Of all the crazy shit organized religion asks us to believe about the Bible, the craziest is that in four thousand years of human history there was not a single queer.

For centuries, the Bible has been a favored tool by countless oppressors in their fight against LGBTQ rights. Scripture, they insist, is clear about God's position on gay relationships: they're "an abomination." Except the Bible doesn't say that. Unlike the public figures and presidential hopefuls constantly spouting it, the Bible actually has a lot of nuance and is capable of metaphor.

In the most commonly referenced verse (Leviticus 18:22*, “Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination”), the Hebrew word To'ebah was translated into English as "abomination," but it's actually a technical term for what is “ritually unclean”, like pork or having sex with a woman on her period. To'ebah wasn't about moral or ethical issues; the passage more than likely referred to the perceived ickiness of non-traditional gender roles. See? Nuance!

Christian authorities on biblical interpretation, seminarians, and biblical scholars agree that there is zero evidence that the Bible condemns homosexuality. Besides, the authors of the various books of the Bible didn't share our modern sexual customs anyway—marriages were arranged and romantic dating hadn't even been invented yet. Their cultural understanding of sexual relationships had less to do with desire and way more to do with power and divisions of class.

Sex was a valence; penetration was seen as a mode of asserting cultural dominance. The proper targets of a man’s sexual desire would've been those whose legal and political rights were below his—specifically women, boys, and foreigners or slaves of either gender. Sex was sex no matter the gender of the person getting you off; the idea that some sort of innate, personal sexuality could define the experience of sex would've been alien to ancient peoples. (Or ancient to alien peoples?)

Just because queerness hadn't been defined yet doesn't mean it didn't exist. The fact that the Bible makes no specific mention of its immorality is actually evidence for the relative acceptance of romantic homosexual relationships at the time.



A closer look at the Bible reveals gay people doing gay shit together from the very gay beginning.



The Old Testament contains one of history's greatest lesbian romances: Ruth and Naomi. Naomi was an Israelite whose husband and sons died during a famine, leaving her alone with her daughters-in-law, Orpah and Ruth. Ruth and Naomi eventually exchange vows of love and Ruth goes on to marry a man, Boaz, explicitly to protect the women’s relationship and ensure their survival.

Here's Ruth's declaration of love to Naomi: "Entreat me not to leave thee, or to return from following after thee: for whither thou goest, I will go; and where thou lodgest, I will lodge: thy people shall be my people, and thy God my God" (Ruth 1:16). Ironically, this passage has been used in straight wedding ceremonies for years.

A few verses earlier, Ruth embraces Naomi: "And they lifted up their voice, and wept again; and Orpah kissed her mother-in-law, but Ruth clave unto her" (Ruth 1:14). The Hebrew word for "clave" in that verse is the same word that’s used to describe the straight marriage of Adam and Eve's children: "Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh” (Genesis 2:24). This is one of the more hotly debated bits of language in the Bible, but the evidence absolutely suggests the word “clave” may have had the same sexual connotation for Ruth and Naomi as it did for Adam's sons.