τὴν φυσικὴν χρῆσιν … εἰς τὴν παρὰ φύσιν

Says "Their females exchanged natural use (τὴν φυσικὴν χρῆσιν) for that which is παρὰ φύσιν." "Likewise also the males (οἱ ἄρσενες), abandoning natural use of the female (τῆς θηλείας), burned … toward one another (εἰς ἀλλήλους), males with males (ἄρσενες ἐν ἄρσεσιν)."

Says Abbott-Smith glosses φυσικός "natural," contrasted with παρὰ φύσιν in Rom 1:26–27. He glosses παρὰ φύσιν "against nature" and cites Rom 1:26 and 11:24. Philo uses the same contrast of a man who "pursues that pleasure which is contrary to nature" (Spec. 3.39, Yonge).

Implies The conservative, historic reading is that "nature" here means the Creator's design of male and female. Paul uses the sex terms θήλειαι and ἄρσενες, not "women" and "men." This echoes Gen 1:27 LXX, ἄρσεν καὶ θῆλυ (vol. 1, p. 2, scan-checked). The acts themselves are described as exchanges of that design. The terms are reciprocal (εἰς ἀλλήλους), not limited to exploitation.

Implies The women's clause (1:26) refers to same-sex relations: ὁμοίως ("likewise," 1:27) ties the men's exchange to the women's, and both clauses share φυσικὴ χρῆσις and the sex terms θήλειαι/ἄρσενες.

Augustine took the women's exchange as unnatural acts between women and men (Nupt. 2.20.35), a minority historic view.

Other readings. - Boswell takes παρὰ φύσιν to mean acting against one's own disposition. - Scroggs argues that the target is the exploitative pederasty of Greco-Roman culture. - Martin reads the text in light of ancient ideas about desire and excess. - Brownson stresses lust, honor and shame, and "nature" as social custom (compare 1 Cor 11:14). - Brooten agrees that Paul condemns these acts but grounds his judgment in ancient gender hierarchy.

Hays (answering Boswell) and Gagnon (answering Boswell, Scroggs, Martin and Brooten) argue that the creation language and the mutual phrasing make these readings unlikely. All are cited by reference only.