Comments on: Genesis 19: The Sin of Sodom

By: anita

anita — Fri, 22 Jul 2011 05:50:11 +0000

William, most of my resources are boxed up and in storage so while I don't consider Wikipedia the most trustworthy of sources, they have a section that deals with this issue on "war rape."

By: William

William — Thu, 21 Jul 2011 19:07:02 +0000

” … letting them know who was in charge, violent gang rape on men … ”

where else in antiquity does it talk about this behavior? I know men on women
but never heard on men on men as a form of subjugation.

Thanks.

By: anita

anita — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 04:25:39 +0000

James–> Thanks so much for checking out SisterFriends and adding a few comments of your own. I actually did make a small mention of Jude in the list of Scriptures that mentioned what the explicitly stated sins of Sodom were however I only mentioned it in passing because in most conversations I’ve had with others the passage in Jude hasn’t been a prominent argument or concern. I appreciate what you added to round out some thoughts on that passage. For me, Jude’s references to Sodom are simply too ambiguous for anyone to build a case on one way or another, though I find the use of “strange” flesh to be interesting since it seems far more logical that the sin of going after strange flesh would be more applicable to the men of Sodom going after the flesh of angels. I don’t think it’s appropriate to use this passage to condemn homosexuality as it would be a stretch to equate “strange” flesh with “same” flesh. Again James, I appreciate your perspective on all this and hope you wander this way again.

By: James

James — Sun, 07 Sep 2008 11:38:24 +0000

I am a Christian gay man who is solidly grounded in my beliefs. I came to your sight not for conformation of what I have come to know on my own (that God loves EVERYONE and homosexuality is definitely NOT wrong) but out of curiosity and to see how unbiased your stance is. It frustrates me that people who believe that homosexuality is not forbidden in the Bible often fall to the same lip-service and name calling that the other side does. I’m impressed with this site; I like what you have here. I think it’s very well put together. But I was curious why the Jude reference wasn’t made available like the others. It just makes it look like you’re hiding something you can’t explain (But I don’t think you are). So I looked it up, (it’s Jude, verse 7; there are no chapters) and in my opinion, Jude is talking about worshiping other gods. He says in vs. 5 that God destroyed people for their unbelief, and goes on is vs. 6 to mention the angels who turned from God to Satan and were condemned. Then he uses Sodom as a further example, for ‘going after strange flesh.’ It does mention fornication, but that is within the wider context of turning to a ‘strange’ faith outside of God. And many pagan (demonically inspired?) religions used sexual practices and sexual degradation of many varying kinds in their ceremonies. The temples of Babylon had prostitutes, male and female, who would let their bodies be used for these pagan rituals. My father, a pastor and Biblical historian, believes that Mary Magdalene may have been a temple prostitute, but I don’t know his basis for this claim. Anyway, I think it’s important to include this in the explanation because ‘going after strange flesh’ could easily be misread as referencing homosexuality. Also, as a side note, I want to agree with you in the idea that the entire Scripture is written for us, but not the everything is written TO us. This way of interpreting the Bible is called Dispensationalism. I’ve been studying it, and I think it’s correct. God set rules and limits and made promises and warnings to a certain set of people at a certain point in history. That’s why we don’t need to follow the Rabbinical diet or Leviticus’ restrictions. It’s not a new idea, and it helps to make many things about the comparison between Old Testament and New Testament much clearer.

By: Fundamentalist Christian Words of Wisdom #5 « break the terror

Fundamentalist Christian Words of Wisdom #5 « break the terror — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 20:43:29 +0000

[...] For a fuller understanding of just what “hospitality” meant in Biblical times, go here. So no, ma’am, that has nothing to do with allowing people in California who love each other [...]

By: anita

anita — Sun, 01 Jun 2008 16:17:23 +0000

Kurri–> That’s certainly what many would argue, particularly if you limit your reading to what the Scriptures itself says was the sin of Sodom. In that case, sodomy would better be defined as pride, inhospitality, arrogance, cruelty to the poor and orphaned, etc. If you have an interest in this topic Mark Jordan’s book, “The Invention of sodomy in Christian Theology” deals directly with your question.

By: Kurri

Kurri — Sun, 01 Jun 2008 10:56:30 +0000

So has there been a mistranslation/misinterpritation with the whole
City = Sodom = Sodomy = Anal Sex = Sin?

By: Rick Brentlinger

Rick Brentlinger — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 18:53:08 +0000

Very interesting, especially the list of scripture references which clearly tell us how God and the authors of scripture understood the Sodom story. Why don’t conservative evangelicals and fundamentalists believe their own Bible?

Great work and much appreciated!

God bless you and your ministry.

Rick Brentlinger
http://www.gaychristian101.com