This page examines a frequently debated verse without treating one interpretation as the only possible reading. It distinguishes the wording of the text from later translations, theological conclusions and contemporary applications.
What surrounds Leviticus 18:22?
Leviticus 18 belongs to a section of the Hebrew Scriptures that presents boundaries for Israelite communal life. The chapter addresses prohibited family relationships, sexual conduct, ritual allegiance and the practices of neighboring peoples. Its themes are connected to holiness and separation from forms of worship regarded by the text as incompatible with Israel's covenant.
Verses 6–21 list prohibited relationships and acts, including sexual relations involving close relatives, a father's wife, a daughter-in-law, a sister-in-law, a woman and her daughter, and a neighbor's wife. Other verses address sexual contact during menstruation and relationships that the text frames as violations of kinship or marriage boundaries.
Verse 22 and its wording
Many English Bibles translate the verse as a prohibition against a man lying with another male in the manner associated with a woman. The Hebrew phrase is compact and difficult to map onto modern categories. In particular, the text does not use the contemporary distinction between sexual orientation, identity and behavior.
Translations differ in how much explanation they add. Some retain a close rendering of the Hebrew construction; others use a smoother phrase that makes an interpretive decision about the kind of intercourse or relationship in view. Those choices can make a translation appear more specific than the underlying wording.
Broad reading
Some interpreters understand the verse as a general prohibition on male same-sex intercourse and classify it as a moral rule with continuing significance.
Contextual reading
Other interpreters connect the verse closely with the chapter's purity, kinship and religious-boundary concerns, and therefore limit its scope or reject applying it to every modern same-sex relationship.
Idolatry and the surrounding chapter
The preceding and following material repeatedly discusses the religious identity of Israel and the practices of other peoples. Verse 21 prohibits dedicating children to Molech and links that act with the worship concerns of the chapter. This context leads some readers to ask whether verse 22 also addresses a particular ancient ritual or social setting.
Other readers argue that the verse's placement among several sexual prohibitions shows that it should be read as an independent rule, even though the chapter as a whole also addresses idolatry and communal boundaries. The disagreement is therefore not simply about one word; it concerns how legal units, literary context and ancient social practices should be weighed.
How interpreters use the verse today
Religious communities do not speak with one voice about Leviticus 18:22. Conservative interpretations commonly treat it as a continuing moral prohibition. Progressive and affirming interpretations may regard it as addressing a different ancient practice, a form of ritualized behavior, or a social world unlike modern relationships. Some communities retain a restrictive reading while rejecting hostility or unequal treatment toward LGBTQ+ people.
A responsible discussion should avoid claiming that a translation alone proves a modern policy. It should also avoid describing people by a disputed ancient category. The verse can be studied historically and theologically while recognizing that its interpretation has real consequences for dignity, belonging and civil rights.
Questions for further study
- What does the wider holiness material contribute to the reading of chapter 18?
- How do different translations handle the Hebrew phrase and what assumptions do they reveal?
- Which ancient social and religious practices are relevant, and which are being supplied by modern readers?
- How do Jewish, Christian and non-religious scholars distinguish historical explanation from present-day ethics?
- What principles of equal treatment and freedom of conscience should guide public policy?
Related reading
- Two types of sin in the Mosaic Code
- Ceremonial impurity and Leviticus
- Sexual orientation and religion
- Sex and gender in Christian thought
- Human rights and religious belief
Editorial note
This article is an educational comparison of interpretations. It does not reproduce a complete Bible translation or claim to resolve a continuing theological disagreement. Readers should consult the translation, commentary or tradition they are studying and compare its treatment with other approaches.