The Sin of Sodom: Genesis 19

"The two angels came to Sodom in the evening; and Lot was sitting in the gateway of Sodom. When Lot saw them, he rose to meet them, and bowed down with this face to the ground. He said, 'Please, my lords, turn aside to your servant's house and spend the night, and wash your feet; then you can rise early and go on your way.' They said, 'No, we will spend the night in the square.' But he urged them strongly; so they turned aside to him and entered his house; and he made them a feast, and baked unleavened bread, and they ate. But before they lay down, the men of the city, the men of Sodom, both young and old, all the people to the last man, surrounded the house; and they called to Lot, "Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us, so that we may know them" Lot went out of the door to the men, shut the door after him, and said, 'I beg you, my brothers, do not act so wickedly. Look, I have two daughters who have not known a man; let me bring them out to you, and do to them as you please; only do nothing to these men, for they have come under the shelter of my roof.' But they replied, 'Stand back!' And they said, 'This fellow came here as an alien (Lot was not originally from Sodom), and he would play the judge! Now we will deal worse with you than with them.' Then they pressed hard against the man Lot, and came near the door to break it down. But the men inside reached out their hands and brought Lot into the house with them, and shut the door. And they struck with blindness the men who were at the door of the house, both small and great, so that they were unable to find the door."
Genesis 19:1-11

Most scholars, including many located within conservative Christianity, have dismissed the story of Sodom in the debate of homosexuality although unfortunately there are many in the church who have yet to hear this conclusion or consider it valid.

There still remain some who insist Sodom is a clear and undeniable blanket condemnation of homosexuality and because this passage remains a debate for many of us in our more conservative communities of faith we need to take some time to look at some specific information we can find in the biblical text itself that would argue against homosexuality as being the sin of Sodom.

1. Sodom's Fate Was Already Sealed. Before this story even unfolds we know that the purpose of the angel's visit was to warn Lot to leave the city with his family to escape God's pre-determined destruction of the city. In Genesis 18:20-21, God tells Abraham that he will destroy Sodom because of sin that already exists within the city, a sin that is unspecified. Had the men of the city left the angels alone, Sodom's fate would have remained the same.

2. Sodom, An Ancient San Francisco? To imply that homosexuality is the sin of Sodom is to imply that all the men of the city were homosexual. It's been argued by some, at least by a few that have corresponded directly with me, that the passage is only attempting to make a point to  the extent of Sodom's sin when it says "the men of the city...both young and old, all the people to the last man" surrounded Lot's house. And yet what do we do with the previous conversation in Genesis 18:23-32 between God and Abraham when God finally relents to Abraham's pleadings that if only ten righteous men could be found in the city, Sodom would be spared and yet ten could not be found? Is it possible that all the men surrounding the city were homosexual? It seems unlikely since not only is the presence of women and children mentioned but also because Lot offered up his daughters in exchange for the strangers, an offer that would have meant nothing had Lot known that all the men who stood before his door were homosexual.

3. Sex versus Power. Lot, standing at the gate, welcomes two strangers and brings them through the outer walled fortress of the city to his home.  Lot, not having been born in Sodom is considered an outsider. The men of Sodom, wary not only of these two strangers but of Lot, the outsider among them, gather outside the house as an aggressive and angry mob. The men of Sodom weren't looking for a date on a Friday night. Their intention wasn't to pursue a relationship or for sexual gratification but to let these strangers know who was in charge. They sought to perpetrate a violent gang rape on Lot's visitors to put them in their place.  In our current context we can only hope that people realize that power rather than sex is behind the act of rape. There are drawings from antiquity illustrating the rape of conquered soldiers by their victors just as there continue to be stories of same sex rape in prisons across America and in the UK. Whether conquered enemy or recently incarcerated inmate, the intention of the rape is to use a perverse means to prove power and might while at the same time humiliating the other by placing them into the assumed inferior and weak position of the woman (This is discussed further in the article dealing with Leviticus). This behavior is just as evil when the intended victim is of the same sex as when it is of the opposite sex which is why it might be valuable to look briefly at a parallel story found in Judges 19.

4. If the sin of Sodom is homosexuality then the sin of Gibeah is heterosexuality. While it's seldom mentioned, and perhaps understandably so, there's a parallel story to that of Sodom found in Judges 19. In this story we have a Levite (foreigner) sojourning through the countryside with his concubine. Though traveling late into the evening when there was greater risk of harm the Levite elects to pass by a "city of strangers" (Jebus) and  to continue traveling to Gibeah where he believes he will find safety there as the citizens are from the tribe of Benjamin and thus fellow Israelites. When he arrives none of the men of the city welcome him but finally he is extended hospitality by another foreigner from the hills of Ephraim who is living there in Gibeah. So now we have a foreigner passing through the land who finds shelter from a local resident who is also considered an outsider by the citizens of the town. Sound familiar?

As the story continues the Levite is being sheltered by the kind elderly man from Ephraim when the men of the city appear, surrounding the house, and demanding that the Levite be sent out that they may "know" him. The word "know" here is yada, the same word used in Genesis 19 which seems within both contexts to bare a sexual connotation. Just as in the Sodom narrative, the man of the house offers his daughter to the demanding crowd in place of the foreigner who he is obligated by sacred law to protect and once again the crowd responds by refusing the exchange. Now the Levite steps forward and offers up his concubine and this time, the men of Gibeah accept the offer and proceed to gang rape the woman resulting in her death. The following chapters (Judges 20, 21) go on to describe the eventual annihilation of the Benjamites, down to the entire town of Gibeah including its cattle, by the collective armies of Israel. Keeping the striking parallels of these two stories in mind, the logical conclusion one might reach concerning Gibeah is that their sin was that of heterosexuality if one maintains that the Sodom narrative serves as a blanket condemnation of homosexuality. This conclusion seems not only logical but the only consistent conclusion that one could reach.

IF NOT HOMOSEXUALITY, WHAT IS SODOM'S SIN?

In considering the sin of Sodom we need to suspend for a moment our own cultural context and reflect on life in antiquity and secondly, we need to consider what other Biblical passages say regarding Sodom's sin.

In our current context, hospitality means setting out the hand towels that actually match the bathroom decor and putting dinner on the dining room table rather than on TV trays. It means saying to a guest, "Our home is your home" and meaning it. It's a warm welcome. Hospitality is being gracious and cordial to a visitor who enters your home. The same was not the case in antiquity. In a country where cities and villages were separated by the harsh desert, hospitality was life-giving to the sojourner passing through your land. Consider this passage on hospitality in antiquity from The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia</a>:

"When the civilization of a people has advanced so far that some traveling has become necessary, but not yet so far that traveling by individuals is a usual thing, then hospitality is a virtue indispensable to the life of the people. This stage of culture was that represented in ancient Palestine and the stage whose customs are still preserved among the present-day Arabs of the desert. Hospitality is regarded as a right by the traveler, to whom it never occurs to thank his host as if for a favor. And hospitality is granted as a duty by the host, who himself may very soon be dependent on some one else's hospitality. But none the less, both in Old Testament times and today, the granting of that right is surrounded by an etiquette that has made Arabian hospitality so justly celebrated. The traveler is made the literal master of the house during his stay; his host will perform for him the most servile offices, and will not even sit in his presence without express request. To the use of the guest is given over all that his host possesses, stopping not even short of the honor of wife or daughter. 'Be we not all,' say the poor nomads, 'guests of Ullah? Has God given unto them, God's guest shall partake with them thereof: if they will not for God render his own, it should not go well with them' (Doughty, Arabia Deserta, I, 228). The host is in duty bound to defend his guest against all comers and to lay aside any personal hatred--the murderer of father is safe as the guest of the son." (C.D. Rom Version)

In Biblical times hospitality was more than good manners but was a matter of life and death. People relied on the hospitality of strangers to shelter them from the harshness of the desert and to provide water and food to sustain their lives. Hospitality was considered a sacred obligation and was what Lot extended to the two strangers, even to the point of offering his daughters in exchange for their safety. It is to the sin of inhospitality that Jesus mentions Sodom on two separate occasions. The first occasion was when Jesus was instructing his disciples concerning what would happen to those towns where he would send them to teach and preach and they wouldn't be welcomed or received. If that was to occur they were to leave the town, shaking the very dust from their streets off their sandals for "it will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah in the day of judgment than for that city" (Matthew 20:11).  On another occasion Jesus was responding to those who accused him of being a glutton and a drunkard and to the cities who heard his words but didn't repent and said again that "it will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom in the day of judgment, than for thee" (Matthew 11:19-24). In both these occasions Jesus was referring to those who treated both He and his disciples with inhospitality and that their judgment would be harsher than the judgment received by Sodom.  Is it reasonable that Jesus compared the sin of inhospitality against himself and his disciples to sexual sins or to the sin of inhospitality that was shown to the angels by the citizens of the city?

Regarding inhospitality, Mary Tolbert has concluded "the central theme of Sodom has to do with the treatment of foreigners. How do you deal with foreigners who live among you and pass through? For people traveling, the way in which they were accepted in foreign cities was very important and because the natural tendency is to keep out the foreigner so there are rules that enforce being hospitable." (Class notes, Homosexuality and the Bible, Pacific School of Religion, Summer 2001)

Along with inhospitality being the context in which Jesus referred to Sodom and Gomorrah, there are several other passages that refer to the sin(s) of these cities and are included here with both the reference and the sin mentioned.

The Sin(s) of Sodom According to the Hebrew and Christian Scriptures

Hebrew scripture references to the sins of Sodom

• Deuteronomy 29:17-26 - Idolatry and images to false gods
• Deuteronomy 32:32-38 - Idolatry
• Isaiah 1:9-23 - Murder, greed, theft, rebellion, covetousness
• Isaiah 3:8-15 - Mistreating the poor
• Isaiah 3:11-19 - Arrogance
• Jeremiah 23:10-14 - Adultery, lying by priests and prophets
• Jeremiah 49:16-18 - Pride of the heart
• Jeremiah 50:2-40 - Idolatry and pride
• Lamentations 4:3-6 - Cruelty and failure to care for the young and poor
• Ezekiel 16:49-50 - Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fullness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy. And they were haughty, and committed abomination before me: therefore I took them away as I saw good.
• Amos 4:1-11 - Oppression and mistreating the poor
• Zephaniah 2:8 - Pride

New Testament references to the sins of Sodom

• Luke 17:26-29 - No specific sins mentioned<
• 2 Peter 2:6 - Living after ungodliness
• Jude 1:7-8 - Fornication after strange flesh, not same flesh
• (angels, see Genesis 6:1)

In conclusion, through a careful consideration of the Sodom narrative, the ancient culture within which it was located, and other biblical references including the words of Jesus, the sin of Sodom appears to be that of inhospitality and mistreatment of the foreigner or the outcast, which is both a seemingly ironic and disturbing consideration in light of the inhospitality received by so many gay and lesbian Christians within the church.

Continue on The Holiness Code (Leviticus 18:22/Leviticus 20:13)

Original source of information www.christianlesbians.com