www.freethoughtperspective.net

SODOM AND GOMORRAH

LARRY E. FARR

A young man grew up in a family that stated they would rather their son be dead than to learn he was gay. Knowing this, their son hid his homosexuality from his family and eventually moved far away from his parents.

Their son contacted AIDS and knew he would die soon. With the help of his minister, they decided an honest letter stating his homosexuality, his terminal illness and his desire to see them would be an appropriate action to bring peace to his life. About two weeks later, he received a reply: an envelope containing only many torn pieces from his birth certificate. (1)

In my November 17, 2006 letter titled, Reader Offers Rebuttal on Homosexuality, I addressed the scientific evidence that homosexuality is not a choice. This letter will deal with the Biblical story of Sodom and Gomorrah (SG) and homosexuality. I hope in future columns to deal with all of the biblical verses that are wrongly used to condemn homosexuality.

Actually, the error in using the Bible to discriminate against homosexuality can be proven in this paragraph. I have shown many times in many published and unpublished letters that the Bible is not inerrant. Based on this fact alone, the Bible should never be used as a source for homophobia. Remember what happened when the Bible was used as a source for justifying the “Holy Crusades,” the Inquisition, witchcraft and slavery.

First, let us look at the “sacred institution between one man and one woman”and the Bible. If we accept the Bible as God’s word, then God explicitly approves of bigamy, concubinage and polygamy, and the biblical statement that women are the husband’s property. Nowhere in the sacred book does God issue a command against these practices. (2)

The story of SG is covered in Genesis chapter 18 and 19. In chapter 18, Abraham welcomes “god” and “two male angels” into his home. (3) There are a number of problems with this encounter before we look at SG. Based on Biblical Archeology and Biblical Anachronisms, there is a real possibility that Abraham never existed. (4) One source lists Abraham’s supposed existence from 2166 to 1991 BC, while the Abraham story was written during the eighth or seventh centuries BC. (5)

Another problem, deals with the nature of this god found in chapter 18. This god is not omniscient as this god sends the two angels to SG to give this god a first hand, eyewitness account. While the angels leave, Abraham and god participate in a bargaining session in which Abraham convinces his god to spare SG from fifty righteous people in SG down to 10 righteous people in SG. (6) We also have this god violating scripture: does god not change his mind (Numbers 23:19 and l Samuel 15:29) and god is not seen (Timothy 6:16).

Chapter 19 finds Lot, Abraham’s nephew, offering the two angels hospitality in Sodom. During this time, there were no paid sources of lodging and travel was hard and dangerous. The operative code was strangers had no protection unless a citizen offered hospitality. If no hospitality was offered, visitors were fair game for sexual abuse which often meant visiting men playing the role of women. (7) This type of sexual abuse was very often done to men who were prisoners of war. (8)

In Genesis 19:4-5, all of the men of Sodom, including the fiances of Lot’s daughters’, asked Lot to allow them to gang rape the two angels. Note that this is gang rape: it is not dealing with the element of love in a sexual relationship. You would think we have reached a common ground here: we can all agree rape, whether heterosexual or homosexual, is immoral. This is not so. According to Deuteronomy 22:28-29 (9), if a not engaged virgin is raped, the rapist must pay her father a fine, must marry her and must not divorce her. The woman has no choice. Remember, that women during the Old Testament era were regarded as property.

More evidence of the second class nature of women is shown in Genesis 19:8 when Lot offered his two virgin daughters as a counter offer. You read this correctly! in spite of this, one New Testament author in 2 Peter 2:7-8 called Lot “righteous.” The author of 2 Peter was probably not Jesus’ disciple Simon Peter. (10) The men refused Lot’s offer but a similar story can be found in Judges 19 with horrific devastating results. A Levite’s concubine endures an all night gang rape, dies and has her Levite companion cutting her body into 12 pieces to be sent to different areas throughout Israel. (11)

Dissatisfied with Lot’s offer, the men become violent and are blinded by the two angels. Lot is told to take his wife and two daughters and flee Sodom in which god destroys SG and all its citizens (including women and children), after Lot’s family leaves. Lot’s wife disobeys the angels command not to look back at the destruction and is turned into a pillar of salt.

Of course, the destruction of SG is a myth. Although there is archaeological evidence of cities that might be SG, the evidence suggests that these cities were destroyed by natural disaster. (12)

There is additional evidence for SG being based on mythology. The alleged location of these cities puts them under a salt sea. Earlier stories concerning Lot and Abraham (Genesis 13 and 14) contain a number of anachronisms: for example, Abraham rescued Lot from the territory of Dan, which did not have that name until long after the myth of the Exodus from Egypt. Finally, the duplication of this story in Judges 19-21 suggests a common legendary tale. (13)

Even the the story of Lot’s wife turning into a pillar of salt is similar to the Greek myth of Orpheus and his lover Eurydice. Orpheus was given permission to bring his deceased Eurydice from the underworld provide he would not look back on his lover until they were above ground. He did look back and she returned to the underworld. (14)

To really understand the significance of this myth, it is important to understand that our story does not end here. According to Genesis 19:30-38, Lot and his two daughters settle in a cave near Zoan, mainly because Lot was fearful of dwelling in the town of Zoan, (the reason for this will be covered later). His daughters were worried that they would never have the opportunity to have children. They solved this “problem” by getting Lot drunk and having sexual intercourse with him (you read that correctly: incest). Both daughters became pregnant. One gave birth to a son named Moab, the father of the Moabites, and the other sister gave birth to Ben-ammi, the father of the Ammonites. These two tribes just happened to be bitter enemies of the Israelites. Archaeological evidence has discredited these false ancestries. (15)

Before closing, there is another possible theory to the story of SG that has scriptural support. As I mentioned earlier, travel was dangerous and hospitality was a necessity to avoid sexual abuse done to strangers to break the monotony of normal existence. (16) Could the “main sin”of SG be in the hospitality with sexual abuse as the result? In Ezekiel 16;48-49, it is clear that the “sin of the Sodomites” was their refusal to take in needy travelers. (17) In Matthew 10:5-15, Jesus supposedly states that on the day of judgment, it will be more tolerable for SG than certain towns that “will not welcome you or listen to your words” when referring to his disciples. There is no reference in either of these scriptures to sexual abuse. (18)

The sad irony of all this is that people who reject homosexuals based on SG are guilty of the same inhospitality the men of SG were guilty of. As one source states it: “So those who oppress homosexuals because of the supposed ‘sin of Sodom’ may themselves be the real ‘sodomites’ as the Bible understands it.” (19)

The story of Sodom and Gomorrah should never be used to discriminate against any sexual orientation.

Notes

1. Spong, Bishop John Shelby, “The sins of Scripture,” pages 124-125.

2. Mattill, Jr, Dr. A.J. “The Seven Mighty Blows to Traditional Beliefs,” page 136, Dr. Mattill, lists 28 passages to support this statement.

3. Kick, Russ, ed, “Everything You Know About God is Wrong,” Green, Hurmence, “The God From Galilee,” page 92.

4. Finkelstein and Silberman, “The Bible Unearthed,” pages 33-38 and 319-325.

5. American Bible Society, “Inside the Mysteries of the Bible,” page 50.

6. Spong, page 129.

7. Spong, page 130.

8. Helminiak, Dr. Daniel A. “What the Bible Says About Homosexuality,” pages 38-39.

9. Mattill, Jr, page 160.

10. Ehrman, Dr. Bart D, “The New Testament,” page 456.

11. Kick, Gaiman and Gibson, “The Journey to Bethlehem,” page 130.

12. American Bible Society, pages 74-75.

13. Greenberg, Gary, “101 Myths of the Bible,” pages 101 and 126-127.

14. Greenberg, pages 127-128.

15. Greenberg, page 129.

16. Spong, page 130.

17. Helminiak, pages 38-39-40

18. White, Dr. Mel, “Religion gone Bad,” page 45.

19. Helminiak, page 40.

20. Helminiak, page 41.