Who This is For:

Anyone who’s been shown Romans 1 as a “case‑closed” proof that gays won’t be in Heaven and anyone who wants a careful, context‑rich read that takes Scripture and queer people seriously.
This post is long because different points connect with different people. Take what’s helpful, return to it later, and share your own insights with me any time.

---

The Passage: Romans 1:21–32

For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles.

Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.

Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones.  In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.

Furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done. They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents;  they have no understanding, no fidelity, no love, no mercy. Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.

---

The Traditional View:

• Focuses on verses 26-27
• Paul condemns all same-sex behavior as a timeless moral truth.
• “Against nature” is read as an unchanging category of sin.
• “Due penalty” is interpreted as God’s judgment specifically for same-sex acts.

The Traditional View has deep historical roots, but it’s not as straightforward as many assume. Early church writers like John Chrysostom and Augustine commented on this passage, but they did so in the context of their own cultural assumptions about sex, marriage, and “natural use,”  often defining “unnatural” to include certain heterosexual acts as well. Over the centuries, translation choices reinforced a moralized reading: rendering the Greek para physin simply as “against nature” without nuance, and interpreting “due penalty” as divine punishment for same-sex acts specifically. By the late medieval and early modern periods, this interpretation had hardened into a doctrinal certainty within much of the Western church, and by the time of modern evangelicalism, it became a central “clobber passage” used to declare all same-sex relationships inherently sinful.

For a clear summary of the traditional evangelical interpretation, see The Gospel Coalition’s article homosexuality.

---

A Contextual Reading:

We’ve all been told Romans 1 singles out LGBTQ people, but that’s not the real story here. Paul isn’t starting his letter to the Romans by focusing on the gays, he’s building a case against people who knew God, but turned away.

His description of “shameful lusts” in verses 26–27 isn’t the starting point. It’s the consequence of something deeper: exchanging the glory of God for idols, claiming wisdom while becoming fools, and trading the Creator for created things.

Romans 1 isn’t Paul’s mic-drop on sexuality, it’s his bait to expose hypocrisy.

And here’s the kicker: if you nod along while Paul lists their failures, you’re walking right into his trap. Because by the time you hit Romans 2:1, he turns it around: “You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment.”

Let’s break it down…

---

The Real Starting Point: Idolatry:

Paul’s opening critique is laser-focused on people who:

• Knew God
• Refused to glorify or thank Him
• Became darkened in heart and mind
• Traded God’s glory for idols

Everything in verses 26–27 flows from this spiritual unfaithfulness, not from sexual orientation.

---

Paul’s Rhetorical Trap

Romans 1:18–32 paints “those people” in dark, exaggerated colors while Paul’s audience nods along in disgust. But then 2:1 drops the reveal: if you’re judging them, you’re guilty too. Paul’s aim isn’t to equip judges, it’s to disarm them.

Recognizing Paul’s rhetorical trap in Romans 1–2 is essential for reading the passage faithfully. In 1:18–32, Paul sketches an unflattering portrait of “those people,” the idolaters whose lives spiral into moral and social chaos. His Jewish and God-fearing Gentile audience would have been nodding along, confident they were on the right side of the story. But that agreement is exactly what Paul is after. In 2:1, he springs the trap: “You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment.” By echoing familiar moral critiques like those the Romans of the day would have been familiar with, Paul draws his listeners into judging others before revealing that all are guilty and in need of grace.

This context cue is critical because it shows Romans 1 was never meant as a proof-text for targeting one group of people, but as a setup to dismantle self-righteousness.

---

Jewish Moral Framework

Paul’s flow mirrors Wisdom of Solomon 13–14:
Idolatry → sexual immorality → societal collapse.

This is important because he’s using a familiar Jewish critique, not introducing a universal ban on same-sex love.

Note: The Wisdom of Solomon (also called The Book of Wisdom) is a Jewish work written in Greek, probably from the 1st or 2nd century BCE, and is included in the Deuterocanonical books. Scholars note that Paul’s structure in Romans 1:18–32 is so close to Wisdom of Solomon’s that it’s likely he’s intentionally echoing it, using a well-known Jewish critique of paganism before springing the “you too are guilty” turn in Romans 2.

Source: The Gospel Coalition

---

What Sexual Practices Paul Actually Knew

Paul’s Greco-Roman context included:

• Pederasty (adult men with adolescent boys) 
• Temple prostitution tied to idol worship – Both male and female prostitution were common. Male prostitutes often served a male clientele, and their services were generally accepted within certain societal boundaries.​
• Sex with enslaved people, never consensual
• Relationships defined by power and status, not equality or covenant

These are the kinds of acts that fit Paul’s description of “shameful” and “unnatural.” Scholars note that the same-sex relationships of today (committed, covenantal marriages) were not well-known. This is important context to keep in mind when looking at the verses that Evangelicals use to classify LGBTQ people. 

And the concept of fixed orientation didn’t exist in Paul’s day, so applying it here is historically off-base.

---

Why Start with Women?

Mentioning women first, let alone female same-sex acts which were rarely mentioned and often viewed as especially shocking in the ancient world would have surprised ALL ancient readers. 

Paul leads with women to amplify the rhetorical punch before moving to men and before turning his fire on his judgmental readers. This should communicate to readers that Paul is intentionally setting up the bomb he’s about to drop in 2:1.

---

Excessive Lust and “Exchange”

Paul says they abandoned their usual relations, driven by inflamed lust, not innate orientation.

Chrysostom (4th c.): They “possessed” legitimate intercourse but chose something else out of “monstrous insanity.” Here he is describing heterosexuals acting outside their usual relations due to excess desire, not condemning innate orientation.

Paul’s target is indulgence without restraint. This is key because we are so often taught verses 26-27 call out all gays and is an inarguable source either all LGBTQ people are separated from God or that those who have same-sex sex are. When very incredibly clearly Paul is identifying a completely different people here. 

Source: New Advent Homily

---

What “Against Nature” Really Means

The Greek: παρὰ φύσιν (para physin) often gets translated to “contrary to custom” or “unusual,” not always as inherently sinful.

• 1 Corinthians 11:13–16: “Nature” as hair-length tradition.
• Romans 11:24: “Against nature” describes God’s radical inclusion, something good.

We also have a few verses where we see how Paul has flexibility with “nature” (physis):

• Galatians 4:8: “By nature (physis) are not gods.” Here “nature” means inherent quality or status, not morality.
• Ephesians 2:3: “We were by nature (physis) deserving of wrath.” A descriptive of human condition, not a chosen moral act.

This is important because if Paul can use para physin for something praiseworthy (Romans 11:24) and use physis for matters of cultural convention (1 Corinthians 11:14), then “against nature” in Romans 1:26 can’t automatically mean “immoral for all people in all times.” It must be read in light of context. Furthermore, para physin is used outside sexual contexts in Greek literature to describe things unusual but not immoral.

Rendering physis as “nature” without nuance has locked in a moralized reading for centuries.

---

“Due Penalty” Isn’t As Clear As We’ve Been Taught

Meanings: 

• Consequences built into the behavior (social breakdown, relational chaos)
• Spiritual alienation
• In ancient worldview, even illness which was a cultural assumption, not divine command

When Paul says those in Romans 1 “received in themselves the due penalty for their error,” the phrase has been read in more than one way. 

Some interpreters see it as describing natural consequences built into the behavior itself: broken relationships, loss of community, or the erosion of trust that comes from using others for gratification. 

Others understand it as spiritual alienation, the inward decay that comes from turning away from God. 

And others note that in the ancient worldview, illness or physical misfortune was often assumed to be divine punishment, even when the connection wasn’t literal.

Here Paul’s language reflects the cultural assumptions of his time, not a direct statement of God’s eternal judgment. Taken together, these possibilities remind us that “due penalty” is not a simple proof-text for divine wrath against LGBTQ people, but a phrase that requires historical, cultural, and theological nuance to interpret well.

---

Reading Romans 1 in Proper Context:

• The main critique is idolatry and what flows from it, not loving same-sex relationships.
  
• Romans 1 is part of a build-up to Romans 2’s warning against judging.
  
• It should make us wary of weaponizing Scripture, not eager to do it. 

---

Takeaways

• Paul’s opening chapter calls out those who knew God yet turned away  not modern LGBTQ people seeking to live faithfully.
  
• “Against nature” is cultural shorthand, not a moral absolute. 
• His real point: everyone needs grace, and no one gets to sit in the judgment seat. 

---

Resources

• Wisdom of Solomon 13–14 — Jewish moral backdrop
• John Chrysostom, Homily 4 on Romans — “monstrous insanity” from lust
  
• Augustine, Marriage and Desire — “unnatural” includes some heterosexual acts
  
• The Reformation Project — Romans 1 breakdown
  
• Anti Justice Mag — “Reframing Romans 1”
  
• Resources for Church Leaders wrestling with LGBTQ questions: Small Church Big Table

---

 

This blog post is part of an ongoing project to explore difficult biblical texts with honesty, care, and curiosity. It will be updated over time with more resources and insights, so please bookmark.

If this helped you, consider sharing it with someone who’s wrestling with the same questions. You’re not alone.

Be well,
David

P.S. Would you take a sec to subscribe on YouTube

Leviticus 18