The History of a Label - LGBTQ & the Bible

More Than Words

The terms used to describe same-sex attraction and those who experience it have shifted repeatedly over the centuries. Across the world and throughout history, these labels have carried power far beyond their letters. They have united and divided, comforted and confronted, inspired and intimidated. Because words are never neutral.

When a word carries misunderstanding, it can spark prejudice, rejection, and even violence. When it carries understanding, it can foster dignity, connection, compassion, and love.

This is the history of the words that paved the way to “gay”.

Part 1: Labels Before “Homosexual”

History tells a story of Diversity

Long before the modern word existed, same-sex relationships and gender diversity were acknowledged around the world. And in many places, honored.

Historical and anthropological records document more than 150 Indigenous North American nations with traditions recognizing people who lived outside today’s Western categories of gender and sexuality. Among them were the Lakota winkte (feminine men with spiritual or ceremonial responsibilities, believed to hold special insight), the Navajo nádleehi, the Crow baté, and many others now often described under the pan-Indigenous term Two-Spirit.

In South America, chronicles from the Andes describe the quariwarmi, “female men” in Inca culture who often served as priests in temple rituals.

Across Africa, traditions varied. Among the Azande of Sudan, male warriors sometimes took younger male partners. In Nigeria’s Igbo culture, di-nwanyị (“female husbands”) entered socially recognized same-sex marriages, often to secure lineage and inheritance.

In Asia, the pre-colonial Philippines had the babaylan, spiritual leaders who could be male, female, or gender-nonconforming. In Japan, wakashudō described same-sex bonds between samurai and their younger companions. Ancient China recorded the duànxiù zhī pì, a term they used for male-male love.

In the Middle East, ancient Mesopotamian records mention priests engaged in same-sex relationships, with the šassinnu taking the receptive role. The medieval Arab world had a rich vocabulary for same-sex love, including mukhannath, a term sometimes used for men with male partners.

Persian literature celebrated the beauty of the amrad (a beardless youth) in romantic verse. In Ottoman Turkish, terms such as köçek (young male dancers who were objects of desire) and oğlan sevgisi (“boy love”) appear in historical sources.

For centuries, relationships between people of the same sex were woven into the spiritual, artistic, and communal life of societies across the globe.

But the tides were about to change.

Ancient Greece Words Start Shifting

One of the richest languages in the world (often claimed to have the largest lexicons of any historical language), Ancient Greek had a few terms for gay relationships. Dating back to 8th century documents, we see words like:

φίλοι: “friends in a romantic or affectionate sense”, sometimes used for male-male bonds.
ἑταῖροι: “male companions,” which were also used for romantic or erotic male-male relationships.

With the rise of Macedonian and Hellenistic monarchies (5th–3rd century BCE), Greece began a gradual and uneven shift, from celebrating many equal-status male relationships to increasingly criticizing them. In elite political and philosophical circles, new ideals of masculinity, hierarchy, and reproduction took hold, fostering greater disapproval of certain same-sex bonds. While male-male relationships continued openly in some contexts, the moralizing trend among cultural elites slowly filtered into broader society. Similar shifts unfolded elsewhere.

ἑραστής: an individual man in love with another man, but often also used for the relationship between the older male partner in a socially recognized pederastic relationship.
ἐρώμενος: the younger male partner in that relationship.
eρασταί: two men in love
ἀνδροβάτης: men having sex with men
αρρενομανής & ἀρρενομιξία: “adult men” having sex with “males” (which often meant young male)
κολομπαράδες: the active sexual man on top (the penetrator)
κῐ́ναιδος: the sexual man on the bottom (the man being penetrated)
ἑταιρίστριαι: female lovers

Across regions, the rise of centralized empires, stronger patriarchal structures, and moral codes prioritizing reproduction, dominance and hierarchy reduced the public space for honoring equal-status male partnerships, even if such relationships endured in private.

The Condemnation of the Middle Ages

The Middle Ages brought many new sexual rules. With those, judgement and condemnation arose towards anyone who did not abide. The word “sodomy” or “Sodomite” became a slur that condemned any sexual act that was not procreative.
Originally, “sodomite” only referred to a person from the city of Sodom. Sometimes, Jews used the term to say: “to act in the manner of Sodom” (referring to someone who was unwilling to share or who treated outsiders cruelly). What it never meant, though, was something “sexual”, until the Middle Ages, when the idea was taught that sex was only for procreation, not pleasure. “Sodomy”, anything sexual that was not procreative (even if people were married), was considered a grave sin that endangered both individual souls and the moral order of society. Sex was for procreation only, not pleasure.

By the 6th century and due to Christian moral reforms, Roman Emperor Justinian focused on male–male intimacy, blaming it for plagues and disasters (although not universal within the empire). Medieval theologians adopted harsh punishments, turning what had once been accepted in many cultures into a crime punishable by death. The European colonialism spread this moral framework around the globe. Catholic orders like the Jesuits and Protestant missionaries traveled around the world, teaching condemnation for same-sex relationships, erasing local traditions and replacing them with laws that criminalized these people once honored, with death or torture.

By the Industrial Revolution, as cities grew and people found others like themselves, same-sex relationships became more visible, and the language used for men was became more hostile. Slurs like “sodomite”, “buggery”, and “molly” carried the weight of ridicule and condemnation.

Part 2: When Words Become Weapons

The Birth of the Word “Homosexual”

The term homosexual was first coined 1869, when Karl-Maria Kertbeny wrote anonymous pamphlets opposing Prussia’s anti-sodomy law. He argued that same-sex attraction was inborn and should not be criminalized.

In the decades that followed, though, some tragically redefined the word as a disorder. A work by psychiatrist Richard von Krafft-Ebing’s in 1886 was one of the most influential works in turning the term “homosexual” into a mental disorder that was socially harmful and a threat to the moral and reproductive order of society.

German physician Magnus Hirschfeld and other activists worked to promote a neutral, science-based understanding, but for most of the 20th century homosexuality was still treated as an illness, until major changes began in 1973.

Moral Panic

The 1930s brought a rise of moral panic toward homosexuality, especially in the U.S. Despite no actual evidence of connection, law enforcement and government agencies began linking homosexuality with deviance, criminality, and pedophilia.

The U.S. government purged thousands of gay people from jobs, schools, military, and homes. They were seen as mentally ill “security risks,” “perverts,” “dangerous,” and “child predators.” Media portrayals created a public fear of “moral collapse due to the homosexuals”.

Educational TV commercials from the 50s and 60s warned people of homosexuals coming after their children.

Nazi Germany spread the teaching that homosexuality was a threat to the nation, a weakness that would “corrupt” society or the military. These fears of national “decay” or “degeneracy” fueled panic and surveillance in other countries as well.

The Campaign to Silence and Erase

Government actions, media censorship, and Christian organization campaigns fueled the moral panic around homosexuality in the mid-20th century:

The Hays Code banned the existence of same-sex relationships in movies.
National Association of Evangelicals urged pastors to preach against homosexuality as part of a broader campaign against “moral decay”.
Billy Graham Crusades linked homosexuality to national moral decline in sermons and media interviews.
Knights of Columbus targeted literature, art, and events that portrayed same-sex relationships.
Christian Colleges created strict codes, expelling and reporting any gay students to parents or police.
Christian Anti-Communism Crusade framed homosexuality as a moral weakness that left America vulnerable to communist infiltration.
Lavender Scare were U.S. federal agencies that purged thousands of suspected gay employees, labeling them “security risks” and “moral threats.”
State and Local Morality Laws strengthened laws to target gay bars, clubs, and gathering places; police raids often led to public exposure and job loss.
Public Service Announcements & Educational Films like Boys Beware warned about “predatory homosexuals” in schools and public spaces.
Post Office Censorship under the Comstock Laws banned the mailing of any books, magazines, or letters, effectively silencing pro-gay voices.
Homophile Movement Suppression was a FBI surveillance and infiltration into gay rights groups.
American Psychiatric Association DSM Classification officially labeled homosexuality as a “sociopathic personality disturbance,” reinforcing the belief it was both a mental illness and a moral danger. Later retracted in 1974.
Local Church Coalitions worked with school boards and civic leaders to ban books and speakers discussing homosexuality, claiming to “protect children from corruption.”
The first Bible Translation to use the word “Homosexual” was the RSV, in 1946. The all-male translating team chose a term that meant “a male boy molester”. They changed it to another word for the next printing, but other translations continued using it (for more on this, watch a great documentary on this on Amazon Prime: 1946: The Mistranslation That Shifted Culture).

A Hurting Community Creates the Word “Gay”

As “homosexual” people began finding each other after the Industrial Revolution, they started using the term “gay” as a secret code for themselves. They had already wanted to move away from the word “homosexual,” which society was using to describe them as a perverted, sexual and criminal. The original term described actions, and not who someone was inside.

The term “gay” brought back the understanding that they felt different on the inside, whether or not they did anything sexual. This new term became deeply meaningful. It described something they couldn’t change, something they were experiencing as a community, the turmoil, fears, and loneliness they all shared. It represented their predicament and connected them with others who understood. While “homosexual” defined outside actions, “gay” defined the inside of a person.

The Church Fights Back with the term “Same-Sex Attracted”

As Justin Lee explains, the term “same-sex attracted” (SSA) was developed during the 1990s by Christians in the Ex-Gay movement.

They first redefined “gay” as no longer as an orientation or inborn attraction, but a behavior, a sinful lifestyle. One was not gay. One acted gay. It was not who you were. It was a lifestyle.

Then, they introduced the term “same-sex attracted” to describe the attraction. It still was not an innate feeling. It was just the term for the attraction.

Being gay was seen as a choice, thereofre incompatible with being a faithful Christian. While Gay became a “worldly” label, SSA (Same-Sex Attracted) became more acceptable and tolerated, as long as the person committed to celibacy and didn’t embrace the “gay lifestyle”. In some churches, even the attraction itself was considered sinful, regardless of whether it led to any action.

Part 3: Today’s Words & Their Realities

What does the word “gay” mean today?

The best way for a straight person to understand what “gay” means, is to think back to middle school, when you started noticing the opposite sex. Did you choose it. Nope. It just happened. You just started noticing. Now flip that. That’s what it’s like for someone who’s gay. They just find themselves noticing the same sex instead. It’s not about what they do or don’t do. It’s about who someone is drawn to, emotionally and relationally. Let’s clarify. A gay person can be attracted to only one person, they can fall in love, commit, like anyone else. Just like straight people, they can’t choose who they are attracted to or not.

Being gay also isn’t about sex. To notice certain people and not others, is a brain response. It’s about who we are attracted to.

And just like straight people, most gay people are looking for connection, companionship, someone to drink coffee with in the morning, to hold hands with on a walk, to build a life with. It’s about love, not lust. Gay people want the same things straight people do: to love and be loved.

Misunderstanding the term: “Gay Identity”

There are those who feel that if a person “identifies” as gay, they are elevating their sexual orientation above their identity in Christ.

Let me clarify a though on “identity” with a personal story.

My parents were missionaries in Spain, so I am what people call an “MK” (Missionary Kid). I’ve always identified as an MK. That term carries for me layers of meaning, grief, joy, loss, loneliness, blessing, excitement, pride, sorrow and the sense of belonging to no single world, while growing up with a wealth of experiences. To have a word that explains ALL of that in a small label, helps me. Not only is it a way for me to explain who I am, but I use it to connect. When I meet another MK, I don’t need to explain myself. Whether they were raised on the coast of Africa or in the Jungles of Papua New Guinea, we instantly share an understanding of each other’s joys, struggles, and unique perspective of the world. The term helps me express a part of who I am and connect with others who share that experience.

My husband is from Sweden. He identifies as Swedish. That’s part of who he is, and having that term helps him communicate something true and unchangeable about himself. Identifying as a Swede helps him express who he is, where he grew up, and connect with others who also identify as Swedish.

Neither of these terms for us diminish our ultimate identity as children of God. They are simply words, connections, declarations, and expressions that describe parts of who we are.

In the same way, when someone says they identify as gay, it simply acknowledges a reality about themself. It is not declaring that sexuality is the ultimate source of meaning. It is naming a truth that can help them be understood and find connection with others who share that experience.

Another fact about me is that I’m straight. I identify as heterosexual. That doesn’t mean I elevate that part of me above my relationship with God. Tt’s simply one reality among many. Why don’t I use that term though? Why do I never use that identity? It’s not because I am ashamed of it, or because I think it’s wrong, or because I am a Christian. It’s just that being straight is common and carries no stigma. It doesn’t require the same language of solidarity or shared struggle.

Gay identity, like MK identity, is not about replacing Christ as the center of one’s lif. It’s about having the words to describe who you are in a world that often misunderstands you.

Misusing the term: “Gay Lifestyle”

We often hear the term “homosexual lifestyle”. The term is misleading because it assumes behavior.

Some people believe everyone is born equally heterosexual, and anything that departs from them feeling that way is a “lifestyle choice.”

But if sexual orientation is something innate, something we are regardless of behavior, the word “lifestyle” doesn’t fit.

I’m heterosexual. What is my “heterosexual lifestyle”? Is it the way I dress? How I talk? My politics? Who I marry?

In reality, no matter my “lifestyle” or what I do, I’m still a heterosexual. Being heterosexual or homosexual is about who we are, not how we act. All of us can live lives that honor God or lives that do not.

Some people who use the phrase “homosexual lifestyle” or “gay lifestyle” bundle together a range of stereotypes, sometimes without realizing it: promiscuity, partying, moral rebellion, political activism, anti-family values, rejection of monogamy, anti-Christian beliefs, and even the false and harmful idea of predatory behavior. This term lumps all these imagined traits together and presents them as inherent to being gay, when in reality, none of them define sexual orientation.

There is no single “gay lifestyle” any more than there is a “straight lifestyle.” Orientation describes who someone is drawn to. Not the kind of life they live.

Misconception of the term: “Gay Agenda”

The phrase “gay agenda” is often used to suggest that LGBTQ people are working together in some coordinated effort to undermine faith, family, morality, or society itself. But what is the reality?

LGBTQ people do not have an agenda to make people gay. In fact, history shows that it has often been heterosexual groups trying to “turn gays straight,” while LGBTQ people fully understand they cannot, nor would want to, turn straight people gay. They speak up in case it helps others who find themselves in the same situation, or to ask for the rights they deserve.

LGBTQ people do not have an agenda of sexually abusing children. They are not sexual predators. They have no more interest in abusing children than heterosexuals do. Predators exist, whether gay or straight. Being gay or transgender does not cause a person to be more of a predator.

LGBTQ people do not have an agenda of cancelling heterosexual marriage. Whether gay or straight, there are people who are for marriage and against marriage. Gay marriages are not a threat to heterosexual marriage. Straight people will continue to fall in love, get married, and build families.

LGBTQ people are not trying to dictate how others live or control politics. What they are asking for is simple: the same rights, protections, and freedoms everyone else expects. The movement is about equality, not domination.

LGBTQ people are not trying to dominate media and entertainment. They seek fair representation after decades of erasure, not control of the industry.

LGBTQ people speak up to advocate for equal rights, fair treatment, and the ability to live openly without fear of discrimination or violence. They don’t do it to control others or take rights away from others. They only do so to have the same rights as others.

The real “agenda” LGBTQ people have is simple: to live without fear, to be treated fairly, and to contribute openly to society without hiding who they are.

Equal dignity is not a threat to faith, family, or morality. It is a reflection of the justice, compassion, and truth that strengthen them.

Misperception of the term: “Bisexual”

“Gay” is anyone (usually applied to men) who has the capacity to be attracted to the same sex, but not to the opposite sex, “lesbian” is a woman who has the capacity to be attracted to the same sex, but not to the opposite sex, and “bisexual” is the capacity to be attracted to both male or female.

The term “bisexual” has been greatly misunderstood in non affirming circles. James Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family, has repeatedly made public statements that bisexuality is inherently promiscuous or linked to orgies.

It does not mean they are attracted to everyone. Just as a heterosexual can choose one person, a bisexual can as well. Being bisexual does not describe how many partners someone has, their commitment level, or whether they engage in any particular sexual practice. Just like everyone else, bisexual people can be monogamous, married, or celibate. Sexual orientation does not determines behavior. It is only about who we find ourselves drawn to. Justin Lee gives us an explanation here:

The Misconception of Asexual

Many of us might not be aware that some are born with no sexual orientation at all, people who experience little or no sexual attraction toward others. They are called “asexual” people. This does not mean they are incapable of deep emotional bonds or love, but rather that sexual attraction is absent or minimal in their experience. They have no interest, and some are incapable of experiencing sexual pleasure.

Asexual people may still engage in relationships or marry, while others may prefer to remain single or focus on non-romantic connections. Asexuality exists on a spectrum, with some individuals occasionally experiencing sexual attraction under specific circumstances and others never experiencing it at all.

It’s important for an asexual person to understand that not everyone experiences attraction the same way they do. Without that knowledge, it can be easy to assume that sexual attraction is always a matter of willpower or morality. For example, someone who has never experienced strong sexual urges might find it hard to grasp why others struggle with sexual temptation, or why sexual attraction can be such a powerful and sometimes distracting force in relationships. In the same way, those who do experience strong attraction may misunderstand or dismiss asexual experiences, assuming they are simply a phase, repression, or disinterest in intimacy. Mutual understanding between asexual and non-asexual people can help bridge these differences, replace judgment with empathy, and create healthier, more respectful relationships.

The Misunderstanding of Flags

Along with words and labels, symbols have also carried meaning, and one of the most recognizable is the rainbow flag.

For some, it represents a direct challenge to their beliefs, traditions, or understanding of morality. They may see it as promoting values they disagree with or as an emblem of social change that feels threatening to their culture or faith.

Yet for many, the rainbow flag is not a sign of rebellion. It is a sign of welcome, safety, visibility, and support. Displaying it on a home, business, necklace, or even as a small pin on a shirt offers reassurance to those who have lived in fear that the space is safe and affirming. In environments where discrimination and rejection are common, it provides visible assurance that a person can be open about who they are without fear. It is a simple way to communicate inclusion, belonging, and respect.

Flags can be deeply personal or a public act of support, but for those who find hope in its colors, the message is clear: You are seen.

Conclusion: Language Begins With Understanding

Labels are meant to describe. They give language to human experience, helping us understand ourselves and connect with one another. Descriptive words open doors to recognition, belonging, and dignity.

But sometimes, people have used labels to dictate. Instead of reflecting a person’s lived reality, words have been wielded as verdicts and tools to control.

Recognizing who people are is the first step toward truly understanding, loving and respecting one another. Without that knowledge, it is easy to make assumptions, fuel stereotypes, and pass judgment.

The more we understand each other’s realities, the less room there is for prejudice and the more space there is for compassion.

At the end of the day, this is not about grammar. It is about real people whose lives have been shaped by the words spoken about them. Words can wound, but they can also heal. They can give someone language for who they are when silence has only made them feel alone.

To love our neighbor, as Jesus taught, is to slow down enough to see them, to hear their story, to understand their pain, to be moved with compassion, and to respond with love.

Are people born straight?