What is the sin of Sodom? Analysis of a controversial passage from the Bible
Biblical reflections published on the site Would Jesus Discriminate? (United States), freely translated by Silvia Lanzi
The story of Sodoma and Gomorra in Genesis 19 is the story of the attempted group rape of two "strangers". He says nothing of loving gay relationships and actually condemns the type of violence sometimes made to gay and lesbians. Judas 7 speaks of a Jewish legend of the first century, according to which Sodom's women would have sex with male angels. Since there is talk of heterosexual sex between angels and humans, it clearly has nothing to do with gay relationships.
The story of Sodoma and Gomorra is perhaps the best known of the "dark steps" that someone tries to use against gay people. This story is told in one of the oldest books in the Bible and for centuries it was the favorite of artists and writers. Even if you have never read the story of the Old Testament of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, you certainly read it in a book or seen in a film. Since the biblical story is very long, I will make you a summary. You can find the original in Genesis 19 and in the previous chapters.
Abraham had a nephew named Lot, who went to Sodoma. At that time Sodoma was considered a comfortable, sophisticated and modern city, and Lot thought it was a better place in which to grow his family than outside the plains, with Abraham, who was a nomad. Unfortunately, the city was also full of wickedness and so God said to Abraham that he would soon destroy it. Two angels were sent to evaluate the situation of Sodoma and, when Lot saw them in the city square, he invited them to his house to dine and stay. He did not understand that they were angels. However, he felt he had the responsibility of being hospitable with foreigners because he remembered having been a foreigner himself.
That evening, when the inhabitants were able that Lot had given hospitality to two foreigners, everyone gathered at his door. They asked Lot to let go of the two men to be able to "know them" (Genesis 19: 5) (the Jewish term that translates "to know" is sometimes used in the scriptures to mean sexual relationship, and given the context of the passage, this is probably the meaning it has here). Lot begged his neighbors not to do such a evil thing. With a despicable act, he offered them his virgin daughters, but men persisted. Finally, the angels affected all of them with blindness and warned Lot and his family to abandon the city because God would have destroyed her soon because of her wickedness. Immediately the following day a fire came from the sky that destroyed the city and all its inhabitants.
Since the Middle Ages, many Christian theologians have seen in this story a total condemnation of homosexuality. They handed down the idea that Sodoma had been destroyed for his sexual wickedness and that the proof of this malice was the desire of his inhabitants of having homosexual sex. We analyze both facts told in Genesis 19 and the interpretation of the story made by the other biblical authors. First, let's examine the facts.
The text tells us that "Sodom's men surrounded the house: young and old, the entire population that came from all sides" (v. 4) They gathered at the door of Lot and asked that his guests were brought out. Language is important because it clarifies that the group at Lot's door was made up of all the people in the city (men and women) or, at least, by all the males of the city, both boys and men. This is a significant fact.
Today, San Francisco has the reputation of being the "gay" city in the world. Yet even in San Francisco, homosexuals are far less than half of the total male population. If the writing text told us that "some sodom men" or even "many sodom men" gathered on the door, we could then assume that men on the door could have been motivated by homosexual desire. But the text says that "Both young and old, all the people up to the last man" He gathered at the door. The suggestion that every man and boy from Sodoma was homosexual is simply not credible. Every reasonable interpretation of history must take into account the fact that all sodom males (both homosexual and heterosexual), and perhaps also women, have participated in this attack. It seems that here it is at work more than the homosexual desire.
This point is strengthened by another fact told in history. We are told that Lot, in a last desperate attempt to save his guests, offered his virgin daughters to the men on the door. Although Lot's offer is questionable, it gives another important interpretative clue. Suppose to stay by hosting an aperitif, when suddenly a group of men who know how to be homosexuals begin to knock angrily at the door, asking you to send a guest out of your home - male of course. Would it make sense to offer them a wonderful woman instead? Of course not! If men were motivated by a homosexual desire, offering them heterosexual sex would not make sense. Lot knew Sodoma's men much better than today's fundamentalist preachers. And it is obvious that he believed that the crowd outside his door was mainly heterosexual. Why would otherwise offer his daughters? Although it could be easier to blame what happened in Genesis 19 to homosexuals, the facts indicate that something much more totalizing and complex happened. But what? If the reason for the attack was not the homosexual desire, then what was it?
Consider an example of modern times. On August 9, 1997, in New York, two policemen were carrying out a search in search of weapons in the house of a Haitian black immigrant named Abner Louima and got angry with him. They dragged him into a bathroom and, while one kept him down, the other filed a broken broom in his rectum. While they did, it was said that the policemen screamed things like "We will teach you that the Nei must respect the policemen!". Following this terrible accident, nobody suggested that the aggression was motivated by homosexual desire. Intuitively, we know that the two policemen were motivated by hatred and fear towards people like Abner Louima. In their minds, there was no better way to diminish and humiliate an "enemy" than to violate it sexually.
There is the same evil motivation behind the vulgar phrase "Fanc*lo!". That's why, when Tyler is driving his 87 Honda Civic along the motorway and an angry man who darts next to him with his Ford F150 shows him his finger, Tyler does not think, "Oh, he must think I'm cute!", but he knows that the man is angry - perhaps enough to brutalize it.
From archaeological evidence we know that it was a common practice for soldiers in the Near East to use homosexual violence as a way of humiliating enemies. When the victorious soldiers wanted to break the spirit of their defeated enemies, they would "treated as women" ran them. This practice was not dictated by sexual desire, but by brutality and hatred against enemies.
The reason to sexually abuse those we hate is sadly part of the general human experience (even if it is not part of our personal experience). It is this motivation, and not the sexual desire, which is behind Sodoma's sin. Perhaps the inhabitants of the city were afraid that the two foreign angelic were spies. Perhaps the fact that Lot (a recent immigrant) had made them enter was served to increase the suspicion. Whatever they had caused their panic, the mass mentality prevailed and the inhabitants of Sodoma soon went to Lot's house asking loudly to brutalize foreigners. This is a story of an attempted mass violence, not of homosexual desire.
To check this statement, let's ask ourselves a simple question. Suppose that the two angels of history had been women, but that the story was exactly the same: Sodom's men asked loudly to have sex with the two woman and God angels has destroyed the city. Do you think someone can conclude that this story is a total condemnation of heterosexuality? Certainly no! Instead, we should all conclude (correctly) that Sodom's wickedness has been demonstrated by the desire to sexually violate two strangers in the midst of them.
In fact, this is the way the other authors of the Bible have interpreted this story. There are about twenty references to Sodoma, none of which says that homosexuality was sin. One of the largest references to Sodoma is found in Ezekiel, who says: "Here, this was the iniquity of Sodom, your sister: she and her daughters lived in pride, in the abundance of bread, and in the indolent ozio; But they did not support the hand of the afflicted and the poor. They were haughty, and committed abominations in my presence; So I made her disappear when I saw this " (Ezekiel 16: 49-50). It is clear from this passage (and from others similar) that the abomination of Sodom, according to the prophets of the Old Testament, was that it behaved with insensitive indifference towards the weak and vulnerable: the poor, the orphans, the widows and the foreigners in the midst of them.
Why then do some Christians interpret this story as a condemnation to any homosexual behavior? We would like to think that their interpretation is led by the Antigay prejudice. Many Christians know only the stereotypes that have learned as children. They take the idea that all gay men are predators and do not exist love relationships between intrinsically homosexual people. So they read the story of Sodoma and see a stereotype of what all gay people think are. They then believe that history should be a radical condemnation of homosexuality because they believe that homosexuality takes on the form shown in this story. In truth, this story is at most a condemnation of homosexual violence and, as other parts of writing affirm, it is more generally than a condemnation of the mistreatment of those who are more vulnerable, including foreigners. It is ironic that Sodom's story is now used by Christians to justify hatred towards another vulnerable group - gay people.
This story clearly does not apply to the question we ask to writing, that is to say if two people of the same sex can live a love relationship engaged with the blessing of God. So we can take this step so difficult and put it aside.
Having gone behind another meat (Judas 7)
The second of these difficult steps is another reference to Sodoma and Gomorra. In the version of King Giacomo we read:
"Like Sodoma and Gomorrah, and the nearby cities, having run in the same way of them, and having gone behind another meat, they were proposed for example, bringing the penalty of eternal fire". (Judas 7)
When we read these verses in modern America, having grown up in a culture that despises gays and refers to them as "queer", it is easy to assume that Judas' reference ad "Going behind another meat" it must mean homosexuality. For many heterosexual people it seems strange or unnatural for a person to wanting intimacy with someone of his own sex. However, well -informed theologians will tell you that it is not of what Judas speaks.
At the time when Judas' book was written, some believed that the women of Sodom had had sex with male angels. This opinion probably comes from Genesis 6: 1.2 and 4, where we are told that the "sons of God" (the angels) took the daughters of men as wives. This was the final act that brought God's judgment to earth in the form of a great flood. And it seems that some Jewish writers believed that this was also the sin that had determined Sodom's fate.
According to a legend of the first century, it is thought that some of the women of Sodoma (and other evil ancient cities) had made sex with beings who were made of different meat - angelic meat. This is what Judas refers to when he talks about "Going behind another meat". He was referring to heterosexual sex between male angels and human women, not in homosexual sex among human beings. Many theologians, including many conservatives, interpret the step in this way.
We ask again: this step applies to the question we ask for writing? We must answer that it has nothing to say that it is possible that two human beings of the same sex have an intimate love relationship with the blessing of God.
Original text: What was the sin of sodom? (Genesis 19 and Jude 7)
