I write the word, “sodomy,” and you all think of one thing. It’s no secret that the word “sodomy” has become the “sanctified” term to refer to male homosexual sex. And I think, for the most part, we all know why these two things are connected. Somewhere, and some time in our lives (probably Sunday school), we heard about the story in Genesis 19 of the destruction of the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah. We were told that God had to destroy these cities because the men who lived there were homosexual (maybe not explicitly, but definitely implicitly). Our learned teachers cite the desire expressed by the men of the city to “know” the angelic visitors whom Lot, the hero of the story, has befriended. Because of this, it’s clear that God hates gay sex so much so that he destroys two cities to make his point.
Pretty clear, right? Well, no. There’s much more that we weren’t told.
W
e read in the text that God has some serious issues with these two cities. In Genesis 18:20, we’re told that a great outcry has reached God from these cities, and that God decides to investigate. What, exactly, is Sodom’s and Gomorrah’s “grave sin?” God sends some angels in the form of men to visit the city to “test the waters” if you will. Lot, Abraham’s nephew, invites the visiting angels into his home and entertains them. Later, the men of the city demand that Lot give up the visitors so that these men can brutalize and rape them. And the rest is history.
Simple, right? Well, not really. There are much deeper layers to this little story that need to be uncovered before we can begin to understand the exact nature of Sodom’s and Gomorrah’s sin, and many of these details can be uncovered when we consider how the Jewish mind understood Sodom and Gomorrah. To do that, we need to check out some other mentions of Sodom and Gomorrah in the Hebrew Bible and extra-biblical literature.
First, consider Ezekiel 16:49: “This was the guilt of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had pride, excess of food, and prosperous ease, but did not aid the poor and needy.” What? No mention of homosexuality? That’s a little strange, considering how we understand “sodomy.” It seems the real problems have to do with excess wealth and an ungenerous attitude toward the poor.
Consider, also, Josephus’ explanation of Sodom and Gomorrah. To Josephus, the people of Sodom and Gomorrah “pride themselves on their power and wealth, they brutalize outside people, and are ungodly.”* Hmm… Again, nothing about homosexuality. The focus seems to be on the cities’ excess wealth and treatment of outsiders and visitors.
Philo had a similar concept of Sodom and Gomorrah. He painted the city as rich and materialistic to the point that the inhabitants became greedy and violent.*
In Targum Psuedo-Jonathan, a story is told of a young girl named Peletit who took bread to a poor starving man. When the people of Sodom and Gomorrah realized what she had done, they seized her, covered her with honey, and hung her on the wall of the city to be devoured by bees. Some consider the cries of Peletit while she hung on the wall to be the very cries that rose to God inciting God to act against Sodom and Gomorrah*
These accounts of Sodom and Gomorrah are important to note. First, there is very little to no evidence outside of the Hebrew Bible or Hebrew literature of the existence of the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah. So what we know about Sodom and Gomorrah, we have to find from the Hebrew Bible and extra-biblical literature from the Hebrew tradition. We have to learn what these writers thought of Sodom and Gomorrah before we can understand the nature of their sin. Second, Sodom and Gomorrah are used regularly throughout both the Hebrew Bible and the NT as an example of an adulterous city that turned from God. Often, the comparison is made between something that Israel has done with the ways of Sodom and Gomorrah, and Israel doesn’t come out looking very pretty. Finally, we cannot properly understand the importance of hospitality and inclusion of visitors/aliens to the ancient Hebrew mind. It’s not part of our culture, so it’s very hard for us to think such a thing would be so grievous. But this is no reason to discredit an interpretation of the story of Sodom and Gomorrah that focuses on the cities’ inhospitality and treatment of visitors. If we do decide to discredit such and interpretation, we are illegitimately imposing our own cultural understandings on a text instead of letting the text’s own culture and setting dictate translation. This is nothing short of twisting scripture to fit our own cultural mind. It shouldn’t be done.
And this is exactly where we’ve gone wrong in the past. The sin of Sodom and Gomorrah is not homosexual orientation. The sin of Sodom and Gomorrah is their complete lack of pity for the poor, the sick, the visitor, or those whom society deems unworthy. Beyond this, their sin was not just a sin of omission (not caring for the poor); their sin went much further. They tortured the poor and persecuted anyone who tried to be hospitable. Lot shows hospitality to visitors, and the men of the city are enraged! Their desire to rape these men is not because of sexual orientation or lust. Their desire is to show their dominance over these visitors and to shame Lot. Rape is often understood not as an act of sexuality but as an act of power and domination. Yes, it is connected to sex in some way, but rape is primarily a way to express power and dominance. Consider what brutal armies would do to their conquered foe – they would rape and kill them. It was a way to humiliate their enemies and show their superiority. It wasn’t because they were horny.
Think about what these messengers from God came to do: They wanted to spend the night in the city square, and they fought Lot when he showed the hospitality. God wanted to see what would happen to the messengers. Just exactly how bad would they be treated? If they entered the city as visitors and made their status clear by spending the night in the square, what would happen to them? This was God’s test – would the people of Sodom and Gomorrah show love and compassion and care for the visitors, or would they brutalize them and treat them as if they were worthless?
So what is the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah? They were rich, content, and selfish. They abused the poor and mistreated the alien. They refused to include those who were outside of their cultural circle. To express their dominance over visitors, they raped and killed them.
So, then, what is sodomy? In my opinion, sodomy is not male homosexual sex, but the refusal to include others and show love to the less fortunate among us. How ironic that many of us practice this kind of sodomy on a regular basis. Some of us even pride ourselves on how exclusive and uncaring we can be toward those we deem “sinful.” It’s sad, really.
My main point here is this: Genesis 19 and the story of Sodom and Gomorrah is not God’s vengeance on homosexuality. It’s God’s vengeance on people who refuse to show love and compassion. God is not punishing men who love other men or women who love other women. God is punishing those who love no one but themselves.
Next, we’ll talk about Leviticus.
9 Comments so far
Leave a comment
Great commentary on this passage, Jon. Thanks for writing this. I would love it if the word ‘sodomy’ was flipped in such a way in the coming generations so that Christians really did think of heartlessness, inhospitality, greed, wealth without concern for the poor, etc. That’d be pretty cool.
Comment by Neville February 25, 2010 @ 5:02 pmSOME ONE FORGOT TO TELL JUDE
JUDE 1:7
even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire
the wicked are sentenced to suffer] just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the adjacent towns–which likewise gave themselves over to impurity and indulged in unnatural vice and sensual perversity–are laid out [in plain sight] as an exhibit of perpetual punishment [to warn] of everlasting fire
Comment by JOSEPHUS March 4, 2010 @ 3:03 pmI don’t agree with your theological/ethical judgment call that rape and violence are equal to homosexual orientation and monogamous homosexuality that we see today. Please, at least be aware that you are making the call here that the definition of “fornication” includes homosexuality. I don’t deny that Sodom and Gomorrah practiced sexual immorality – after all, they did want to rape these men. But it was not their sexual orientation that brought about God’s punishment. It was their sexual violence. Unfortunately, so many people are so uncomfortable with homosexual orientation that they can’t see Genesis 19 any other way.
Comment by jddamiani March 4, 2010 @ 3:17 pmNow I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them. For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple.
Comment by PAUL @ ROMANS 16 March 10, 2010 @ 11:03 pmThank you for your comment. I agree with you wholeheartedly. Many people have distorted the story of Sodom and Gomorrah for far too long. Because of their desires to demonize homosexuality, they forsook the traditional interpretation of the passage in favor of a simplistic interpretation that focuses on homosexuality. Why? Because they themselves are guilty of the real sins of Sodom and Gomorrah. It’s a shame that, when the Bible speaks against our own desires, we change the interpretation to ease our guilt. When the Bible shows us how much God hates greed, selfishness, inhospitality, we ignore it and make up our own interpretation. It’s very sad.
Comment by jddamiani March 11, 2010 @ 9:21 amso very sad
Comment by lucy(I WILL use my real name :) ) March 13, 2010 @ 4:48 pmso very much in shock
in the days of noah….
when the rain starts falling it’s too late.
I take it you don’t approve of my explanation as to why Sodom’s sin was not homosexuality. If so, you could always provide a counter argument. A vague reference to Noah just isn’t going to cut it. I would agree, however, that we’re in some serious trouble here. The US (Christians and otherwise) looks so much now like Sodom did then, that it’s a little freaky. And I’m not talking about sexuality; I’m talking about greed, selfishness, violence,”fullness of bread,” failure to help the oppressed, etc. But hey, as long as we’re fixated on the great “sin” of homosexuality, we don’t have to worry about our own greed and selfishness, am I right?
Comment by jddamiani March 13, 2010 @ 6:02 pmDear JonJon, I am not the one that has to “approve” your interpretation (not an explanation-rather, an interpretation). You-just like the thousands of other theologians before you, are taking a try at interpretation. You are using your degree. Good job. You, as the many others before you- may just be wrong…or right. However, it is not me that will approve or disprove your message. You alone will be responsible and accountable before God for the truth or poison that you are feeding us. I don’t need to counter your interpretation. It is meaningless for me to argue with an interpretation- I have the very spirit of God within me,Each day, to listen to and trust. And from the beginning of time, He created all things for His glory-
7″But now ask the beasts, and let them teach you; And the birds of the heavens, and let them tell you.
Comment by lucy(I WILL use my real name :) ) March 14, 2010 @ 4:34 pm8″Or speak to the earth, and let it teach you; And let the fish of the sea declare to you.
9″Who among all these does not know
That the hand of the LORD has done this,
10 In whose hand is the life of every living thing,And the breath of all mankind?
11″Does not the ear test words,
As the palate tastes its food?
12″Wisdom is with aged men, With long life is understanding.
Now that is something I can handle! I will answer to God, and that’s EXACTLY why I’m writing these blogs.
Comment by jddamiani March 14, 2010 @ 4:44 pm