"Sins of Sodom" What were they guilty of?

by Frank75 28 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • Frank75
    Frank75

    Hi All. I am new to posting here and thought I would get the ball rolling with
    a new thread.


    Lamentations 4:6 says the following (NWT):
    "The [punishment for the] error of the daughter of my people also
    becomes greater than the [punishment for the] sin of Sod´om,..."

    Although this text does not say very much, it raised in my mind a
    question. We know what the punishment was for Sodom and Gamorah, but
    what exactly was it that they were punished for? What was their crime exactly?
    Was it their sexual depravity? The thought that most take away from the account is that it was, but is there anything that the bible writers say specifically? Is it Homophobia that leads us to that conclusion, Or was it something else that brought divine disfavor?

    Although there is more in the context than an "equating" of the
    error of Israel with the sin of Sodom, (it seems to compare the
    punishment only, and not what lead to the punishment) is there a
    similarity between the error of Israel and Sodom anyway?

    Your thoughts, scriptural or otherwise, will be appreciated.

    Frank..(not Ernest)

  • m0nk3y
    m0nk3y

    God didn't like the brick work and they couldn't agree on a new colour scheme so he decided that he would punnish all those fags in the city. That is why today all fags like myself have the most fantastic fashion sense .. we wouldn't want our current cities to be destroyed now would we ? So every generation of hetrosexually challenged persons are equiped with the 'knowlegde' so that such a disaster could never happen again.

    monk3y

  • joelbear
    joelbear

    Jude 7 says So too Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities about them after they in the same manner as the foregoing ones had committed fornication excessively and gone after flesh for unnatural use, are placed before us as a warning example by undergoing the judicial punishment of everlasting fire. So I guess it depends on what your definition of fornication and unnatural is.

  • Frank75
    Frank75

    That's humorous. What do they call you guys in Oz, pufters, or what? Actually, there is no need to get our backs up (or buns) as the "angle" (no pun) I am "thrusting" from (this is too much) was to isolate the stereotypical response to the guilt of S and G. A "flamer", would be the last person in the world I would expect to "slide in" (ouch!) with a negative stereotype response. It is hard to imagine that the typical conclusion (a hetero one) of Homosex, was rampant, on a level with Sodom, at the time of Jeremiah. So could it be something else? Or a combination of things that ticked God off.

    Then again if you are being "tongue and cheek" (shame on you) then give me your best "shot" with out blowing your "load" just yet.

    Scripturally now,

    Thanks

    Frank (not Ernest)

    PS Nice lipstick, what color is it (brand) Thanx.

  • SanFranciscoJim
    SanFranciscoJim

    I have studied these scriptures for many years. Here is a partial text of an essay on my findings regarding the story of Sodom and Gomorrah:

    The ancient story of Sodom and Gomorrah has been used throughout the centuries as a condemnation of homosexuality, to the point where certain sex acts have become referred to as "Sodomy". The verses in this story most commonly referred to as proof that the Sodomites were homosexual are verses 4 and 5: "Before they could lie down, the men of the city, the men of Sodom, surrounded the house, from boy to old man, all the people in one mob. And they kept calling out to Lot and saying to him: 'Where are the men who came in to you tonight? Bring them out to us that we may have intercourse with them." Examining this scripture, the first thing we see is that all

    the people, in one mob, demanded that Lot bring out the visitors to them. If we are to believe that the account of Sodom & Gomorrah is a condemnation of homosexuality, then we must accept the fact that the entire city consisted of homosexuals. If we look in the previous chapter, Genesis 18: 16-33, we see an account of Abraham negotiating with God to spare the people of Sodom, with the final outcome of God promising "I shall not bring it to ruin on account of the ten" (verse 33). God promised Abraham that Sodom would not be destroyed if only ten "righteous men" could be found I the city. If we are to accept the Watchtower's logic, this would mean that the "righteous men" referred to were heterosexuals. At this point, we need to ask ourselves: What would be the odds of less than ten people in the entire region of Sodom & Gomorrah being heterosexual? The obvious answer is: Impossible.

    If homosexuality was not being referred to in this passage, then what was? Looking at the scriptures in Hebrew, we find an interesting usage of a couple of different words. When the mob cries out "Where are the men who came in to you tonight?", the Hebrew word translated men is 'enowsh which, literally translated, means "mortal". This indicates that the mob knew that Lot had visitors, but were unsure of what sex they were. The Hebrew word for "man" (utilized in this same passage in Genesis 19:8) is entirely different. One has to ask: Why would homosexuals want to have sex with two strangers if they were unsure of what sex they were?

    The passage translated as "Bring them out so that we may have intercourse with them" needs further examination as well. Other Bible translations read "so that we may know them". The Hebrew word herewith translated as "have intercourse", or "know" is yada. This word, yada, appears in the Hebrew Scriptures a total of 943 times. In all but ten of these usages, the word is used in the context of getting acquainted with someone. Had the writer intended for his reading audience to believe that the mob wanted to have sexual intercourse with the strangers, he would have used the Hebrew word shakab, which vividly denotes sexual activity. The correct translation, therefore, should be rendered something to the effect of: "Where are the mortals who came in to you tonight? Bring them out to us that we may get acquainted with them."

    So then, if the story of Sodom & Gomorrah was not a condemnation of homosexuality, what was it trying to convey? Two verses elsewhere in the Bible sum up the story this way: "Look! This is what proved to be the error of Sodom your sister: Pride, sufficiency of bread and the carefreeness of keeping undisturbed were what happened to belong to her and her dependent towns, and the hand of the afflicted one and the poor one she did not strengthen. And they continued to be haughty and to carry on a detestable thing before me, and I finally removed them, just as I saw [fit]" - Ezekiel 16: 49, 50. It is commonly assumed that the "detestable thing" referred to in this passage is homosexuality. In fact, the Hebrew word utilized here is tow'ebah, which translated literally means "to commit idol worship". This can be seen in the original Genesis passage, chapter 19, verse 8: "Please, here I have two daughters who have never had intercourse with a man. Please let me bring them out to you. Then do to them as is good in your eyes." One must ask: If Lot's house was surrounded by homosexuals, why would he offer the mob women? Note that these women were virgins. Note also that the Sodomites were pagans. Virgin sacrifices to idols were a common practice Sodom. Therefore, it can be concluded that Lot was offering his daughters as a virgin sacrifice to appease the mob in an effort to protect the visitors.

    In the Greek scriptures, the story of Sodom is summed up this way: "and by reducing the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to ashes he condemned them, setting a pattern for ungodly persons of things to come". This corroborates Ezekiel's summation, once again showing that these were "ungodly persons", in other words, idolaters, not worshippers of the true God.

    The story of Sodom and Gomorrah, therefore, is a condemnation of idol worshippers, a greedy and inhospitable society. The judgement of this region had nothing, absolutely nothing to do with homosexuality!

    The entire essay can be found at: http://www.gayxjw.org/bible.html

  • Francois
    Francois

    Well, if there's a couple of things I don't do, I don't go after fornication excessively but only moderately and I use flesh as naturally as possible. If I can't figure out where it's to go, I ask. Then, armed with the new knowledge, I put it there. So I figure I'm safe, see. Not too much fornication, no unnatural use. I'm good I figure.

    Frank Tyrrell.

  • berylblue
    berylblue

    Where are the mortals who came in to you tonight? Bring them out to us that we may get acquainted with them."
    Sorry, but why then did Lot offer his daughters to the mob? Chances are the mob were already "acquainted" with them.

  • Frank75
    Frank75

    "So I guess it depends on what your definition of fornication and unnatural is."

    Taking that expression out of context does not make sense. If you isolate the text fine, but with the whole of Juse's short letter, it doesn't really fit.

    Frank

  • KGB
    KGB

    Sodom was a city of immorality and that was why it was destroyed, I think it was destroyed to be used as an example to those who dare go the other way..

  • Double Edge
    Double Edge

    Interestingly enough, the Book of Ezekiel fills us in as to the MAJOR reason they were destroyed.... they were totally lacking in compassion.... so much so that even the woman didn't pity anyone.

    Ezekiel 16 47 You not only walked in their ways and copied their detestable practices, but in all your ways you soon became more depraved than they. 48 As surely as I live, declares the Sovereign LORD , your sister Sodom and her daughters never did what you and your daughters have done.
    49 " 'Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit