Sodom & Gomorrah 2 - Genesis 19: 1-11

The three “angels” or holy men have agreed to spare the city of Sodom if there are only 10 righteous people in it. Abraham asked these questions knowing full well that his nephew Lot and his family were there. Now I don’t know exactly how big Lot’s family was or if his family alone exceeded the 10 person requirement, but I know he had a wife and at least two daughters, so that’s only four people altogether, assuming they were all righteous. This really begs the question, why did Lot even live there if the whole city was so wicked? It’s really an interesting question, why does he stay? These angels walk toward Sodom and Lot sees them because he “sat in the gate of Sodom.” An article about this chapter form bibleref.com notes that Lot was probably “sitting at the gate as a leader and elder of the town.” When Lot sees these men, the article makes a good point of noting “he probably doesn’t yet know that these are angels sent to investigate the sins of the city’s people in preparation for God’s judgment.” I always assumed that Lot had recognized these men as holy and therefore invited them to stay at his house for that reason, but it makes sense that he wouldn’t know that yet. Maybe one of the reasons Lot is sitting by the city gate is to collect any visitors and keep them safe for the night. Maybe that’s one of the reasons that he stays, to do that service for the visitors of that city, to keep them safe. Lot invites them to stay at his house “and wash your feet,” but the men decline answering, “Nay; but we will abide in the street all night.” I’ve always thought that the men would sleep in the streets the same way that homeless people do in our society, shiver under some newspaper on a park bench, but the article comments, “in an era before large-scale hotels, inns, or other accommodations, it would not have been unusual for travelers to sleep in a public area for the night as they passed through a town. As messengers of God, the angels were not concerned for their own safety.” Lot was insistent and when they relented “made them a feast, and did bake unleavened bread, and they did eat.” As the evening progressed “the men of the city… compassed the house round, both old and young, all the people from every quarter: and they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men whoch came in to thee this night? Bring them out unto us, that we may know them.” This of course means that they wanted to rape the visiting men and this makes it sound like every single male in the city was involved in this activity at night and that this wasn’t a first for them, but instead a very common practice. I just don’t understand the appeal of raping someone, especially a man raping another man because rape isn’t about sex it’s about power and I just don’t understand why their first thought about doing violence to these visitors would be rape. Like if they were like “bring out all of their stuff” or they wanted to beat them up or something, robbery and beatings I understand, it’s not right, but I understand, but rape? Like why that specifically? And this isn’t a practice that is specific to Sodom because there are other accounts of this happening in the scriptures later, I just don’t get it. Because the men of Sodom wanted to rape the visiting men, this is the reason why this account is used to point the fingers at homosexuality as being a sin in the Christian community at large. The LDS doctrine has modern day revelation with the Proclamation on the Family and things like that, but the homosexual sex part of this account is not the point here. If we think about it, why was Sodom ripe for destruction? Is it more likely that it’s the homosexual part of this account that is the problem or the gang rape part? My guess is that two people of the same gender engaging in consensual sexual activity is not as big of a deal as gang rape. And let’s not forget the incredibly close tie between rape and murder. Many, many rape victims become murder victims, or they at least have their lives ruined. I don’t think that I can understate the significance sexual assault has one one’s wellbeing, physically and mentally. It literally ruins people’s lives pretty consistently, so yeah, it’s a big deal, then add to it the “gang” part, where rape happens over and over again by multiple offenders, it’s absolutely horrific. I’m *hoping* that if it were women being gang raped all the time that God would have been just as angry and the consequences just as severe, and I think that it would be, because I truly believe that Jesus is the champion of women. There are a few other points to make when considering that the homosexual aspect of Sodom’s violence was not the deal breaker that people seem to make it out to be. The first point comes to us from an article on this chapter from reformationproject.org which notes that “God had already decided to destroy the city prior to this incident.” I don’t know why it had never occurred to me, but the whole conversation Abraham had with the angels came had to do with them discussing the decision that God had already made. The decision was made long before the concept of homosexuality was introduced into the story. Second, the article notes, “same-sex rape was a common tactic of aggression and humiliation in the ancient world. Gang rape is completely different from loving relationships based on consent, much less mutuality and commitment.” Again, this is about power and destruction NOT same sex attraction, in fact, later in the JST of verse 8, when Lot declines sending out the visitors to be assaulted, the group of men shout back, “we will have the men, and thy daughters also; and we will do with them as seemeth us good.” If it was only about homosexuality, then the daughters would have had no appeal to the men, but it wasn’t about that at all. To further illustrate this point, the article notes a similar account in Judges 19 in which a traveler is threatened with gang rape and instead the men of the household send out two women and at least one of them was raped to death, so there’s not homosexual aspect there. This excellent article gives us further insight: 1. More than 20 references are made to S&G in the scriptures and “only two of them mention sexual sins at all. 2. The word “abomination” is used in the Old Testament 117 times and “111 of those have no connection to same-sex behavior.” 3. “2 Peter 2:7 says that Lot was ‘greatly distressed by the sensual conduct of the wicked.’ This phrase is not a specific reference to same-sex behavior.” 4. “Isaiah equates the sin of Sodom with oppressing marginalized groups, murder, and theft. Jeremiah 23:14 links it with adultery, idolatry, and power abuses. Amos 4:1-11 and Zephaniah 2:8-11 compare it to the oppression of the poor, as well as prideful and mocking behavior.” 5. “The earliest Christians read the Sodom story as a parable about inhospitality, arrogance, and violence, not same-sex behavior.” 6. “The Bible never teaches that same-sex behavior was even part of Sodom’s sin.” I love the JST here because I can’t even tell you the amount of distress that verse 8 has caused me, when Lot offers his daughters to be raped instead of the visiting men, but the JST makes it clear that it was the men who started talking about raping the women, not Lot offering. I don’t know why Lot brought up to the crowd “behold now, I have two daughter which have not known man,” but then he pleads with the men to not harm the visitors. The men of Sodom are super pissed that Lot isn’t doing what they want, especially because “this one fellow came in to sojourn, and he will needs be a judge,” which I take to mean, “this guy isn’t even from our city and he’s going to judge us for what we’re doing?!” They threaten “deal worse with thee, than with them,” because they are so angry. The men are about the break the door down, and the angels “pulled Lot into the house to them, and shut the door. And they smote the men that were at the door of the house with blindness,” so that they couldn’t even see the door in front of them.