[DontchaKnowit]

agreed - although My understanding is that the word Paul uses there is actually not even a real word, and appears nowhere else in literature at the time - so we really have no clue what he means.

I always find it interesting that there is at least this one verse where there is some contention as to whether it is an explicit ban on male homosexual relationships - But there is absolutely no argument whatsoever : there is no reference at all to female homosexual relationships in the bible. Ever. And yet the church is often very preoccupied with viewing lesbian relationships as a sin. Very strange

[rom16384]

Arguably there is a reference to female homosexual relationships in Romans 1:26, "For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature."

[angiosperm]

Could as easily have meant buttplay. We have certain evidence that Roman prostitutes offered that, maybe habitually against contraception.

[aeneasmackenzie]

In case you are not aware, apostolic churches do not and have never claimed to draw their teaching authority from the bible. It is true that sola scriptura groups are in a pickle here.