Here is an annotated bibliography on the Bible and homosexuality, sexuality and gender.
A Reader: Writings to Resource Conversations, Grace and Disagreement: Shared Conversations on Scripture, Mission and Human Sexuality. London: The Archbishops’ Council, 2014.
These essays were provided as resources for the Shared Conversations process within the Church of England. The two essays by Ian Paul and Loveday Alexander deal most directly with the Bible. Ian Paul’s essay is essentially a shorter version of his Grove Booklet. He provides a fairly traditional interpretation of the seven key biblical texts (recognising the limited applicability of Genesis 19 and Judges 19), but also refers to Jonathan and David, and the gospels.
Loveday Alexander is more concerned with an appropriate hermeneutic, focusing on the acceptance of the gentiles as an analogy which suggests attending to the present context seriously, and that the ancient world had a vastly different context and assumptions.
Both are in effect relatively brief summaries of positions. They are of interest as showing the evidence considered and presented in the debates within the Church of England.
“An Approach to the Theology of Same-Sex Marriage.” In Theological Forum, 1-11: Church of Scotland, 2017.
A report for the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland. It first considers differing approaches to scriptural interpretation, then considers three types of arguments: those based on human rights; analogical arguments building from traditional understandings; and fully theological arguments for the admissibility of same-sex marriage. The report in particular considers work by Prof. Jean Porter on pre-reformation developments in the understanding of marriage, and the work by Robert Song. The report ultimately recommends that ministers be allowed to conduct same-sex marriages, provided there is sufficient safeguard for conscience for those who feel unable to.
It is currently available here.
Living in Love and Faith: Christian Teaching and Learning About Identity, Sexuality, Relationships and Marriage. London: Church House Publishing, 2020.
The resource book that came out of the shared conversations on sexuality in the Church of England. Its section on the Bible is one of the first to recognise the different ways in which the Bible can be approached and interpreted, all of which are seeking to take the Bible seriously.
It is currently available here. You can either buy it in hardback, or download it as a free pdf.
Arnoldussen, Marijn, Thomas Steensma, Arne Popma, Anna van der Miesen, Jos Twisk, and Annelou Vries. “Re-Evaluation of the Dutch Approach: Are Recently Referred Transgender Youth Different Compared to Earlier Referrals?” European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry 29 (2020): 803-811.
These findings suggest that the recently observed exponential increase in referrals might reflect that seeking help for gender dysphoria has become more common rather than that adolescents are referred to gender identity services with lower intensities of gender dysphoria or more psychological difficulties.
Bailey, J. Michael, Paul L. Vasey, Lisa M. Diamond, S. Marc Breedlove, Eric Vilain, and Marc Epprecht. “Sexual Orientation, Controversy, and Science.” Psychological Science in the Public Interest 17, no. 2 (2016): 45-101.
This (freely available) paper is the best current summary of the scientific research on homosexual orientation. It covers a whole range of areas, including heritability, hormone effect, birth order effects, prevalence, stability/fluidity, social environment, and much more.
It is currently available here.
Banister, Jamie A. “Ὁμοίως and the Use of Parallelism in Romans 1:26–27.” Journal of Biblical Literature 128, no. 3 (2009): 569-90.
Banister argues that ‘likewise’ in Romans 1:26-27 refers to the type of activity (unnatural) rather than a parallel between female-female and male-male. In other words, Paul may not have been referring to female same-sex activity.
Boswell, John. Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1980.
The book that started it all off. It explores Christianity and homosexuality up to the fourteenth century. Every study since interacts in at least some ways with Boswell. One of the first to argue that arsenokoitai referred to prostitutes, and that Romans targeted heterosexual people acting against their nature rather than referring to homosexuals. Hugely influential.
Brooten, Bernadette J. “Patristic Interpretations of Romans 1:26.” In Studia Patristica XVIII: Papers of the Ninth International Patristics Conference, Oxford 1983, edited by Elizabeth A. Livingstone, 287-91. Kalamazoo: Cicerstian Publications, 1985.
Patristic interpretations of Romans 1:26 either did not view the verses as referring to female same-sex activity at all, or where they did still concentrated on male same-sex activity, showing that the two were not viewed equally.
Brooten, Bernadette J. Love between Women: Early Christian Responses to Female Homoeroticism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996.
Brooten aims to show that early Christian attitudes to female homo-eroticism were similar to that of Greco-Roman society (which was generally against it). She uses a variety of sources (magic spells, charms etc) to uncover a broader picture of the practice and rhetoric in the ancient world. In particular, one chapter is devoted to Romans 1. She interacts with Miller (1995) in an extended footnote. Brooten argues that Paul thought female same-sex activity was wrong, but that in turn Paul was wrong to condemn it. This is a major study, and most scholars since interact with Brooten.
Brownson, James V. Bible, Gender, Sexuality: Reframing the Church’s Debate on Same-Sex Relationships. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2013.
Brownson aims to grapple with the moral logic lying behind gender and sexuality in Biblical texts. He aims to present both sides of the argument fairly, but by focusing on the moral logic to help move beyond existing debates at the time. He argues that although the Bible assumes one-flesh unions are male-female, faithfulness to the Biblical witness does not require this.
de Bruyn, Theodore. “Ambrosiaster’s Interpretations of Romans 1:26-27.” Vigiliae Christianae 65, no. 5 (2011): 463-83.
De Bruyn points out how Ambrosiaster (fourth century writer) changed his interpretation of Romans 1:26-28 over different recensions, initially understanding Romans 1:26 to be about unnatural sex between women and men. De Bruyn uses this as evidence of a wider change in interpretation over the early church period.
Budin, Stephanie Lynn. The Myth of Sacred Prostitution in Antiquity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008.
Budin argues that sacred prostitution never existed in reality. The myth developed as a form of rhetoric or propaganda to vilify other cultures.
Calvin, John. De Usuris. Ioannis Calvini: Opera Quae Supersunt Omnia. Vol. 10. Edited by Guilielmus Baum, Eduardus Cunitz and Eduardus Reuss. Brunsvigae: C. A. Schwetschke, 1871.
This is the original French version of the letter which Calvin sent to his friend about whether money-lending could ever be justified. Andrew Goddard refers to this letter in his article ‘Semper Reformanda…’. In a context in which the Bible was thought to condemn all money-lending, Calvin argued that the original meaning of the scriptures in their context and to their audience was important. Also, you needed to discern the purpose behind prohibitions. Throughout, you need to see how this fits in with justice and love. Calvin, through this, argues that Biblical prohibitions on money-lending did not necessarily apply to the type of money-lending proposed in the Reformation.
Cornwall, Susannah. Theology and Sexuality, SCM Core Text. London: SCM Press, 2013.
This is, as an SCM Core Text, a study guide to help thinking and reflection over sexuality. It therefore covers issues around gender (including transgender and intersex), celibacy, virginity, marriage, sex outside marriage including prostitution, and same-sex relationships. Throughout there are thoughtful questions for the reader to reflect upon.
Countryman, L. William. Dirt, Greed and Sex: Sexual Ethics in the New Testament and Their Implications for Today, SCM Classics. London: SCM Press, 2001.
An influential study (first published in 1988) on sexual ethics, looking through the lens of purity (influenced by Mary Douglas) and property. Among many points of interest, he argues that Romans 1 indicates that same-sex activity is unclean, but not necessarily therefore sinful. The particular angle he uses sheds fresh light on a range of passages. Thought provoking, whether or not you agree with his conclusions.
Davie, Martin. Glorify God in Your Body: Human Identity and Flourishing in Marriage, Singleness and Friendship. London: CEEC, 2018.
This book was produced for the Church of England Living in Love and Faith discussions around sexuality. It is commended by the Church of England Evangelical Council (CEEC).
The book presents a conservative exposition of why marriage must be just between man and woman, and no other possibilities exist. The author commends friendship and wants the church to become a better place for single people.
There are many problems with this book. A particular interpretation of Genesis 1 & 2 is made to bear the entire weight of what follows – and no other possible interpretations are properly examined.
Along the way, the book argues strongly for a complementarian position (justified by an understanding of the ‘image of God’ that was unknown to the first 1900 years of the church). Husbands are to lead; wives to submit. Male headship is assumed (though it is unclear how this might apply outside of marriage).
The section on intersex people is shockingly bad. The author suggests that people with such conditions should be urged to live out their lives according to their chromosomes (with surgery if necessary) irrespective of their physical bodies. This would lead to someone who was born as a female, grew up as a female, developed a female body including genitalia and breasts, who identified as a female, and who was legally female, but had complete androgen insensitivity syndrome, being asked to transition to being a man to match her XY chromosomes. Such a person would also be encouraged only to marry a woman – which is ironic.
The section on people who are transgender is also poor. Science is used polemically to paint a picture, without actually treating the science properly or using the broad range of research that has been done. The experiences of one transgender person are noted, but we are also given the testimony of two detransitioners (despite regret rates for gender reassignment surgery being below 2%, and below 1% in more recent studies).
The recommended pastoral approach is gender identity conversion, and detransitioning for those who have already transitioned. Recent research (Turban, 2020) shows how harmful this has been, increasing significantly the risk of suicide.
The section on sex outside marriage is poor (particularly on cohabitation). Same-sex relationships are dealt with relatively briefly, with the standard verses trotted out and alternative interpretations to the conservative one dismissed without consideration. There is also an emphasis that some ‘same-sex attracted’ people can marry people of the opposite sex. This is undoubtedly true for a few individuals, but it is not the case for the majority of gay people.
Overall, this book does not really engage seriously with any counter-arguments, but just presents a certain approach to the Bible, which is then rigidly applied to pastoral situations. This leads to dangerous and in some cases shockingly bad pastoral practices being recommended.
Use with care.
Davison, Andrew, ed. Amazing Love: Theology for Understanding Discipleship, Sexuality and Mission. London: Darton, Longman and Todd Ltd, 2016.
A fairly short book aimed a popular audience, from an inclusivist standpoint. It was put together as a resource for the Church of England debates. The book has a range of contributors, but these are not separated out. The book covers discipleship, the scientific background to the debate, biblical arguments and missional arguments. It is generally well argued, but inevitably too brief to deal with real points of contention in any depth. Thus, for the biblical material, particularly the New Testament texts are only dealt with sketchily, and the reader is signposted to other authors for more detail. This is a good introduction to some of the arguments made for inclusion.
Davison, Richard. Flame of Yahweh: Sexuality in the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic Press, 2007.
Covers Old Testament sexuality, from a ‘traditional’ standpoint. Davison tries to argue that the commandment about Levirate marriage didn’t mean polygamy, and that the Old Testament overall supports monogamy – I’m not sure how successfully.
Diamond, Milton. “Transsexuality among Twins: Identity Concordance, Transition, Rearing, and Orientation.” International Journal of Transgenderism 14 (2013): 24-38.
A twin study (using identical and non-identical twins) which shows that gender identity dysphoria has a strong genetic component (over 20% of variance). This is in line with other studies.
Duffield, Ian K. “The Clear Teaching of the Bible? A Contribution to the Debate About Homosexuality and the Church of England.” The Expository Times 115 (2004): 109-15.
Ian Duffield presents brief arguments over the key verses, arguing that the biblical texts are not appropriate for today’s different context or debate (faithful, Christian homosexuals).
Elliott, John H. “No Kingdom of God for Softies? Or, What Was Paul Really Saying? 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 in Context.” Biblical Theology Bulletin 34 (2004): 17-40.
The article critically examines a range of issues around 1 Cor. 6:9-10, including how malakoi and arsenokoitai have been translated. Elliott considers lexical, biblical and contextual arguments for Paul’s meaning, concluding that great caution is needed because of the lack of clarity, but that the more likely background of arsenokoitai is the abusive pederasty prevalent at the time. Whatever the precise meaning of the terms, Elliott also notes that Paul is including them as examples of ‘unjust’ behaviour. The article interacts with Wright (1984) amongst others. This is a thorough examination of a range of issues around the passage.
Elliott, Neil. Liberating Paul: The Justice of God and the Politics of the Apostle. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2006.
Elliott deals with Romans 1:24f from p.192-95. He links sexual abuse to injustice (adikia). First, he agrees with Scroggs that inequalities of power renders the context utterly different from today’s. Secondly, he asks why Paul focuses on sexual abuse? He argues that Paul relies on moral revulsion not just from Jews, but also gentiles, and finds the answer in the scandalous sexual behaviour of recent emperors. He cites accounts of Tiberius (‘every imaginable unnatural act’); Caligula (routinely raped wives of guests; submitted to foreign hostages; stabbed in the genitals when assassinated by a soldier he had abused); and Nero (rape; incest; brothels; etc). Elliott’s approach is part of a larger argument that the Roman empire is a foil for Paul’s argument.
Gagnon, Robert A. J. The Bible and Homosexual Practice: Texts and Hermeneutics. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2001.
Anti-gay. It can feel like he’s shouting at you. Often quoted/used as a reference point (eg by EA). Disliked by many because of his comments/attitudes as well as being accused of poor scholarship, particularly on the modern science. BUT he has read nearly everything, argues his case strongly, and this is one of the texts that everyone interacts with.
Gagnon, Robert A. J. “Are There Universally Valid Sex Precepts? A Critique of Walter Wink’s Views on the Bible and Homosexuality.” Horizons in Biblical Theology 24 (2002): 72-125.
A response to Walter Wink (2002). Part of a debate between the two.
Glancy, Jennifer A. “The Sexual Use of Slaves: A Response to Kyle Harper on Jewish and Christian Porneia.” Journal of Biblical Literature 134, no. 1 (2015): 215-29.
Glancy takes issue with Harper’s view on what was seen as appropriate for Jewish males, and argues that porneia may not have been seen to include sex with one’s own slaves (in other words, sex with your slaves would not be seen as immoral).
Gnuse, Robert K. “Seven Gay Texts: Biblical Passages Used to Condemn Homosexuality.” Biblical Theology Bulletin 45, no. 2 (2015): 68-87.
Goes through seven key texts. Gnuse refers to a lot of the existing literature, and the bibliography of the article is fairly extensive. Mainly Gnuse rehearses existing arguments about these texts (in an inclusivist direction). He also argues that Romans 1 may be directed in particular to the Isis cult.
Goddard, Andrew. “Semper Reformanda in a Changing World: Calvin, Usury and Evangelical Moral Theology.” In Alister E Mcgrath and Evangelical Theology: A Dynamic Engagement, edited by Sung Wook Chung, 235-63. Carlisle: Paternoster Press, 2003.
Goddard looks at how Calvin treated money-lending (de Usuris), to argue that it provides a template for how the Church today should treat ethical controversies.
A copy of the article is currently available on the Fulcrum website here.
Goddard, Andrew, and Dan Horrocks. Resources for Church Leaders: Biblical and Pastoral Responses to Homosexuality, Resources for Church Leaders. London: Evangelical Alliance, 2012.
Covers the whole issue (not just biblical) from Evangelical Alliance perspective. Doesn’t seem to note serious arguments against seeing 1:26 as being female-female, and dismisses temple context.
Green, Marcus. The Possibility of Difference: A Biblical Affirmation of Inclusivity. London: Kevin Mayhew Ltd, 2018.
Marcus Green is an Anglican, evangelical gay vicar. The book tackles the ‘clobber’ verses, but then goes beyond them to argue for a biblical vision of radical inclusion and love.
Grenz, Stanley J. Sexual Ethics: An Evangelical Perspective. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1990.
Grenz argues that sexuality differences are an essential part of what it means to be human. He argues for a ‘traditional’ viewpoint. The sections on the Bible are relatively brief.
Haller, Tobias Stanislaus. Reasonable and Holy: Engaging Same-Sexuality. New York: Seabury Books, 2009.
Haller argues in favour of the church supporting and blessing same-sex marriage. His approach is to tackle the objections one by one. As this is a popular book, he doesn’t interact much with modern scholarship directly (eg by name), but argues mainly from primary sources (he does interact with Brooten and Miller, in support of Miller, on Romans 1:26, and he also interacts with Gagnon on the meaning of porneia). Deceptively rich and thought-provoking.
Harper, Kyle. “Porneia: The Making of a Christian Sexual Norm.” Journal of Biblical Literature 131, no. 2 (2012): 363-83.
Harper traces how the term porneia developed in early Christian thought and before in Hellenistic Judaism. He notes its relationships with moicheia (violation of a respectable woman). He argues that the term developed to encompass diverse sexual practices that were widely accepted by others. In classical Greek, porneia meant selling oneself for sex. Judaism, through using porneia as a translation for zanah, broadened this to fall into sexual shame, and closely linked this with idolatry. It then developed into meaning any illicit sexual conduct, including (for Jewish males) prostitution (and so unlike the surrounding culture).
Hartke, Austen. Transforming: The Bible and the Lives of Transgender Christians. Louisville, Kentucky: Westminster John Knox Press, 2018.
The book mixes a pastoral, theological and biblical approach at a popular level. It is affirming of those who are transgender.
Hays, Richard B. “Relations Natural and Unnatural: A Response to John Boswell’s Exegesis of Romans 1.” Journal of Religious Ethics 14 (1986): 184-215.
Hays responds to Boswell, arguing that his exegesis of Romans is wrong. Hays argues in particular that Boswell is wrong in asserting that Paul says nothing of those who are ‘naturally’ homosexual, but is addressed to heterosexual men. Secondly, Boswell is wrong in arguing that para phusin should be understood to mean unusual or different, rather than carrying negative connotations.
Hays argues that, as Paul knows nothing of orientation, it cannot be addressed only to heterosexual men. Secondly, he argues that para phusin has a clear history in Jewish and Stoic sources meaning ‘against nature’ (rather than beyond nature) and that homosexual behaviour had a history of being described using these terms. Hays argues that the exegesis has first to be done (which he sees as Paul condemning homosexual behaviour) and then the implications/hermeneutics of this need to be worked out.
Hays’ point about Paul not addressing heterosexual men in particular is one I would agree with. However, he does not address well enough (to my mind) the issue that same-sex activity was so closely tied to pederasty, and he dismisses the idea of pagan worship being a context without explaining why (even though he argues against one of Boswell’s reasons for not agreeing with it). There is also a tendency (picked up on by Martin in a critique of Hays elsewhere) to gloss Romans 1:18f as a universal condemnation of humankind, rather than being strictly limited to gentiles.
Hays, Richard B. The Moral Vision of the New Testament. New York: HarperCollins, 1996.
Sets out the argument against homosexuality based on his reading of Romans 1. Martin interacts with this argument in his book and article.
Hensman, Savitri. “Journey Towards Acceptance: Theologians and Same-Sex Love.” Ekklesia, Retrieved 25th January 2013, http://www.ekklesia.co.uk/files/journey_towards_acceptance_oct_2012_0.pdf.
Charts a range of theologians in a range of denominations who have moved to or are accepting of same-sex relationships.
Herzer, Linda Tatro. The Bible and the Transgender Experience. Cleveland, Ohio: Pilgrim Press, 2016.
A series of studies on biblical passages relevant to the transgender debate, at a popular level. Affirming of transgender Christians.
Hornsby, Teresa A., and Deryn Guest. Transgender, Intersex, and Biblical Interpretation, Semeia Studies vol. 83. Atlanta: SBL Press, 2016.
This book seeks to apply a trans gaze to biblical texts. The co-authors’ starting point is that heteronormativity and heterosexism, buttressed by traditional biblical interpretation (but not inherent in the texts), are foundational lynchpins justifying violence against transgender and intersex persons. They offer examples of alternative readings to biblical texts, challenging heteronormativity that sees gender as natural, fixed and binary rather than constructed, dynamic and malleable.
Hubbard, Thomas K. “Peer Homosexuality.” In A Companion to Greek and Roman Sexualities, edited by Thomas K. Hubbard, 128-49. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2013.
This reviews homosexual attraction and activity between approximately same-age participants in the ancient Greco-Roman world. Hubbard uses a variety of evidence sources including vase depictions.
Huehnergard, John, and Harold Liebowitz. “The Biblical Prohibition against Tattooing.” Vetus Testamentum 63, no. 1 (2013): 59-77.
Lev 19:28 prohibits tattooing, but no reason for the prohibition is given. Since it appears in a context of pagan mourning practices (Lev 19:27,28) it is assumed that the reason for the prohibition lay in its association with such mourning practices. In this paper the authors explore the broader context of the law in biblical times, and how it was understood in subsequent rabbinic times. They propose that in the biblical period the prohibition was associated with the marking of slaves, and that in the subsequent rabbinic period it was associated with paganism. [Taken from authors’ summary]
John, Jeffrey. Permanent, Faithful, Stable: Christian Same-Sex Marriage. New ed. London: Darton, Longman & Todd Ltd, 2012.
Jeffrey John looks at scriptural and moral arguments over same-sex marriage. This is a brief, popular book, so the scriptural arguments are short. In brief, he argues that the ancient world saw homosexual behaviour as being prostitution or pederasty, and so not relevant to today’s arguments where neither of those apply.
Karras, Ruth Mazo. “Active/Passive, Acts/Passions: Greek and Roman Sexualities.” The American Historical Review 105, no. 4 (2000): 1250-65.
Reviews books on ancient sexuality. This reinforces that the ancient construction of sexuality was complex and very different from ours; the emphasis on role played (active passive) was important, in contrast to gender or orientation.
Keen, Karen R. Scripture, Ethics, and the Possibility of Same-Sex Relationships. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2018.
Keen notes the current debates over the ‘clobber’ texts in scripture, reviewing the approaches taken. She suggests that there is currently a stalemate, and looks to resolve it by using scriptural principles that all can adhere to in applying biblical teaching to this issue. Thoughtful, imaginative, careful and non-judgmental.
Keo-Meier, Colton, and Christine M. Labuski. “The Demographics of the Transgender Population.” In International Handbook on the Demography of Sexuality, edited by Amanda K. Baumle, 289-327. New York: Springer, 2013.
Good overview over a range of factors affecting transgender people, including prevalence.
King, Helen. “Temple Prostitution for Christians.” In Shared Conversations. https://sharedconversations.wordpress.com/2016/08/14/temple-prostitution-for-christians/, 2016.
The blogpost highlights how rhetoric around pagan worship and orgies was mainly just that – rhetoric rather than reality.
Lamas Jr, Mark. “The Sin of Cunnilingus.” In Centre for the Study of Christian Origins, edited by Helen Bond, Paul Foster, Larry Hurtado, Timothy Lim, Matthew Novenson, Sara Parvis, Philippa Townsend and Margaret Williams. Edinburgh: New College, University of Edinburgh, 2017.
Warning: Explicit language used. Mark Lamas Jr follows Miller (1996) in arguing that Romans 1:26 refers to unnatural acts between females and males. In particular, he argues that one possibility is male to female cunnilingus (seen as the lowest, most depraved type of passive sex for a man, below being anally penetrated). If so, this would be also having a go at men, explaining why this comes first before male-male in Romans 1:27. He uses Martial and material culture (frescoes from Pompeii, terracotta lamps etc) to lay out the social-sexual context to which Paul would be referring.
The post can currently be found here.
Loader, William. Sexuality in the New Testament: Understanding the Key Texts. London: SPCK, 2010.
This is a shorter, more popular version of his 2012 work (itself part of a broader range of studies he has conducted on sexuality in the ancient world). He is in favour of same-sex marriage, but still understands Paul as being against all forms of same-sex activity.
Loader, William. The New Testament on Sexuality, Attitudes Towards Sexuality in Judaism and Christianity in the Hellenistic Greco-Roman Era. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2012.
Does what it says on the tin.
Malick, David E. “The Condemnation of Homosexuality in 1 Corinthians 6:9.” Bibliotheca Sacra 150 (1993): 479-92.
Argues that malakos and arsenokoites refer to all homosexual behaviour. Mainly engages the argument about pederasty.
Malick, David E. “The Condemnation of Homosexuality in Romans 1:26-27.” Bibliotheca Sacra 150 (1993): 327-40.
Argues that it condemns homosexual activity of all kinds, against Scroggs and others.
Malina, Bruce. “Does Porneia Mean Fornication?” Novum Testamentum 14, no. 1 (1972): 10-17.
Malina argues that porneia refers specifically to sexual relations prohibited by the Torah. Premarital, consensual sex between male and female wasn’t prohibited. Therefore ‘fornication’, usually understood to mean pre-marital sex, is a poor translation.
Mann, Rachel. Dazzling Darkness: Gender, Sexuality, Illness and God. Glasgow: Wild Goose Publications, 2012.
This doesn’t interact directly with the biblical passages. It is an autobiography of someone who is a lesbian, transgender priest with a disability. Thoughtful on God, theology, gender, identity, disability and ministry.
Martin, Dale B. “Heterosexism and the Interpretation of Romans 1:18-32.” Biblical Interpretation 3, no. 3 (1995): 332-55.
Critiques Richard Hays’ interpretation of Romans 1 as an example of ‘heterosexism’. Aims to point out that ‘plain, objective’ readings of texts can import ideology (for example, through universalising Romans 1 to represent humanity’s fallen state, rather than being specific to idolatrous gentiles).
Martin, Dale B. “Arsenokoités and Malakos: Meanings and Consequences.” In Biblical Ethics & Homosexuality: Listening to Scripture, edited by Robert L. Brawley. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1996.
Martin argues that ‘objective’ reading of 1 Cor. 6:9 & 1 Tim. 1:10 are driven more by ideology than by historical criticism. He aims to challenge the idea that an ‘objective’ reading to provide a foundation for ethical reflection is even possible. Thought-provoking. Interacts (in the notes) with Wright.
Martin, Dale B. Sex and the Single Savior: Gender and Sexuality in Biblical Interpretation. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2006.
Argues that Paul’s categories very different from ours; ‘against nature’ is excessive nature.
Miller, James E. “The Practices of Romans 1:26: Homosexual or Heterosexual.” Novum Testamentum 37, no. 1 (1995): 1-11.
Argues that the most likely reading of Romans 1:26 is unnatural heterosexual intercourse rather than female homosexuality. Referenced by Brooten (in a footnote) and also by Haller.
Miller, James E. “Response: Pederasty and Romans 1:27: A Response to Mark Smith.” American Academy of Religion 65, no. 4 (1997): 861-66.
Argues that Smith (1996) was wrong, and that pederasty remained common and acceptable in the period. Miller also reaffirms heterosexual behaviour for Romans 1:26.
Miller, James E. “The Missing 800 Pound Gorilla.” In Society of Biblical Literature. Baltimore, MD, 2013.
In this conference paper, Miller argues that the ‘missing 800 pound gorilla’ in the New Testament (actually Loader’s book about the NT and sexuality) is any concern about procreation. This failure to be concerned about procreation is, Miller says, both uniform and deliberate. Miller argues that the NT has no place for procreation as a sexual value, in contrast both to Judaism of the time and the subsequent early church tradition.
Mock, Steven E., and Richard P. Eibach. “Stability and Change in Sexual Orientation Identity over a 10-Year Period in Adulthood.” Archives of Sexual Behaviour 41, no. 3 (2012): 641-48.
This study looks at sexual orientation over time, to explore how fluid orientation is.
Morschauser, Scott. “‘Hospitality’, Hostiles and Hostages: On the Legal Background to Genesis 19.1-9.” Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 27, no. 4 (2003): 461-85.
Morschauser argues that the Sodomites wished to ascertain why strangers have entered the city (and so ‘know’ is not sexual). Lot offers his daughters as hostages to be held in protective custody. This is rejected by the Sodomites. This abandonment of the rule of law is the sin of Sodom. This interpretation remains a minority one in scholarship, most of which continues to see ‘know’ in a sexual sense (as in the parallel passage in Judges).
Nanos. “Paul’s Reversal of Jews Calling Gentiles ‘Dogs’ (Philippians 3:2): 1600 Years of an Ideological Tale Wagging an Exegetical Dog?” Biblical Interpretation 17 (2009): 448-82.
Nanos, exploring Phil. 3:2, argues that there is scant evidence that Jews regularly called gentiles ‘dogs’. However, this interpretation has led to Christians naming Jews as ‘dogs’. Alternative referents for Paul include worshippers of the goddess cults, and Cynic philosophers.
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 5, no. 2 (1994): 179-206.
This article argues that the verses refer specifically to anal penetration, and were originally addressed to the penetrator. The article speculates as to reasons for the inclusion of these verses, considering various possibilities. Two in particular are highlighted: that the active male is feminizing the passive male (or is not conforming to his class by choosing another male as the partner – cf Mary Douglas); or that the mix of semen and excrement is defiling.
Paul, Ian. Same-Sex Unions: The Key Biblical Texts, Grove Biblical. Cambridge: Grove Books Limited, 2014.
A short booklet, giving a brief flavour of the arguments on both sides for the key biblical texts. Usually, Paul comes down in favour of the ‘traditional’ side in each case.
Petersen, William L. “Can Ἀρσενοκοῖται Be Translated by “Homosexuals”?” Vigiliae Christianae 40 (1986): 187-91.
Petersen was an early critic of using ‘homosexual’ as a suitable category for the ancient world, arguing that it only really emerges as a category in 1869 with a Hungarian doctor called Benkert who first used the term for those oriented towards their own sex. In contrast, the ancient world was unconcerned generally with orientation, and concentrated on acts. Translation of arsenokoitai as homosexuals thus incorrectly includes the celibate; incorrectly excludes heterosexuals engaging in same-sex activity; and incorrectly includes female homosexuals.
Philo. De Specialibus Legibus. Philonis Alexandrini opera quae supersunt. Vol. 5. Edited by L. Cohn. Reprint ed. Berlin: De Gruyter, 1962.
Ruden, Sarah. Paul among the People: The Apostle Reinterpreted and Reimagined in His Own Time. New York: Image Books, 2010.
Chapter 3 explores the cultural background to Romans 1. Ruden produces a variety of evidence to demonstrate the violent, shaming, pederastic nature of male same-sex activity in the ancient world. She argues that ‘none of the sources, objectively read, backs up’ the idea of friendly couplings (p.49).
Sanders, A. R., E. R. Martin, G. W. Beecham, S. Guo, K. Dawood, G. Rieger, J. A. Badner, E. S. Gershon, R. S. Krishnappa, A. B. Kolundzija, J. Duan, P. V. Gejman, and J. M. Bailey. “Genome-Wide Scan Demonstrates Significant Linkage for Male Sexual Orientation.” Psychological Medicine 45, no. 07 (2015): 1379-88.
Scientific paper, indicating there may be some linkage between certain genes and male sexual orientation.
Scroggs, Robin. The New Testament and Homosexuality. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983.
An influential book, with which most subsequent scholars interact. Scroggs argues that biblical statements about sexuality have to be understood and read within the understanding of the ancient world, whereas (when he was writing) many commentators equated homosexuality now with behaviour then. He emphasises that most same-sex behaviour was pederasty. Thus, when Philo, for example, writes about Lev. 18:22 or 20:13, he does so with pederasty in mind. Thus, the passages in the Bible about same-sex activity refer to a completely different situation, and are irrelevant today.
Shaw, David, ed. True to Form, Primer. Market Harborough: FIEC, 2016.
A collection of essays on gender and sexuality written for the Fellowship of Independent Evangelical Churches. Contributors include Sam Allberry, Ed Shaw, Pete Sanlon and others.
Ed Shaw provides a thoughtful piece analysing contemporary culture, and the changes that have taken it to its current state. Pete Sanlon interacts with Foucault’s History of Sexuality.
Alastair Roberts argues that Genesis offers a firm foundation for traditional views for sexuality and gender, using the analogy of harmony and music. This results in a strongly complementarian view of males and females; an argument that only male-female marriage is possible; and that changing one’s sex can ‘only ever be a fiction’ (p.40).
Sam Allberry briefly reviews literature on the subject, mainly from a conservative viewpoint (he only mentions Vines and Brownson). Interestingly, he argues that the key Biblical passages are Genesis 1-2 and Matthew 19:3ff – Romans 1 and 1 Cor. 6 ‘ends up being a bit of a smokescreen’ (p.46). Marriage becomes a dominant metaphor through which to understand the biblical story.
Robert Smith offers a ‘pastoral’ response to the transgender ‘crisis’. In practice, he argues that the basic assumptions behind transgenderism are false, and the goals impossible. Those who have already transitioned should stop hormones, & dress and identify according to their birth gender. They should consider themselves as eunuchs for the kingdom, and look forward to resurrection bodies (which are sexed).
Peter Saunders reviews the medical side of gender dysphoria, generally sticking to factual description.
Sharon James looks at gender identity in schools and courts, providing conservative churches with advice on how to challenge or respond. Ironically, she points out the dangers of boys not fitting male stereotypes (and perhaps therefore seeing themselves as female) without addressing the strong division between male and female that others in the volume introduce.
Overall, this is a mixed bag. Throughout there is a concern for those who identify as same-sex attracted, or transgendered. However, the strong emphasis on complementarity and fixed gender identity result in a pastoral approach that lacks any flexibility. It is also interesting how the locus for this has shifted to Genesis and Matthew in arguments over the Bible from Romans and 1 Corinthians.
Shaw, Ed. The Plausibility Problem: The Church and Same-Sex Attraction. Nottingham: Inter-Varsity Press, 2015.
A book aimed at traditional evangelical churches, asking for them to create contexts where same-sex attracted men and women can flourish whilst remaining celibate. At the back of the book the biblical arguments are briefly addressed, using a template of creation, fall, redemption and perfection. Another appendix addresses those who argue in favour of same-sex relationships, characterising them as implausible. Shaw’s treatment doesn’t address many of the arguments raised in recent scholarship (but, it is not really aimed at that audience).
Siker, Jeffrey S., ed. Homosexuality in the Church: Both Sides of the Debate. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1994.
Covers the debate from a number of angles, with contributors from both sides. The biblical material is covered by Hays and Furnish.
Smith, Elke Stefanie, Jessica Junger, Birgit Derntl, and Ute Habel. “The Transsexual Brain – a Review of Findings on the Neural Basis of Transsexualism.” Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews 59 (2015): 251-66.
Smith, Mark D. “Ancient Bisexuality and the Interpretation of Romans 1:26-27.” Journal of the American Academy of Religion 64, no. 2 (1996): 223-56.
Argues that pederasty is not the context, and that Romans 1:26 is female-female. See the rebuttal by Miller (1997).
Song, Robert. Covenant and Calling: Towards a Theology of Same-Sex Relationships. London: SCM Press, 2014.
Song tries to get beyond the ‘key verses’ approach to the Bible. He tries to sketch out a big picture approach to the Bible, using (in part) the themes of creation and covenant to argue in favour of same-sex covenant relationships. He does address the ‘key verses’ (in a brief way), and is happy to accept, for the sake of argument, conventional readings of the texts (without saying that they must be read in this way). He argues that the coming of Christ changes what we should expect for human sexuality. In other words, that, as with slavery and women, there is a trajectory in scripture which allows for a fresh understanding of sexuality. The back of the book also gives a helpful list of further reading with comments on each suggestion.
Sprinkle, Preston, William Loader, Megan DeFranza, Wesley Hill, and Stephen R. Holmes, eds. Two Views on Homosexuality, the Bible, and the Church. Edited by Stanley N. Gundry, Counterpoints. Grand Rapids, M.I.: Zondervan Academic, 2016.
Stone, Mark Preston. “Don’t Do What to Whom? A Survey of Historical-Critical Scholarship on Leviticus 18.22 and 20.13.” Currents in Biblical Research 20, no. 3 (2022): 207-37.
A review of the different proposals for understanding Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13. Stone notes 21 different approaches, and goes into the main variations in more detail.
Swancutt, Diana M. ““The Disease of Effemination”: The Charge of Effeminacy and the Verdict of God (Romans 1:18–2:16).” In New Testament Maculinities, edited by Stephen D. Moore and Janice Capel Anderson. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2003.
Swancutt argues that Romans 1 targets two features that were viewed as dangerous in the ancient world: uncontrolled desire, which led to gender boundary behaviour – in men, effemination. She sees this as being particularly targetted at Stoics, who had a leading role among the elite, particularly in Rome at the time. They claimed to live according to nature, yet were often caricatured as hypocrites owing to their pederasty and giving in to lusts. Swancutt further claims that this continues into Romans 2 – where ‘the one who judges’ is implicitly a stoic man with authority. This fits in with various patristic interpretations of Romans, which also focus on the way that gender is being subverted, and relate it to rulers and leaders. Paul is therefore attacking Romanitas, with its presumption to rule well, by using gender stereotypes to point out the insanity of expecting them, rather than God, to dispense justice. The Romans judge ‘like a girl’.
In particular, Swancutt interacts with Brooten, arguing that Brooten tries too hard to find lesbianism in this and other passages. Swancutt argues that in Romans 1:26 the point is that the women become active, rather than passive – the object of their sexual activity is immaterial. But the main focus is on male behaviour which has become passive and effeminising. This fits within a single-sex understanding of biology, with a vertically arranged hierarchy from male to female.
Swancutt therefore also argues against any who see any form of complementarity of the sexes at work here, and any who see any form of orientation being used. It is active males feminising themselves or others that is the issue, caused by uncontrolled lust and desire.
Tallon, Jonathan. Affirmative: Why You Can Say Yes to the Bible and Yes to People Who Are LGBTQI+. Manchester: Richardson Jones Press, 2023.
This is my book. It covers the general background to sexuality in the ancient world, and considers the arguments made against inclusion from what are sometimes known as the ‘clobber’ verses from Romans, 1 Corinthians, Leviticus and Genesis. It also goes beyond this, to include a consideration of parallels between this issue and the biblical debates about slavery in the eighteenth century. It also shows how Acts 10-15 provides a template for a positive biblical inclusion of LGBTQI+ people.
Thatcher, Adrian. “The One Sex Theory and Why It Still Matters.” In Theology and Religion Seminar. University of Exeter, 2012.
Thatcher argues that the ancient world conceived of humanity as being one sex (with a hierarchy from male to female) rather than two sexes, which is a modern idea. This has implications for how Genesis, for example, should be read, as well as offering new perspectives on intersex and transgender. He argues that the church should seek to redeem the one-sex approach rather than to baptise the two-sex approach.
Thatcher, Adrian. “Redefining Marriage?” In Centre for the Study of Christianity and Sexuality Annual Conference. Birmingham, 2014.
Thatcher considers marriage, including the history of how it has been defined (which illustrates many changes along the way). Contemporary theological models of marriage (he outlines eight) are compatible with same-sex couples being married.
Thatcher, Adrian. Redeeming Gender. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016.
The Standing Doctrinal Commission of The Church in Wales. “The Church in Wales and Same-Sex Partnerships.” 2014.
This report includes general background material for the debate, as well as presenting three options from differing perspectives.
The report can be currently be found here.
Töyräänvuori, Joanna. “Homosexuality, the Holiness Code, and Ritual Pollution: A Case of Mistaken Identity.” Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 45, no. 2 (2020): 236-67.
This article argues that the Levitical verses refer to two men simultaneously having intercourse with the same woman. The prohibition is to prevent offspring whose parentage is unclear (& therefore abominable), which would lead to pollution of the Promised Land.
Townsley, Jeramy. “Paul, the Goddess Religions, and Queer Sects: Romans 1:23–28.” Journal of Biblical Literature 130, no. 4 (2011): 707-28.
Townsley argues that the contexts for Romans 1 are the Goddess cults, which explains all the phenomena mentioned. He argues against a female-female understanding of Romans 1:26. Future scholarship will need to take this article into account; to date, little scholarship has interacted with this argument.
It is accessible here.
Townsley, Jeramy. “Queer Sects in Patristic Commentaries on Romans 1:26-27: Goddess Cults, Free Will, and “Sex Contrary to Nature”?” Journal of the American Academy of Religion (2012).
This is a companion piece to Townsley (2011), building upon his argument there. Townsley shows how the early Church interpreted Romans 1:26-27 as a reference to the sexual practices of goddess cults (relevant in a polytheistic environment), not homosexuality. Romans 1:26b was not interpreted to mean female-female sex until the fourth century.
It is accessible here.
Turban, Jack L., Noor Beckwith, Sari L. Reisner, and Alex S. Keuroghlian. “Association between Recalled Exposure to Gender Identity Conversion Efforts and Psychological Distress and Suicide Attempts among Transgender Adults.” JAMA Psychiatry 77, no. 1 (2020): 68-76.
This is a study using over 27,000 transgender people. Those who had been exposed to gender identity conversion efforts (whether by professional or religious advisor) were significantly more likely to lead to severe psychological distress and lifetime suicide attempts (roughly twice as likely). If the person was exposed to this under the age of 10, the results were more damaging – lifetime suicide attempts were four times as likely.
This report is evidence that attempts to convert people’s gender identity is damaging.
Vedeler, Harold Torger. “Reconstructing Meaning in Deuteronomy 22:5: Gender, Society, and Transvestitism in Israel and the Ancient near East.” Journal of Biblical Literature 127, no. 3 (2008): 459-76.
Vedeler argues that the context for Deut. 22:5 is that transvestitism in neighbouring nations was only associated with the cult (specifically of Ashtarte and Inanna/Istar). The prohibition is on a ‘superior man’ (geber rather than normal Hebrew word for man) taking part in a cult-like activity, and on a woman taking the military arms of a superior man. His suggested translation is ‘A woman shall not be associated with the instrument of a superior man, and a superior man shall not wear the garment of a woman, for whoever does these things is a cultic abomination to Yahweh your God.’ (p.476)
The passage, on this basis, would not be addressing wider cases of cross dressing.
Vines, Matthew. God and the Gay Christian: The Biblical Case in Support of Same-Sex Relationships. Reprint ed. New York: Convergent Books, 2015.
Matthew Vines is prominent in the US as a supporter of gay Christians. This book presents a summary of arguments currently used regarding various issues (including biblical texts).
Walsh, Jerome T. “Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13: Who Is Doing What to Whom?” Journal of Biblical Literature 120, no. 2 (2001): 201-09.
This is quite a technical article working out exactly what is implied by the Hebrew of the Levitical passages. He argues that specifically male-male anal intercourse is meant, where one participant is a free adult Israelite taking the passive role.
Wiepjes, C. M., N. M. Nota, de Blok Cjm, M. Klaver, de Vries Alc, Wensing-Kruger Sa, de Jongh Rt, Mark-Bram Bouman, T. Steensma, P. Cohen-Kettenis, Gooren Ljg, Kreukels Bpc, and M. denHeijer. “The Amsterdam Cohort of Gender Dysphoria Study (1972-2015): Trends in Prevalence, Treatment, and Regrets.” The Journal of Sexual Medicine 15 (2018): 582-90.
The study covers all those who attended the gender identity clinic in Amsterdam from 1972 to 2015 (this includes 95% of people treated in the Netherlands). The number of people presenting has increased 20-fold in that time. The number who experienced regret after gonadectomy remained small (0.6% transwomen; 0.3% transmen). About half of these cases of regret were ‘social regret’ – where it was too difficult to maintain an identity owing to context (eg family pressure).
Williams, Craig. Roman Homosexuality. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010.
Covers the whole field of ancient Roman homosexuality. Does for the Romans what Dover did for the Greeks (as Nussbaum notes in the foreword). Williams in his introduction notes how problematic it is to talk of ‘homosexuality’ when Rome did not use that cultural category.
Williams, Rowan. The Body’s Grace. 2nd ed. London: LGCM/ISCS, 2002.
This is actually more of a pamphlet. It is a lecture given by Rowan Williams, exploring the relationship between sexual intimacy and grace. It has been called the ‘best 10 pages written about sexuality in the twentieth century’.
Wilson, Alan. More Perfect Union: Understanding Same-Sex Christian Marriage. London: Darton, Longman & Todd Ltd, 2014.
Alan Wilson’s book is a popular presentation in favour of same-sex marriage. The sections on the Bible are relatively brief.
Wink, Walter, and Robert A. J. Gagnon. “To Hell with Gays?” Christian Century, 2002, 32-44.
This is part of an exchange between Robert Gagnon and Walter Wink. Wink is not impressed with Gagnon’s arguments.
Wright, David F. “Homosexuals or Prostitutes? The Meaning of Αρσενοκοιται (1 Cor. 6:9, 1 Tim. 1:10).” Vigiliae Christianae 38 (1984): 125-53.
Wright is arguing with Boswell. Wright argues that the term arsenokoitai included homosexuality generally, not just pederasty (though ends with noting interchangeability with paidophthoria, then arguing that latter is included in former). He appeals in part to similarities with Levitical language in the Septuagint. See also Martin (1996) who criticises Wright’s arguments.
Wykes, Michael. “Devaluing the Scholastics: Calvin’s Ethics of Usury.” Calvin Theological Journal 38 (2003): 27-51.
Wykes compares Calvin’s approach to money-lending with that of Aquinas, showing how Calvin treated the problem differently, allowing a different resolution.
Zeichmann, Christopher B. “Rethinking the Gay Centurion: Sexual Exceptionalism, National Exceptionalism in Readings of Matt. 8:5-13//Luke 7:1-10.” The Bible and Critical Theory 11 (2015): 35-54.
Zucker, Kenneth J., Anne A. Lawrence, and Baudewijntje P. C. Kreukels. “Gender Dysphoria in Adults.” Annual Review of Clinical Psychology 12 (2016): 217-47.
