Does Genesis 19 condemn Homosexuality?

by brotherdan 116 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • brotherdan
    brotherdan

    There are many "proof" texts that people (including JWs) use to justify their rejection of anyone that is gay. There are a few scriptures that you can pull up and try to make a case for show homosexuals why they are evil and wrong.

    I've been researching more of these scriptures and I'm coming to some very different conclusions than many other Christians hold, especially JWs. I wanted to talk about the first text used by many people to condemn homosexual behaviour. BTW, as far as I've seen the condemnation that comes from people never stops at condemning the behaviour. It seems to always flow over and become a condemnation of the individual as well.

    Look at Genesis 19. This is the account where God sent His angels to Sodom. Lot welcomed them into his home and was very hospitable to them. They went to Lots house and at evening time, before they went to bed, men of the city surrounded the house, asking for Lot to bring the men out.

    Here is where the text is at issue. In verse 5, some translations say the following: "They called to Lot, "Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us so that we can have sex with them." Interestingly enough, this is not an appropriate translation of this verse. The word that was translated as "to have sex with them" is the Hebrew word "Yada" which literally means "to know someone". It is mentioned some 943 times in the Bible, and in only about 12 cases does it refer to sexual activity.

    A more correct translation can be seen in the English Standard Version which translates this: And they called to Lot, “Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us, that we may know them.”

    It is unclear what their intent was. They MAY have wanted to rape the strangers. But they also could have wanted to physically harm them. Or they may have wanted to verbally interrogate them to see where they came from. It is not specified in this scripture. The point is, you cannot take this verse and say that it shows that homosexuality is wrong in and of itself.

    So what is the "sin" of Sodom as spoken of in Isaiah 3:9? Interestingly enough, Jesus himself talks about this at Matthew 10:14,15. When instructing his disciples on how to preach he says that if someone is inhospitable to you, you are to shake off your feet and leave. He compares this inhospitality to Sodom and Gomorrah in verse 15. The parallel account in Luke 10:7-16 even goes further in comparing Sodom to those who are inhospitable.

    So why was Sodom destroyed? Was it because of their sexual activity? Nowhere in the Bible is this found. In fact Ezekial 16:48-50 says that Sodom was destroyed because of their pride, their excess of food while the poor and needy suffered, and worshiped many idols; sexual activity is not even mentioned.

    So in conclusion, to use Genesis 19 to condemn all people that are gay is to twist the scripture and perform isegesis on it.

  • Nice_Dream
    Nice_Dream

    Interesting points! I enjoy reading your thoughts.

  • PublishingCult
    PublishingCult

    Your research is spot on.

    More and more, Church's are abandoning the Sodom and Gomorah account as evidence of God's displeasure of homosexuality, and it's because of this sort of light being shown on Genesis 19.

    The WTBTS is so progressive that they are still holding tightly to the erroneous application of those Bible passages, ha ha, and they will be the last to let go of it, too.

  • brotherdan
    brotherdan

    Thanks guys. (I've missed you Nice Dream... :-(

    The fact is, even if it WERE "wrong", there are so many things that everyone does that are wrong. I do wrong things all day every day. I try not to, but I do. I've lied a few times in my day and even stolen a few things in my past. Those are wrong things. So then I should be condemned just as much as someone who is gay.

    Besides, it seems to me that we have to worry about the hetrosexual people a lot more sometimes. You know? I'm sure there are instances of a gay man raping another gay man. But the majority of cases (at least in my limited experience) come from heterosexual men raping women. And yet the very word "Sodomy" erroneously comes from this case in Genesis 19 and is used to infer that homosexuals are sexually depraved people. The facts just don't show the same.

  • leavingwt
    leavingwt

    brotherdan: Is all sexual activity outside of marriage sinful? What is the Bible's position on gay marriage?

  • Leolaia
    Leolaia

    I wouldn't quibble with the meaning of "know" here because it is clearly has a sexual nuance here as it is in Genesis 4:1; the parallel story in Judges 19:22-25 is clearly referring to rape. And that is actually the point: the story is about rape, not homosexuality as a sexual orientation (indeed Lot's offer of his virgin daughters doesn't make sense if orientation is what the story is concerned with). Gang rape, actually. Rape is about the most inhospitable way one could possibly treat a guest. And as you correctly point out, the references to Sodom and Gomorrah in the gospels concern their inhospitality, similarly Ezekiel 16:46-50 describes the sin as pride, a lack of concern for the poor and needy, and gluttony.

  • PSacramento
    PSacramento

    Leo makes a very good point, it isn't the sexual orientation of the act, but they ACT as even we know it, Rape is NOT an acto fo sex or lust or homosexuality between to of the same sex, it is an act of power, violence and degradation.

    While inhospitable may sound "less intense" the fact is that in the ancient world of the Hebrews, inhospitability lead to violence and death.

  • Philadelphia Ponos
    Philadelphia Ponos

    Like all words in the Hebrew and Greek scriptures the context it is used in determines how it should be translated in English. The verses that follow the men's request to get to "know" the angels show that it was of a sexual nature.

    6 Lot went out to the men at the entrance, shut the door after him, 7 and said, "I beg you, my brothers, do not act so wickedly. 8 ( H ) Behold, I have two daughters who have not known any man. Let me bring them out to you, and do to them as you please. Only do nothing to these men, for they have come under the shelter of my roof."(ESV)

    First we see that them trying to get to know the angels was an action that was considered wicked to Lot. That doesn't sound like they were just trying to ask questions. The most conclusive proof however that getting to "know" in verse 5 is of a sexual nature is that in verse 8 Lot uses the same phrase for his daughters when he says "who have not known any man" which is to say they haven't had sex with any man.

    Edited to add: I can't buy the argument that it was about the act of rape rather than homosexuality for two reasons. Lot offered up his two daughters to be raped, which shows the wicked act Lot was reffering to couldn't of been rape if he was ok with the idea of his own daughters being raped. Secondly the men rejected Lot's request of his daughters and continued to try to have sex with the men. All of this points to the wicked act being homosexuality rather than rape.

  • Leolaia
    Leolaia

    The parallel story in Judges 19 also describes the rape itself (here quoted from the KJV):

    "Now as they were making their hearts merry, behold, the men of the city, certain sons of Belial, beset the house round about, and beat at the door, and spake to the master of the house, the old man, saying, Bring forth the man that came into thine house, that we may know him. And the man, the master of the house, went out unto them, and said unto them, Nay, my brethren, nay, I pray you, do not so wickedly; seeing that this man is come into mine house, do not this folly. Behold, here is my daughter a maiden, and his concubine; them I will bring out now, and humble ye them, and do with them what seemeth good unto you: but unto this man do not so vile a thing. But the men would not hearken to him: so the man took his concubine, and brought her forth unto them; and they knew her, and abused her all the night until the morning: and when the day began to spring, they let her go" (v. 22-25).

  • White Dove
    White Dove

    Good points, Brother Dan.

    Another point might be that there is no other story hinting and talking about a homosexual relationship in a good light more than that of David and Jonathan.

    When I was a JW and read the account, I couldn't believe how much love love love and excitement at being together the story was about.

    Homosexuality is a-okay in my book. Also, the idea that "men lying together" is probably taken out of the context of homosexuality and better applied to making a business out of it.

    Making a business out of sex is not smiled on in several places in the Bible, but being together for love sure is.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit