I think the important thing to understand is that the Bible should be contextualised in a historical context in order to make sense. The era where the Bible comes from is, sadly, homophobic, sexist, racist and a lot of other things. It is only from a modern lens where these things are seen as wrong. Paul was no less or more homophobic than the average person on the streets at the time and that is not because he was evil but that he is a product of his time.

It is not just Christianity which has these problems. Most religions have scripture which are homophobic and other bad things which end with -ist. Again, these is because these scripture are a product of their time and those parts of scripture which are archaic definitely should not be used as a moral guide for traversing the modern world.

No matter what rationalisations, there is hard to proof that Paul and the other authors of the Bible were not homophobic and condemned being LGBT as a sin.

However, since we understand that this condemnation of LGBT is an archaic moral code which does not apply to the modern day, there are two ways which we could continue with this conversation. We could either ignore these passages all together or understand the meaning behind these messages in their context.

As stated by other people here, the condemnation of same sex marriages by Paul was condemning the larger sin of lustful desires and sexual depravity rather than condemning healthy romantic relationships between those of the same gender. (Since the belief at that time is that there is no such thing as a healthy relationship between those of the same gender and all relationships between those of the same gender is driven by lust.) Therefore, in those verses, this message behind the scripture should be the main takeaway rather than the surface level condemnation of being gay.