Christians....this is from the part of the Bible which talks about Sodom & Gamorrah. What do you think?

Question

"Before the guests went to bed, the men of Sodom surrounded the house. All of the men of the city, both young & old were there. [They called out to Lot and asked for the guests] Lot said[ I still have 2 daughters who are virgins. I'll bring them out to you, but don't do anything to these men in my house.] the brackets say I paraphrased. but you can look it up.

Answer 1

Sodom and Gomorrah: by far the biggest scriptural weapon used by both the religious AND secular communities against homosexuals and homosexuality. Common thought is that God destroyed the cities because they were full of homosexuals. That assumption is made because the men of Sodom attempted to rape the angels sent to inspect and destroy the cities.


Let's put this into perspective. The Bible says that there were a total of five major kingdom cities - Admah, Sodom, Zeboiim, Bela (Zoar), and Gomorrah - which were to be destroyed that day. Now, it is highly unlikely (if not impossible) that five kingdoms were populated with nothing but homosexuals. Even in this day and age, where the world has about 6,000,000,000 people, the Religious Right denies that there are even the 10% of homosexuals in the world that has been promoted by the Kinsey Institute on Human Sexuality. San Francisco - the gay capitol of the world - counts less than 50% of its population as homosexual, and are we to believe the church's interpretation that five major cities were populated with nothing but homosexuals?


Furthermore, the church has taught that the entire population of the men of Sodom where gathered at Lot's door to rape the angels. But according to the biblical text, this is absolutely false. The text merely says that "men of the city" came to Lot. This could not be ALL the men of the city because AFTER the angels blinded the men at the door, they say to Lot,


"Hast thou here any besides?

son in law, and thy sons, and thy daughters,

and whatsoever thou hast in the city

bring them out of this place."

- Genesis 19:12


It is obvious then that the entire population was not at Lot's door, but merely a group of lascivious men. Then, two verses later, Lot leaves his house, goes out into the city, finds his sons, his daughters and their husbands, and warns them to flee. But they didn't listen to him simply because they thought he was loony.

What's more, the doctrine held by the church is rather a backward theory. The angels did not destroy the city because of the actions of the men at Lot's door. That event was merely the "last straw", so to speak. Before the event even occurred, the angels had already come with the express intent of destroying the five cities.


Gay rights activists, and even some "gay churches", have said that the cities were destroyed because they violated the Laws pertaining to the treatment of strangers. I wouldn't count on that either. Why? First, we only have one example of this mistreatment, which only occurred in Sodom. What of the other four cities? Second, because God is EXTREMELY patient with the wicked (read the book of Jonah for example), and you'd have to do more than just treat strangers rudely to get Him to obliterate five whole cities off the face of the earth! It is God's will that NONE should perish, according to His Word (and I'll take His Word for it). Those cities must have done something REALLY evil for Him to say, "Because Sodom and Gomorrah is great, and because their sin is very grievous, I will go down now and see whether they have done altogether according to the cry of it, which is come unto me." Abraham begged God to spare the cities if He found JUST 10 righteous people in it - but there wasn't even 10. NOT EVEN 10! THAT'S how bad they were.


Let's cut right to the bone and see what GOD actually said was the reason He destroyed those five cities:


"Behold, THIS was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom:

pride,

fulness of bread,

and abundance of idleness was in her,

neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy;

And they were haughty,

and committed abomination before Me.

Therefore I took them away as I saw good."

- Ezekiel 16:49-50




"Even as Sodom and Gomorrah,

and the cities about them in like manner,

giving themselves over to fornication,

and going after strange flesh,

are set forth as an example,

suffering the vengeance of eternal fire."

- Jude 1:7


Looks to me like they burned in their lust - and got burnt! We'll examine the Ezekiel verse first, since it clearly claims to list the very reasons for the destruction of those cities.


We do not see anything here that even remotely resembles the issue of homosexuality. We see that they committed "abomination", but it should be noted that there are over 100 abominations listed in the Bible - and I've no doubt they committed every single one of them. Two of their sins was haughtiness (arrogance) and pride, which were the very sins that caused Lucifer's downfall.


In the above verse from New Testament epistle of Jude, we see the term "going after strange flesh". This of course refers to the angels, which are not human, whom the Sodomites attempted to rape. They are spiritual beings - the opposite of human flesh. In the Old Testament, Aaron's sons were destroyed by God for offering STRANGE FIRE on God's altar. The word "strange" in both cases refers to something otherworldly, alien, foreign, not human nor of human design, opposite. (The strange fire that was offered by Aaron's sons was most likely demonically conjured up by sorcery learned in Egypt.)


It is also interesting to note that the Greek word for "strange" used in Jude's verse is "HETERO" (opposite), which is the total opposite of "HOMO" (same). In other words, the men of Sodom went after DIFFERENT flesh - not the same flesh. So regardless of any interpretations of this verse, it is still completely impossible to apply it expressly to homosexuals.


I'm sure we all agree that rape and fornication is completely ungodly and clearly forbidden in Scripture. No one's arguing there. None of us dispute that the men of Sodom who wished to do harm to the angels were wicked, for indeed they were. Still, some ministers, because of their presumption that the cities were destroyed for homosexuality, have implied that the "fornication" mentioned in this verse refers to homosexuals. That, of course, is their way of grasping at straws as a last resort to defend their biased position in regard to this verse. Fornication is fornication - straight or gay. The Bible does not make a distinction, here or elsewhere.


Most probably there were homosexuals living in those cities, for there are homosexuals in every land and in every walk of life; and it's almost certain that there were people there who violated the Laws mentioned in Leviticus 18 & 20 - heterosexuals who slept with other men. Yet even that is conjecture because the only true evidence we have for anything is from that which the Bible offers. But search high and low and you will find nothing in this story that refers directly or indirectly to homosexuals.


We are not told of the accounts of the angels' visits to the other four cities. Apparently Sodom was the last on the list, and most probably it received the most "coverage" in the Bible because it was were Lot, Abraham's nephew, was living. Those who would say that Sodom was destroyed for homosexuality neglect the fact that there were FOUR other cities who were destroyed with Sodom. Are these homophobic ministers telling us that God destroyed all five cities because of the sins of one city? We are told CLEARLY in the above verses exactly WHY all five cities were destroyed and they had nothing to do with homosexuality in particular.

The point is that these cities were completely wicked in every imaginable sense of the word - and if creation has become corrupt, hasn't the Creator the right to put an end to it?

Answer 2

This is a passage that disturbs many and it is difficult to understand. Rather than assume that Lot’s motives were bad, why not consider some possibilities? First of all, Lot surely was aware of how the God of Abraham had protected Sarah, Abraham’s wife (Lot was Abraham’s nephew) (Genesis 12:11-20) So maybe Lot had faith that his daughters could be protected in much the same way. In fact, God did intervene through his angels.

Or Lot may have been trying to shock or confuse the men. Perhaps he believed that his daughters would not be desired by the crowd because of their homosexual lust (compare Jude 7) so they would not bother with the girls. Moreover, since the girls were engaged to men of the city (see Genesis 19:14), maybe Lot hoped that family ties would move some men in the mob to speak up in defense of his girls. If the mob were divided, it would not be nearly so dangerous. Something similar was used by the apostle Paul and it worked. See Acts 23:6-10.

Hannah

Answer 3

Instead of assuming that Lot's motives were bad, why not consider some possibilities? First of all, Lot may well have acted in faith because no doubt Lot was aware of how Jehovah had protected Sarah, the wife of Abraham, Lot’s uncle. Recall that because Sarah was very beautiful, Abraham had asked her to identify him as her brother, lest others kill him in order to take her. Subsequently, Sarah was taken to the household of Pharaoh. Jehovah, however, intervened, preventing Pharaoh from violating Sarah. (Genesis 12:11-20) It is possible that Lot had faith that his daughters could be similarly protected. Significantly, Jehovah through his angels did intervene, and the young women were kept safe.

Consider another possibility. Lot may also have been trying to shock or confuse the men. He may have believed that his daughters would not be desired by the crowd because of the homosexual lust of the Sodomites. (Jude 7) In addition, the young women were engaged to men of the city, so relatives, friends, or business associates of his prospective sons-in-law might well have been in the crowd. (Genesis 19:14) Lot may have hoped that by reason of such ties, some men in that mob would speak up in defense of his daughters. A mob thus divided would not be nearly so dangerous.

Whatever Lot’s reasoning and motives, we can be sure of this: Since Jehovah always does what is right, he must have had good reason to view Lot as a “righteous man.” (2 Peter 2:7,8) And judging from the actions of the crazed mob of Sodomites, can there be any doubt that Jehovah was fully justified in executing judgment upon the inhabitants of that wicked city?—Genesis 19:23-25.

Instead of criticizing the Bible or judging it by the people who claim to follow it, it is best to look into it for yourself as the answers are all there for us if we want them.

http://www.watchtower.org/

http://www.watchtower.org/library/g/2005/4/22/article_02.htm


.

Answer 4

you dont seem to have taken the whole setting into context Lot was exercising a custom of the peole when traveling and you wanted a place to stay you went to the town square and a resident of the town would take you in an take care of you for the duration of the staythat included protection lot knew that theese people were not interested in his daughters after all they were gay not normal people also their prospective sons in law lived in the city and may have tried to intervene on their behalf and most importantly Lot trusted in God implicitly and was not let down the 2 visitors were Angels come to warn Lot and his family of the citys imminent destruction and the angels struck the Mob with blindness so they could not find the door lot and his family left at dawn un harmed and the cities were destroyed even down to this day those are the facts look it up Gorbalizer

Answer 5

Hospitality is defined as the “generous and cordial reception of guests,” and it has long been a characteristic of Jehovah’s true worshipers. For instance, Abraham, Lot, and Rebekah practiced it. (Genesis 18:1-8; 19:1-3; 24:17-20) Recounting his attitude toward strangers, the patriarch Job stated: “Outside no alien resident would spend the night; my doors I kept open to the path.”—Job 31:32.

For travelers to receive hospitable treatment from their fellow Israelites, it was often sufficient to sit down in the public square of a city and await an invitation. (Judges 19:15-21) Hosts usually washed their guests’ feet and offered the visitors food and drink, also providing fodder for their animals. (Genesis 18:4, 5; 19:2; 24:32, 33) Travelers who did not wish to be a burden on their hosts carried with them the needed provisions—bread and wine for themselves and straw and fodder for their asses. They required only shelter for the night.

The visitor was regarded as under the householder’s protection during his stay.
Lot sought to protect his guests even to the point of offering his two virgin daughters to the mob.

Answer 6

The story of Sodom & Gamorrah represents the worst in human conduct. It is a myth, a story told to teach us what happens to a society when the good people do nothing to stop the wrong doings around them.
If a frog is put into boiling water, it will jump out. Take that same frog and slowly heat up the water, the frog will get use to the water getting warmer - then it will be too late and the frog will die. So so with this story which can represent our lives today. If we allow sin to become a part of our normal lives, then eventually our lives will be without virtue.

Answer 7

Lot is a good example of a bottle fed believer. He never grew in his walk with God, but he believed none the less and God counted him as righteous (same as he did Abraham).

Lot believed but had very little understanding of Gods true charactor and power. The fact that Lot thought he had to protect the angels may be laughable to us now, but the fact is that Lot was choosing to "protect" Gods angels by giving his own daughters instead. Had Lot a bit more knowledge of the all powerfulness of the God he believed in, he would have known that they were there to protect him and his family, not the other way around.

Sadly, even after this life changing event, Lot still did not learn his lesson and continued to neglect to grow in his own faith and also continued not to teach his own daughters to wait on God for what they needed. We see this when Lots own daughters chose to have sex with their drunken father in order to produce a son to carry on the family "seed". The daughters knew of God, because of the statement they made about God putting them in the position of having no men to marry and carry on the family "seed". THey just had never been taught to wait and God would provide.

Answer 8

You have to understand, he was picking between two bad options. Have his guests disgraced and dishonor himself, or protect his guests and give them his daughters. Neither one of those choices was very attractive, so he made a decision to spare his guests and bring pain on his own family, not someone else's. It's not like the choice wouldn't have bothered him, I'm sure he dreaded the idea.

Answer 9

Because Lot know that homosexuality was a sin. I know it is disturbing to think he offered his daughters to be well, raped. But this is showing that men should not lay with other men- how it is an abomination in the eyes of God. Lot was the ONLY one who followed the Lord- that is why God had him and his family move- and told them not to look back. God took care of him....God had them leave so He could destroy that place. There was so much sin going on- as there is today! But God is merciful right now...slow to anger and abounding in lovingkindness....

Psalm 103:8
The LORD is compassionate and gracious, slow to anger, abounding in love.

Answer 10

This question is not for Christians, as Jesus gave us His Gospel. The Gospel says what is correct and what is wrong in old Testament.

Answer 11

The men were there to 'take advantage' of the two angelic visitors. Lot knew that they would not touch his daughters - they were not looking for female companionship.