Dennis On: Getting Sodom Straight...

Getting Sodom Straight...

The Biblical story of Sodom is not the story of a town that happened to be 100% gay, men and boys, for this is a ludicrous assumption. This would have to be the conclusion if God, vowing to save it for ten righteous men, did not. It would also mean that "righteous" meant heterosexual, while unrighteous meant homosexual and, well, I doubt that alone qualifies men to be righteous.

The story that unfolds in Genesis 19 is a hospitality story and not a story based on homosexuality. Sodom's problems as remembered by Ezekiel were that the people were prideful, had too much food, too much time, neglected the poor, were haughty and committed abominations (Ez. 16:49-50). Not ANY mention of mass homosexuality. Abominations can be just about anything not in tune with the law and in this case was a reference to idol worship. Another common Israelite trait all through their history. Why would papa Lot offer his virgin daughter's to a crowd of homosexuals, in place of his guests? What interest would homosexuals have in virgin women? ZERO, unless the girls were being offered as an appeasing virgin sacrifice ("for they have not known a man.") This would qualify as an abomination to be sure, and also idolatry. Human sacrifice was still an option it appears with Abram and Lot.

Another factor is that in that culture the protection of guests under one's roof to a male host was a matter of honor. This is why Lot scrambled to come up with a solution to the problem. In Lot's mind, it was about Lot's reputation and honor. Not an uncommon modern theme in Middle Eastern men to this day. Strangers were not taken kindly to in small clannish towns. They could be spies and were always suspect.

The way to put a stranger in his place was to humiliate them sexually, and send the warning that they had best have no ill intentions in the town. In that culture, the most horrific way to humiliate a stranger and have power over him was to mistreat him as one might mistreat a woman. Symbolic or literal rape. The rape would not be a homosexual act, it would be a warning and a putting of strange man in his place as a warning. "In our town, you are just like any other woman, property to be used as needed and disposed of if necessary" It may only have been a threat to humiliate and control as the original request was for them to come out "that we might know them".

There are two schools of thought on "know them". One is sexual and one is to simply interrogate and get to know. Few ever question Lot's evil counteroffer. But it does show that Lot was a product of his culture and personal ego protection. Eastern hospitality issues were at stake here and not homosexuality. EVERY sermon I ever heard on the topic stops short of explaining Lot's egregious behavior as a father. I doubt this ever really literally happened, but if it did, Lot would be no hero of mine. I seriously doubt he had much of a relationship with the girls after this stunt, not to mention Mrs. Lot! Perhaps she did not so much look back to Sodom as refused to look ahead at him leaving town!

I have always found it amusing to inform fundamentalist males who literally believe that "women come from men and not men from women" as Paul ignorantly noted, that the human fetus starts out female. While the genetics to be male or female is there, the initial stages of conception put the fetus clearly in the female camp. Torture the Taliban with this fact! It is only after the fetus is bathed in the chemistry of testosterone after the fourth to sixth week does it literally start it trip toward maleness. Without that chemical miracle and it can be interrupted by many factors, including stress in the mother at the time, and the male born can be highly feminized in both thinking and body. We all know men who act very feminine who in fact are not homosexual but are oft accused of it. This would reflect such a deficiency in the womb. It's a big topic medically, environmentally and socially and I do not mean to address them in any detail. The information is out there.

I know many gay men and women (I am not gay), and there is not one that I could see being anything but who they are. I have asked each one when they knew their leanings sexually were toward their own sex and it is ALWAYS between 8 and 12 years old. They then, (I live in Fundamentalist Land), spend the next twenty years having it prayed out, Bibled out, preached out and counseled out with massive doses of fear, shame and guilt. At about age 30, they tend to finally give up and admit, "I seem to be what I am." And accept themselves even if others don't. One gay friend and their partner of 20 years recently met a pregnant teen who was going to abort her child and long story short, they paid for the birth, attended it and adopted the little girl as their own. At the infant baptism ceremony she was taken to by the one of the partners, a member "outed" them to the new Pastor (the old one was more don't ask don't tell), and the next day the Pastor gave them a video to reform them. They were not not interested in reform. To a gay person becoming heterosexual on command would be the same as a heterosexual becoming gay on command. The next day they were disfellowshipped from a life long church affiliation by the new pastor. So, you be the judge. A gay couple saves a nearly aborted child, raises her like a princess and gets bounced from their church after 30 years. WWJD?

What's the point here? I think, leave people alone. No one can live the life of another. Thought control and obedience to organizations and leadership, to me, is suspect and not a path that serves the individual in the long run. In the 250 peak years of the Inquisition, the Catholic Church successfully murdered as "witches" (you shall not suffer a witch to live), tens of thousands of women. These were mostly midwives, herbalists, and some men who simply were not interested in Catholic control and "truth". Like Lot, women were expendable to the Church to preserve honor and the patriarchal, literalist, goddess smashing politic.

I have always chuckled at Leonardo da Vinci's painting of the Lord's Supper. Everyone "knows" what they are looking at. 12 Men and One Jesus in the middle. Ah... but look again. Sitting on the right hand of Jesus is a woman, looking like a woman and in fact, probably being Mary, "the prostitute". Leonardo had his own opinions about WWJD and who He might honor in a society that would not agree. Perhaps we should be just as kind and respectful and not let the misuse of scripture taint our view of real human beings.

Dennis C. Diehl

DenniscDiehl@aol.com