unclean.

You shall be holy to me; for I the Lord am holy, and I have separated you from the other peoples to be mine.

A man or a woman who is a medium or a wizard shall be put to death; they shall be stoned to death; their blood is upon them.

Bibliography

Alter, Robert. The Five Books of Moses: A Translation with Commentary. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2004. Kindle edition.

Amit, Yairah. “Judges.” Pages 355–391 in The Oxford Annotated Bible: New Revised Standard Version With The Apocrypha. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010.

Bird, Phyllis A. “The Bible in Christian Ethical Deliberation concerning Homosexuality: Old Testament Contributions.” Pages 142–176 in Homosexuality, Science, and the “Plain Sense” of Scripture. Edited by David L. Balch. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2000.

Bottero, Jean. Mesopotamia: Writing, Reasoning, and the Gods. Translated by Zainab Bahrani and Marc Van De Mieroop. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1992.

Bottero, Jan. Religion in Ancient Mesopotamia. Translated by Teresa Lavender Fagan. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2001.

Brettler, Marc Z. “Genesis.” Pages 7–80 in The Oxford Annotated Bible: New Revised Standard Version With The Apocrypha. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010.

Brown, Michael L. Can You Be Gay and a Christian: Responding with Love and Truth to Questions about Homosexuality. Lake Mary, FL: Front Line, 2014.

Carden, Michael. “Genesis.” In The Queer Bible Commentary. Edited by Deryn Guest, Robert E. Goss, Mona West and Thomas Bohache. London: SCM Press, 2006.

Friedman, Richard Elliott & Shawna Dolanksy. The Bible Now: Homosexuality, Abortion, Women, Death Penalty, Earth. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011. Kindle edition.

Greenberg, Steven. Wrestling with God & Men: Homosexuality and the Jewish Tradition. Madison, WI: The University of Wisconsin Press, 2004.

Gushee, David P. and Brian D. McLaren. Changing Our Minds: Definitive 3^rd Edition of the Landmark Call for Inclusion of LGBTQ Christians with Response to Critics. Canton, MI: Read The Spirit Books, 2017.

Halperin, David M. “Homosexuality.” Pages 347, 351–354 in The Oxford Companion to Classical Civilization. Edited by Simon Hornblower and Antony Spawforth. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004.

Harding, James E. “Homophobia and Masculine Domination in Judges 19–21. The Bible and Critical Theory 12.2 (2016): 41–74.

Hess, Richard S. Leviticus. The Expositor’s Bible Commentary (Revised Edition). Edited by Tremper Longman III & David E. Garland. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2008. Kindle edition.

Hollenback, George M. “Who is Doing What to Whom Revisited: Another Look at Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13.” Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 136, No. 3 (2017), 529–537.

Levenson, Jon D. “Genesis.” Pages 8–101 in The Jewish Study Bible: Tanakh Translation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004.

Levine, Baruch. Leviticus. The JPS Torah Commentary. Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society, 1989.

Lings, K. Renato. “The ‘Lyings” of a Woman: Male-Male Incest in Leviticus 18:22?” Theology and Sexuality, 15.2 (2009), 231–250.

Lings, K. Renato. Love Lost in Translation: Homosexuality and the Bible. Bloomington, IN: Trafford Publishing, 2013. Kindle edition.

Loader, William. Making Sense of Sex: Attitudes towards Sexuality in the Early Jewish and Christian Literature. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2013.

Matthews, Kenneth A. Genesis 11:27–50:26. The New American Commentary. Edited by E. Ray Clendenen. Nashville: B&H Publishing Group, 2005.

Matthews, Victor H. “Hospitality and Hostility in Genesis 19 and Judges 19.” Biblical Theology Bulletin, Vol. 22 (1992): 3–11.

Michaelson, Jay. God vs. Gay: The Religious Case for Equality. Boston: Beacon Press, 2011.

Milgrom, Jacob. Leviticus: A Book of Ritual and Ethics. A Continental Commentary. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2004.

Milstein, Sara J. “Saul, the Levite, and His Concubine: The ‘Allusive’ Quality of Judges 19.” Vetus Testamentum 65 (2015): 1-22.

Moster, David Z. “The Levite of Judges 19–21.” Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 134, No. 4 (2015): 721–730.

Nissinen, Martti. Homoeroticism in the Biblical World: A Historical Perspective. Translated by Kirsi Stjerna. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1998.

Olyan, Saul M. “And with a Male You Shall Not Lie the Lying down of a Woman”: On the Meaning and Significance of Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13. Journal of the History of Sexuality, Vol. 5, No. 2 (1994): 179–206.

Roth, Martha T. Law Collections from Mesopotamia and Asia Minor. Writings from the Ancient World. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 1997.

Schwartz, Baruch J. “Leviticus.” In The Jewish Study Bible, 203-280. Edited by Adele Berlin and Marc Zvi Brettler. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004.

Stewart, David T. “Leviticus.” In The Queer Bible Commentary. Edited by Deryn Guest, Robert E. Goss, Mona West and Thomas Bohache. London: SCM Press, 2006.

Via, Dan O. and Robert A. J. Gagnon. Homosexuality and the Bible: Two Views. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2003.

Vines, Matthew. God and the Gay Christian. New York: Convergent Books, 2014.

Wenham, Gordon. Genesis 16–50. Word Biblical Commentary. Edited by Bruce M. Metzger. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2000.

Westbrook, Raymond and Bruce Wells. Everyday Law in Biblical Israel: An Introduction. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2009.

Wold, Donald J. Out of Order: Homosexuality in the Bible and the Ancient Near East. Austin, TX: Venus Moon Press, 2009.

---

NOTES

[1] This paper was originally researched and written in 2019 and submitted as a graduate paper while studying at Trinity Western University, Langley Campus, British Columbia. I have revised it somewhat to better represent my present conclusions.

[2] All biblical quotations are taken from the New Revised Standard Version unless otherwise noted.

[3] See Appendix A: Various Translations of Lev 18:22 & 20:13.

[4] E.g., Wold writes, “I treat the biblical text in a ‘what you see is what you get fashion.’” See: Donald J. Wold, Out of Order: Homosexuality in the Bible and the Ancient Near East (Austin, TX: Venus Moon Press, 2009), 9.

[5] See Appendix B: Grammatical Analyses and Literal Translations of Lev 18:22 & 20:13.

[6] Gen 1:27 reads, וַיִּבְרָ֨א אֱלֹהִ֤ים ׀ אֶת־הָֽאָדָם֙ בְּצַלְמֹ֔ו בְּצֶ֥לֶם אֱלֹהִ֖ים בָּרָ֣א אֹתֹ֑ו זָכָ֥ר וּנְקֵבָ֖ה בָּרָ֥א אֹתָֽם׃.

[7] אִישׁ is used 76 times in Leviticus. The majority of times it is translated “man,” though it is also translated “anyone,” “someone,” “one,” and “husband.” Some versions (e.g., NRSV) tend to render אִישׁ as “someone” or “anyone” to be gender inclusive, though I think the NET Bible does a better job of more often translating אִישׁ as “man” unless context indicates both genders are under consideration. Afterall, all ancient Near East societies were decidedly patriarchal, not egalitarian.

[8] See 15:18, 33; 18:8, 14, 15, 16, 20; 20:10, 11, 14, 20, 21

[9] תִשְׁכַּ֖ב: Qal, Imperfect, 2^nd, Masculine, Singular of שׁכב.

[10] יִשְׁכַּ֤ב in Lev 20:13 is a Qal, Imperfect, 3^rd, Masculine, Singular of שׁכב.

[11]  Lev 20:11, 12, 18, 20. To שׁכב with someone is to “uncover [someone’s] nakedness—see 20:11, 18, 20.

[12] The pertinent phrase in Gen 49:4 reads כִּ֥י עָלִ֖יתָ מִשְׁכְּבֵ֣י אָבִ֑יךָ and is best translated as “because you went up on beds of your father” (or, “because you went up on your father’s beds”).  

[13] See Appendix A.

[14] E.g., Wold, writes, “Some writers suggest that the phrase the lying (down) of a woman [מִשְׁכְּבֵ֣י אִשָּׁ֑ה]…is ambiguous” (Out of Order,104).  His view is that, “Contrary to the opinions presented by many contemporary scholars, the language of the two biblical laws on homosexuality is clear” (Out of Order, 102). In contrast, Saul M. Olyan writes, “What do Lev 18:22 and 20:13 actually mean? Determining this is complicated by the presence of the opaque idiom…in both formulations. The most common translation… “as with a women,” is interpretive, not literal” [Saul M. Olyan, “And with a Male You Shall Not Lie the Lying down of a Woman,” Journal of the History of Sexuality (1994, No. 2): 183–184].

[15] Deut 7:25; 12:31; 17:1; 18:12; 22:5; 23:18; 25:16; Prov 3:32; 6:16–19; 11:1; 12:22; 15:8–9, 26; 16:5; 17:15; 20:10, 23. Such abominations to Yahweh include: idol worship; sacrificing children to Canaanite gods; sacrificing defective animals to Yahweh; practicing divination; casting spells; consulting ghosts; cross dressing; brinigng fees or wages of a prostitute into Yahweh’s house; using dishonest weights and measures; having haughty eyes, or a lying tongue; shedding innocent blood; devising wicked plans; rushing to do evil; giving false testimony; justifying the wicked and condemning the righteous.

[16] Friedman notes that some of the acts identified as תוֹעֲבַ֛ת, including some listed in Lev 18 and 20, are acts of which the great patriarchs of Israel were guilty. He concludes from that observation that what was not תוֹעֲבַ֛ת “in the generation of the patriarchs has changed and become one in the generation of Moses…An act or an object that is not a [תוֹעֲבַ֛ת] can become one, depending on time and circumstances [Richard Elliott Friedman and Shawna Dolansky, The Bible Now: Homosexuality, Abortion, Women, Death Penalty, Earth (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011), 36]. Gushee notes, “It is relevant to note that never again, outside of Leviticus, are same-sex actions mentioned in Old Testament law, leaving at least 111 of the 117 uses of the term “abomination” to describe other issues. It is interesting how few of those other acts or character qualities are ever described as abominations by Christians today” [David P. Gushee and Brian d. McLaren, Changing Our Minds: Definitive 3^rd Edition of the Landmark Call for Inclusion of LGBTQ Christians with Response to Critics (Canton, MI: Read the Spirit Books, 2017), Kindle edition, ch. 12, loc. 1062).

[17] K. Renato Lings, “The ‘Lyings’ of a Woman: Male-Male Incest in Leviticus 18:22?” Theology and Sexuality, 15.2 (2009), 236.

[18] Those who “shall be put to death” are: those who “give any of their offspring to Molech” (v. 2); “all who curse their father or mother (v. 9); “both the adulterer and the adulteress” (v. 10); both the “man who lies with his father’s wife” along with the father’s wife (v. 11); “a man [who] lies with his daughter-in-law” along with the daughter-in-law (v. 12); “a man [who] lies with a male” and the male with whom he lies (v. 13); “a man [who] takes a wife and her mother” along with his wife and her mother by being “burned to death” (v. 14); “a man [who] has sexual relations with an animal” along with the animal (v. 15);  “a woman [who]…has sexual relations with an animal” along with the animal (v. 16); “a man or a woman who is a medium or a wizard” by stoning (v. 27).

[19] Those who “shall be cut off from their people” are: “a man who takes his sister” or half-sister” along with the sister or half-sister (v. 17); “a man [who] lies with a woman having her sickness” along with the woman (v. 18). Those who are “subject to punishment” are: “a man who takes his sister” or half-sister” along with the sister or half-sister (v. 17); a man who “uncovers the nakedness” of his “mother’s sister” or “father’s sister” or “uncle’s wife” (v. 19–20). Those who will “die childless” are: a man who “uncovers the nakedness” of his “mother’s sister” or “father’s sister” or “uncle’s wife” (vv. 19–20); “a man [who] takes his brother’s wife” (v. 21).

[20] Note that in Lev 18:2 God tells Moses to “Speak to the people of Israel,” and in 20:2 Yahweh tells Moses, “Speak to the people of Israel. Any of the people of Israel, or of the aliens who reside in Israel…” 

[21] Jacob Milgrom, Leviticus: A Book of Ritual and Ethics (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2004), 175.

[22] Milgrom, Leviticus, 175; Richard S. Hess, Leviticus, The Expositors Bible Commentary (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2008), Kindle ebook, V. “The Holiness Code,” loc. 6111.

[23] Deut 29:23; 32:32; Isa 1:9f, 3:9; 13:10; Jer 23:14; 49:18; 50:40; Lam 4:6; Ezek 16:46–50; Amos 4:11; Zeph 2:9; Matt 10:15; Luke 10:10–12; Rom 9:29; 2 Pet 2:6–10; Jude 6–7. Instead, the sins of Sodom that are highlighted are abuses of public justice, adultery, lying, pride, excess food, prosperous ease and lack of care or mocking of the poor.

[24] Gushee, Changing Our Minds, ch. 12, loc. 1015. See Sirach 16:8; 3 Maccabees 2:5; Wisdom 19:15.

[25] Gushee, Changing Our Minds, ch. 12, loc. 1025.

[26] Phyllis A. Bird, “The Bible in Christian Ethical Deliberation concerning Homosexuality: Old Testament Contributions,” in Homosexuality, Science, and the “Plain Sense” of Scripture, ed. David L. Balch (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2000), 148.

[27] Bird, “The Bible in Christian Ethical Deliberation,” 158; Jean Bottero, Mesopotamia: Writing, Reasoning, and the Gods, Trans. Zainab Bahrani and Marc Van De Mieroop (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1992),191.

[28] Ca. 1076 BCE. As translated by Martha T. Roth, Law Collections from Mesopotamia and Asia Minor, Writings from the Ancient World (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 1977), 160.

[29] Martti Nissinen, Homoeroticism in the Biblical World: A Historical Perspective, Trans. By kirsi Stjerna (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1998), 43.

[30] Nissinen, Homoeroticism in the Biblical World, 38.

[31] Oylan, “With a Male You Shall Not Lie,” 190.

[32] Renato K. Lings, Love Lost in Translation: Homosexuality and the Bible (Bloomington, IN: Trafford Publishing, 2013), Kindle edition, “Unresolved Issues,” loc. 5151.

[33] Michael L. Brown, Can You Be Gay and a Christian: Responding with Love and Truth to Questions about Homosexuality (Lake Mary, FL: Front Line, 2014), 127; Wold, Out of Order, 102.

[34] Wold, Out of Order, 7.

[35] Bird, “The Bible in Christian Ethical Deliberation,” 143.

[36] Wold states, “Written in the language of law, both verses are concise and precise…” (Out of Order, 101) and “Contrary to the opinions presented by many contemporary scholars, the language of the two biblical laws on homosexuality is clear” (Out of Order, 102).

[37] Brown (Can You Be Gay and a Christian? 127) writes, “Either way, it turns out that Leviticus 18:22 means exactly what it says, and it applies to all peoples for all times. Will we accept the words of our God?”

[38] Friedman and Dolansky, The Bible Now, 39.

[39] Lings, “The ‘Lyings’ of a Woman,” 248.

[40] Lings, “The ‘Lyings” of a Woman,”  231.

[41] Lings notes, “The argument of James Miller (2010: 49) that Leviticus 18.22 is ‘non-incest’ because of its position between 18.21 (sacrifice to Molekh) and 18.23 (bestiality) loses its force if the parallel prohibition in Leviticus 20.13 is brought into the picture. The context of this verse differs from Leviticus 18.22 in significant ways. Most remarkably, the two preceding verses clearly speak of incest, i.e. Leviticus 20.11 and 20.12 announce the death penalty for incestuous acts. According to 20.13, the same punishment applies to males who engage in mishkevey ishshah (Lings 2009: 245). Therefore, while it is impossible to speak with absolute certainty at this stage,136 various factors seem to point in the direction of a possible location for mishkevey ishshah within the biblical vocabulary pertaining to incestuous relationships (Lings 2009: 245).” [Love Lost in Translation, “Incest, Part One,”loc. 5233]. This is also the position taken by Jacob Milgrom and David T. Stewart, as well as a growing number of scholars.

[42] Of the 17 specific laws listed in chapter 18 (not including 18:22), 14 are prohibiting various incestuous relationships. The other 3 laws have to do with: not uncovering the nakedness of a woman who is menstruating; not sacrificing offspring to Molech; not have sex with an animal. Of the 14 specific laws listed in chapter 20 (not including 20:13 and the laws re: unclean food), 7 are prohibiting various incestuous relationships. The other 7 laws have to do with: not sacrificing offspring to Molech; not turning to wizards and mediums; not cursing one’s parents; not committing adultery; not having sex with an animal; not being a medium or wizard. However, in chapter 20, v. 13 is found in the midst of the 7 laws prohibiting incest.  

[43] See Appendix C for a visual representation of the embedding of 18:22 and especially of 20:13 in chapter 20. Lings (“The Lyings of a Woman,” 245) summarizes it as follows: “The amplified equivalent of Lev. 18.22 is found in 20.13. From a literary point of view, the most remarkable detail is the fact that the two preceding verses clearly speak of incest. Thus Lev. 20.11 and 12 announce the death penalty for incestuous acts. According to 20.13, the same punishment applies to all males who engage in מִשְׁכְּבֵ֣י אִשָּׁ֑ה.  Following a brief parenthesis, which presents the penal framework for other sexual crimes, the incest theme is resumed in v. 17 and vv. 19-21.”

[44] Bird (“The Bible in Christian Ethical Deliberations,” 157) concludes, “It appears most likely in the patriarchal ethos of ancient Israel that homosexual activity carried a sense of male shame for the partner “forced” to assume the “female” role (or shamelessness for the male who assumed it voluntarily), a judgment corroborated by Mesopotamian evidence…In the final analysis it is a matter of gender identity and roles, not sexuality—which must conform to the socially approved gender patterns.” Olyan (“And with a Male You Shall Not Lie,” 197–198), summarizes the various attempts by scholars to find unity in these laws as follows: “Some scholars have been inclined to explore how the laws of Lev 18 and 20 function as a group and to suggest what if anything unites them … One way of understanding these prohibitions emphasizes alleged connections with so-called idolatry. Another approach utilizes Mary Douglas’s arguments…with regard to prohibited animals, arguing that male-male anal intercourse is forbidden because the receptive male does not conform to his class (male). A third view sees the wasting of male seed in nonprocreative acts as the central concern in the sexual laws of Lev 18 and 20, including 18:22 and 20:13. Finally, it has been argued that the mixing of otherwise defiling emissions is at issue in several of these sexual proscriptions.”