Does Genesis 19 condemn Homosexuality?

by brotherdan 116 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  trevor

  The angle Gaybriel would have a thing or two to say about this thread.
• 

  brotherdan

  It is disingenuous to say that the city was destroyed because of lack of hospitality.

  I am not being disingenuous in any way. As was already brought by myself and someone else on this thread, just read Ezekial 16:49,50. It says:

  "Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, 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."

  Nowhere does it talk about homosexuality as being the sin in either Genesis or Ezekial. So then, how can you call this argument disingenuous and then say that it is implied that they were killed because of homosexuality? It seems to me like THAT is the twisted and faulty argument.
• 

  Leolaia

  I would suggest that the city was destroyed because the majority of its inhabitants were not found righteous, rather than on the account of one specific behavior.

  Well that is certainly the case with the Sodom tradition in Ezekiel and in later Jewish literature, although there the emphasis is on arrogance, gluttony, and inhospitality towards the needy and strangers:

  "Behold, this was the guilt of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had pride, surfeit of food, and prosperous ease, but did not aid in the poor and needy. They were haughty and did abominable things before me; therefore I removed them when I saw it" (Ezekiel 16:49-50).

  "He did not spare the neighbors of Lot, whose arrogance made them hateful" (Sirach 16:8).

  "For they justly suffered for their own misdeeds, since indeed they treated their guests with the more grievous hatred. For those others did not receive unfamiliar visitors, but these were enslaving beneficent guests. And not that only; but what punishment was to be theirs since they received strangers unwillingly" (Wisdom 19:13-15).

  "Now about this time the Sodomites, overwhelmingly proud of their numbers and extent of their weath, showed themselves insolent to men and impious to the Deity, insomuch that they no more remembered the benefits they had received from him, hated foreigners and avoided any contact with others. Indignant at this conduct, God accordingly resolved to chastise them for their arrogance, and not only uproot the city, but to blast their land so completely that it should yield neither plant nor fruit whatsoever from that time forward" (Josephus, Antiquitates Judaicum 1:194-195).

  The emphasis on sexual sins was mainly found in one particular branch of early Judaism, the Enochic/Essene branch, which took such an interest in the story because of the parallel between the attempted rape of angels and the antediluvian intercourse between angels and women; the mingling of angel and human flesh was the ultimate abomination: "Why have you forsaken the high heaven, the eternal sanctuary, and lain with women, and defiled yourselves with the daughters of men, and taken for yourselves wives and done as the sons of the earth .... With the blood of women you have defiled yourselves, and with the blood of flesh you have begotten, and with the blood of humans you have lusted, and you have done as they do, flesh and blood, who die and perish" (1 Enoch 14:3-4). The two were thus compared together: "Abraham told them about the punishment of the giants and the punishment of Sodom, how they were condemned because of their wickedness, because of the sexual impurity, uncleanness, and corruption among themselves they died in sexual impurity" (Jubilees 20:5). The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs drew the same comparison but specifically characterized the sin of Sodom as fornication and adultery with women:

  Testament of Levi 14:6: "You make married women impure, you lie with whores and adulteresses, you marry heathen women, and your union will be like Sodom and Gomorrah in ungodliness".

  Testament of Naphtali 3:4-5: "Do not become like Sodom which changed the order of its nature; in like manner also the Watchers changed the order of their nature, whom the Lord also cursed at the Flood".

  Testament of Benjamin 9:1: "But I surmise that there will also be evil-doings among you, from the words of Enoch the righteous, for you will commit fornication with the fornication of Sodom, and will perish, all but a few, and will renew wanton deeds with women".

  The focus on adultery with women is likely due to exegesis of the comparison of Sodomites and those who "commit adultery" in Jerusalem in Jeremiah 23:14. The late Enochic Book of Parables (first century AD) alludes to the sin as having "lust in their flesh" (1 Enoch 67:4-13). The Enochic comparison of the Watchers with the Sodomites is the basis of the similar comparison in Jude (a writing heavily influenced by 1 Enoch):

  Jude 6-7: "And angels who did not keep their own domain, but abandoned their proper abode, he has kept in eternal bonds under darkness for the judgment of the great day. In the same way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities around them, since they in the same way as these [angels] indulged in gross immorality and went after different flesh, and exhibited as an example, in undergoing the punishment of eternal fire".

  Although this is commonly read as a reference to homosexual intercourse, the lust here is that of angel-human liaisons, for Sodom and Gomorrah went after a different kind of flesh (as opposed to desiring the same flesh) in the same way that the angels did. Humans have a different kind of flesh from other creatures: "Not all flesh is the same: People have one kind of flesh, animals have another, birds another and fish another" (1 Corinthians 15:39). Indeed in 1 Enoch the giants also fornicated with different kinds of flesh: "They began to sin with birds, and with animals and with reptiles and with fish" (7:5; cf. Jubilees 5:2, 7:24). This was extended in later midrash as an explanation for why the animals deserved to die in the Flood, for "animals were so corrupted with those not of their species, horse with donkey and donkey with horse and snake with bird" (Midrash Tanhuma, Noah 12). So alloioteros "different, strange" is used in 1 Enoch 106:5 like heteras "different, other" in Jude 7 to refer to the different nature of the angels compared to humans.
• 

  passwordprotected

  It is disingenuous to say that the city was destroyed because of lack of hospitality.

  Why?

  If the explanation for the destruction of Sodom, namely its sin or lack of righteousness, is explained in the Bible, how is it disingenuous to hold to that view?

  Perhaps we struggle in our post-Watchtower pit of confusion to see that homosexuality might not be the ire-inducing crime the Governing Body (and mainstream, "orthodox", evangelicals) says it is. My understanding of Jesus is that he was always more concerned about social justice than sexual sin. His righteousness reflected that of the Father, therefore the Father is angered and upset by the poor and needy being ignored or abused. And that was what was going on in Sodom.
• 

  acolytes

  passwordprotected...good point, Jesus never commented on a persons sexuality.

  The American Indians practised homosexuality,had different funnerals and were considerd barbaric by the priests who tryed to change the wisdom and warmth and humun insight of these proud people.

  The simplistic answer is it is NOT disingenous to say the city was destroyed because of lack of hospitality. Ironically the Indians hospility to the priests in my mind destroyed a very hospitable people.

  Acolytes
• 

  Rabbit

  And then Lot has to commit incest (while drunk!!) to keep his lineage going so it can lead up to the Messiah?

  1. Lot didn't do it, his daugters did

  BroDan,

  How can I say this, as delicately as possible ? Because, it's a very, very ugly mental picture of a man, Lot, that Biblically is held up as a good example to followers. 'God' praises him, too. Yet, you and many others want to protect Lot's reputation in order to protect your beliefs in these very old writings.

  *sigh*

  Lot wasn't ever condemned or punished by God or anybody else for being (a) DRUNK. And, NEVER condemned for RAPE or INCEST.

  Do you really think a 'regular' guy could have used "I'm innocent by because, I was DRUNK", as a reasonable, lawful defense for having sex with ALL his daughters???

  "...his daughters...," "did it"? Really? They were mere property, remember ?

  What does it tell you about Daddy Lot, when he is capable of getting getting several erections and climax's with his DAUGHTERS ??? Don't even try the DRUNK excuse !

  Then, like all child abusers...Lot blames his daughters. Who are they to say anything OR be believed ??

  There. Defend that ugly truth.
• 

  tec

  Rabbit, if you just go by the account, the daughters are the ones who say, lets get him drunk so we can have sex with him, so our line doesn't die out. If you want to imply that this was somehow added in later to take the blame of incest off him, then why add anything in at all? Why not say, my daughters were pregnant by some other men?

  Tammy
• 

  Snoozy

  Somtimes you don't need the bible to tell you what's right and what's wrong. You just know...

  It's called Common Sense...
• 

  AdaMakawee

  Tammy,
  If you go "strictly by the account" -- it was written by men. Now I'm not saying anything generically about a gender, just casting a comparison to modern days with JWs, with Catholics, etc., in which case men in power were protected and lies were told, in order to point out that the over arching attitude at the time was used to write the account. I very much doubt if the women had written it, the account would have read the same.

  Ada
• 

  Rabbit

  TEC,

  I could not have answered better than Ada did. Read her comment again, please?

  BroDan ?