I would be very careful about saying the Bible "clearly condemns" on this topic. Leviticus 18 and 20 are the only two instances in the entirety of the Old Testament that even remotely comment on this topic, and they sandwich a very ambiguous collection of texts that are very difficult to interpret in the modern world. Many of the tribal laws found in the Book of Leviticus fell out of practice by the end of the Old Testament. In the book of 2 Samuel (which comes later), several of these ritualistic laws were not only no longer in practice, and the Hebrews’ relationship with God began to be expressed in radically different ways. On the other hand, some of the laws (such as the Ten Commandments) come straight out of Leviticus 19. Jesus even points to Leviticus 19:18 (“Love your neighbor as yourself: I am the Lord”) as the Second Greatest Commandment in the Bible.
I would recommend strong words of caution before proclaiming with confidence that the Old Testament is "clear" on this one.
As for the New Testament, the only words that are accredited to speaking on this topic come from Paul's first letter to the Corinthians and Paul's letter to the Romans. You've made clear your credentials in Greek and Hebrew, so you know very well that the Greek words Paul uses here are aresenokoitai, which refers to male-specific same-gendered pederasty and "malakoi," which translates literally into "soft ones" - a word which, among many connotations including "sissies" and "dandies" was also Greco-Roman slang for young boys who were often passivesexual partners in prostitution. In the Roman empire (which included the port city of Corinth), male prostitution was commonplace and was frequently a sign of social class. It was common and even expected for the wealthy upper-class male to be seen penetrating a social inferior as a sign of one’s dominance and even one’s manhood. This was also a double-standard. To be penetrated by someone of a lower social class than you was seen as a disgrace – and even criminal!
What’s more, they were not willing participants in prostitution commerce – they were often captured by military and army personnel as prisoners of war. This is by far, the most likely explanation as to what the Pauline authors refer to as “fornicators, sodomites, [and] slave-traders” in 1 Timothy 1:10. This also explains why the Pauline author makes a point to contrast the specific behavior he is condemning with anything based out of love (1 Timothy 1:3-7). This cruel, inhuman, and barbaric was not only vehemently protested by Paul, but also Josephus, and the Jews in Paul’s time. Before we consider comparing the behavior which Paul and his contemporaries were condemning to loving, committed relationships today, this historical background may be important to our understanding
Forgive me if I'm only regurgitating information you already know, but with all due respect, the implications of the language, you claim such an intimate understanding reflect the possibility that the issues confronted by the Biblical tradition are not always as black and white as we might desire in the modern world.
More information about text formats