The Sin Of Sodom

[Damien the Leper]

Scott did not want to derail the BSA thread, so I decided to start this one.

A bit of history:

This is my explanation to Ahab:

What was the question? I didn't see one, but I did see you make a good point.

Rob Osborn said this:

Being forced into a no win situation. I dont see why BSA doesn't just keep the same standard in place they have always had. Must every organization be swayed to the lack of principle that Sodom and Gomorrah had?

This was my response to him:

What did the prophet Ezekiel say was the sin of Sodom (Hint: Ezk 16:49)?

Volgadon stated this:

I'm still waiting for a good response to your Ezekiel question.

To which Scott Lloyd replied:

I'll take a stab at it.

I don't see how the things mentioned in Ezekiel 16:49 preclude sexual sin, especially considering verse 50, which refers to "abomination" and cross-references to Jeremiah 23:14, which mentions adultery in the context of Sodom and Gomorrah.

And I then gave my response to Scott in my post above (#218).

This was Scott's last reply to me from the BSA thread:

Ultimately, I believe sins can be and often are interrelated. That wrongdoing facilitates further wrongdoing. I'm not asserting that sexual sin was the sole reason for the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, but neither am I willing to rule it out as a contributing factor, even a significant one.

But as I said, I'm not prepared to argue this from a scholarly perspective --I don't have the background that you and Volgaden evidently do -- and I'm not disposed to derail this thread with it in any case.

With Scott's last words to me in that thread in mind, I issue a CFR for explicit Hebrew Bible (for #1 following) evidence to substantiate two claims, 1) homosexuality was in any way a sin of Sodom and 2) that the sins described in various scriptural texts are "interrelated".

This is not an attack on Scott. I like Scott but I would like a more extensive response.

NOTE to Scott: I'm not looking for a scholarly response. I'm asking for an appropriate and demonstrable response that is well reasoned.

[Scott Lloyd]

I still feel out of my element when it comes to discussing ancient Hebrew and thus will not be participating at length on this thread.

I will only respond that I only asserted that the scripture mentions adultery in connection with the sins of Sodom. To me, adultery is a broad term that encompasses, among other things, homosexual behavior, since there can be no lawful expression of homosexuality.

As for sins being interrelated, that was a statement of personal conviction, but it does seem axiomatic to me. The sin of pride, for example, can facilitate an assortment of other, more grievous sins, including sexual sins. I will not be answering a CFR pertaining to that one, since I don't believe references are necessary for statements of personal belief that are axiomatic.

[Damien the Leper]

I still feel out of my element when it comes to discussing ancient Hebrew and thus will not be participating at length on this thread.

That's fine.

I will only respond that I only asserted that the scripture mentions adultery in connection with the sins of Sodom. To me, adultery is a broad term that encompasses, among other things, homosexual behavior, since there can be no lawful expression of homosexuality.

Fair enough.

As for sins being interrelated, that was a statement of personal conviction, but it does seem axiomatic to me. The sin of pride, for example, can facilitate an assortment of other, more grievous sins, including sexual sins. I will not be answering a CFR pertaining to that one, since I don't believe references are necessary for statements of personal belief that are axiomatic.

Thank you for explaining this, Scott. I understand your reasoning better now and I will withdraw this particular CFR.

[Maidservant]

If you read the Book of Jasher, you can read an idea of what the problems of Sodom were from the point of view of the writer (?) of that book, and sexual morality is not referenced, if I recall correctly. Chapters 18 and 19.

www.ccel.org

[Damien the Leper]

If you read the Book of Jasher, you can read an idea of what the problems of Sodom were from the point of view of the writer (?) of that book, and sexual morality is not referenced, if I recall correctly. Chapters 18 and 19.

www.ccel.org

Thank you for the reference!

[Damien the Leper]

Book of Jasher can be found here and it is chapter 19 that addresses Sodom.

[bluebell]

I did not read the other thread so these verses have probably already been mentioned, but the Guide to the Scriptures on LDS. org provides these verses (among others) under it's 'homosexuality' heading-

• There shall be no sodomite of the sons of Israel, Deut. 23:17
  
• They declare their sin as Sodom, they hide it not, Isa. 3:9 (2 Ne. 13:9).
  

[Damien the Leper]

I did not read the other thread so these verses have probably already been mentioned, but the Guide to the Scriptures on LDS. org provides these verses (among others) under it's 'homosexuality' heading-

• There shall be no sodomite of the sons of Israel, Deut. 23:17
  
• They declare their sin as Sodom, they hide it not, Isa. 3:9 (2 Ne. 13:9).
  

1) Keep in mind that Israel is a patriarchal culture. For a man to allow himself to be penetrated (I'm trying so hard not to break the rules and I think I might be blushing as I write this) is seen, within the historical context, as submission and willing to be treated as a woman.

2) As I said before, "sodomy" and "sodomite" do NOT harmonize with the Greek word ἀρσενοκοῖτaι (1 Cor 6:9). Therefore, sodomite isn't really a word or adjective but more of an expletive. I explained this earlier in the thread. I also demonstrated from Ezekiel what the sin of Sodom was. It is audacious for us to assume, based on a disgusting traditional misreading and misunderstanding of the text, that certain sins are somehow implied.

3) Let's look more closely at Isaiah:

v8. For Jerusalem has stumbled, and Judah has fallen, because their speech and their deeds are against the LORD, defying his glorious presence.

v9. For the look on their faces bears witness against them; they proclaim their sin like Sodom; they do not hide it. Woe to them! For they have brought evil on themselves.

From www.isaiahexplained.com by Avraham Gileadi:

Isaiah’s further mention of Sodom (cf. Isaiah 1:9–10) implies that sodomy has become widespread among God’s people. So much that it is flaunted openly and shows in his people’s faces and demeanor. God’s response is to pronounce a covenant curse: “Woe to their souls” (ᐣôy lěnapšām)—that is, to body and spirit. The word “disaster” or “calamity” (rā â) signifies God’s Day of Judgment, when God uses the king of Assyria to wreak a Sodom-and-Gomorrah type of destruction upon the wicked of his people—on all who belong to Isaiah’s Babylon category (cf. Isaiah 13:1–19; 47:11).

What is clear from the text is that "sodomy" is an act. It is **** intercourse. Also clear from the text, is that it is gender neutral concerning who is being "sodomized".

Concerning 2 Ne. 13:9, and possibly a little bit above, all you have done is proof texted, incorrectly I might add. 2 Ne. mentions nothing about sex. It simply says "sin to be even as Sodom". There is a comparison being made. Go back and read verse 8 in the same chapter and then look at verse 9 again.

Edited January 30, 2013 by Valentinus

[RobertAC]

I did not read the other thread so these verses have probably already been mentioned, but the Guide to the Scriptures on LDS. org provides these verses (among others) under it's 'homosexuality' heading-

• There shall be no sodomite of the sons of Israel, Deut. 23:17
  
• They declare their sin as Sodom, they hide it not, Isa. 3:9 (2 Ne. 13:9).
  

Deuteronomy is hard to understand as what is being prohibited and why. The reference to a "Sodomite" is unclear.

As to the Isaiah and Nephi references, they seem to concern people embracing their sin as a good thing as the people of Sodom did.

[bluebell]

I really have no idea, nor to i care a whole lot at this point. I was pointing out the verses that we have which speak specifically about sodom which the church has related to homosexuality. Hopefully a bible scholar or someone more knowledgable will join the discussion and be able to shed more light on the subject.

[Calm]

I did not read the other thread so these verses have probably already been mentioned, but the Guide to the Scriptures on LDS. org provides these verses (among others) under it's 'homosexuality' heading-

• There shall be no sodomite of the sons of Israel, Deut. 23:17
  
• They declare their sin as Sodom, they hide it not, Isa. 3:9 (2 Ne. 13:9).
  

Other translations translate "sodomite" as "shrine" or "cultic" prostitute, which may have included homosexuality but definitely homosexuality was not seen as the primary issue with such in ancient times (like Hamba said elsewhere, "sex is sex" and it is the cultic aspect that is the concern.

http://bible.cc/deuteronomy/23-17.htm

Barnes' Notes on the Bible

Compare the marginal reference. Prostitution was a common part of religious observances among idolatrous nations, especially in the worship of Ashtoreth or Astarte. Compare Micah 1:7; Baruch 6:43.

[Damien the Leper]

I really have no idea, nor to i care a whole lot at this point. I was pointing out the verses that we have which speak specifically about sodom which the church has related to homosexuality. Hopefully a bible scholar or someone more knowledgable will join the discussion and be able to shed more light on the subject.

It is an incorrect connection made not only by the LDS church by many others. It is a false assumption that has been regurgitated for centuries.

Edited January 30, 2013 by Valentinus

[Damien the Leper]

Other translations translate "sodomite" as "shrine" or "cultic" prostitute, which may have included homosexuality but definitely homosexuality was not seen as the primary issue with such in ancient times (like Hamba said elsewhere, "sex is sex" and it is the cultic aspect that is the concern.

http://bible.cc/deuteronomy/23-17.htm

This is exactly what Paul was dealing with in Romans 1. He was coming back from his mission in the Mediterranean and Asia Minor and these temples are being erected for the worship of pagan gods. In those temples, prostitution was being practiced.

[go_utes01]

It is an incorrect connection made not only by the LDS church by many others. It is a false assumption that has been regurgitated for centuries.

Is the point that ancient prophets would have seen nothing wrong with homosexual activity or just that some people's understanding of the sin involved in Sodom is incorrect? Do you believe there is any indication on how the ancient prophet/church viewed homosexual activities? I assume homosexual activity would have still been seen as fornication or adultery and looked down upon, am I correct in that assumption? Thanks.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

It is an incorrect connection made not only by the LDS church by many others. It is a false assumption that has been regurgitated for centuries.

It is based on the premise that the men in that city rejected two virgins for two agels...does not take much of a leap.

[volgadon]

It is based on the premise that the men in that city rejected two virgins for two angels...does not take much of a leap.

I posted a link to a book by Tikvah Frymer-Kensky, I'll have to repost it, as she provides a very good explanation for this behaviour. The reason why the rejected Lot's offer was because the daughters were part of the city, whereas the angels were newcomers, and thus had to be humiliated and shown who's boss. Think a prison yard setting. The reason Lot made the offer in the first place is because as host he was bound to care for his guests above all else.

[Calm]

I posted a link to a book by Tikvah Frymer-Kensky, I'll have to repost it, as she provides a very good explanation for this behaviour. The reason why the rejected Lot's offer was because the daughters were part of the city, whereas the angels were newcomers, and thus had to be humiliated and shown who's boss. Think a prison yard setting. The reason Lot made the offer in the first place is because as host he was bound to care for his guests above all else.

The Book of Jasher interpretation carries the same significance, no homosexual attack, but all strangers were set up in order to be abused in some fashion, if poor it was the law to allow them to starve to death even and those who violated the law were killed.

[volgadon]

The Book of Jasher interpretation carries the same significance, no homosexual attack, but all strangers were set up in order to be abused in some fashion, if poor it was the law to allow them to starve to death even and those who violated the law were killed.

I actually had an elementary school textbook on Midrash (which I've since lost) that had a page or two of stories about the horrible treatment of guests in Sodom. The usefulness of such accounts is not in their authenticity, but rather because they are spurious. If the writers decided to invent details, why invent those details. Once the question is asked, we can see more on how the text was interpreted.

[volgadon]

Here is what I wrote in the other thread.

Popular etymology notwithstanding, the sin of Sodom was not primarly homosexuality, but hatred, betrayal, and rape. http://books.google....er jail&f=false

Be one's stance on homosexuality as it may, I feel that before prooftexting we ough to look for the intended meaning of the scriptural passage. Reading this one as a mere indictment of homosexuality misses what the text is really trying to say, and its broader application.

[TAO]

Volgadon, does the verse which uses 'of unnatural affection' refer to homosexuaity in Hebrew or Greek?

[Damien the Leper]

Is the point that ancient prophets would have seen nothing wrong with homosexual activity or just that some people's understanding of the sin involved in Sodom is incorrect? Do you believe there is any indication on how the ancient prophet/church viewed homosexual activities? I assume homosexual activity would have still been seen as fornication or adultery and looked down upon, am I correct in that assumption? Thanks.

I will respond to this tomorrow.

[Anijen]

A legal view of sodomy is a sin that could not lead to pregnancy (does not matter if it is homosexual or hetro). It was and in some cases still used to add on to other charges just to keep them [criminals] in longer. An important cases in our legal history is Lawrence v. Texas it has and will continue to be a precedence for future decisions.

I am not an advocate of same sex marriage but am not irritated enough to be annoyed about it either.

[volgadon]

Volgadon, does the verse which uses 'of unnatural affection' refer to homosexuaity in Hebrew or Greek?

Not directly, no. I'll expand on this later.

[Damien the Leper]

Is the point that ancient prophets would have seen nothing wrong with homosexual activity or just that some people's understanding of the sin involved in Sodom is incorrect? Do you believe there is any indication on how the ancient prophet/church viewed homosexual activities? I assume homosexual activity would have still been seen as fornication or adultery and looked down upon, am I correct in that assumption? Thanks.

The point is that the Sin of Sodom is misunderstood.

The Jewish culture did not approve of homosexuality. But sodomy was frowned upon because it was not procreative. It was worse for homosexuals because it was seen as a man being submissive in a highly patriarchal culture and society. When I read these texts, I have to keep them within their ancient cultural understanding and not misread read them to fit a contemporary understanding.

[go_utes01]

The point is that the Sin of Sodom is misunderstood.

The Jewish culture did not approve of homosexuality. But sodomy was frowned upon because it was not procreative. It was worse for homosexuals because it was seen as a man being submissive in a highly patriarchal culture and society. When I read these texts, I have to keep them within their ancient cultural understanding and not misread read them to fit a contemporary understanding.

Well, if how you described the view of homosexuals in the Jewish culture is correct, it seems plausible that the Jewish leaders could have believed that homosexual activity was part of the reason for the judgment against Sodom, no?