What does the Bible say about homosexuality?

Hi John. Thank you for your comments. You said; Before they had gone to bed, all the men from every part of the city of Sodom—both young and old—surrounded the house. 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.” (Genesis 19:4-5)

If you were correct, it would mean that literally EVERY male ("all") in the city of Sodom (thousands upon thousands) wanted to have collective sexual relations with two angelic-or-messenger beings simultaneously. The idea seems ludicrous (not to mention physically impossible). Furthermore, Gen. 19: 4 suggests that "ALL THE PEOPLE from every quarter" engaged in this confrontation, which may have included woman too since the Sodomites had daughters (Eze. 16: 49) - "all the people" means ALL.

The Genesis text does NOT say "so that we can have "sex" with them." It says that we may "know" them. The Hebrew word for "know" is "Yada" which means to "ascertain by seeing." It also means to know by; "observation, care, recognition." For example, Exodus 33: 13 says; "... that I may KNOW thee, that I may find grace in thy sight: and consider that this nation is thy people." The word "know" here (yada) is the same word as KNOW (yada) in Gen. 19: 5. There are MANY more examples in the Bible of the word "know" (yada) used in like manner - voluminous examples. You are trying to interchange the word "know" with the word "knew" to make the text conform to your national sexual encounter concept. When translated as "knew" (rather than "know") it can denote a sexual connotation (for example as used in Gen. 4: 1). However, the Gen. 19: 5 verse uses the correct context and English word "know" rather than "knew."

You said; They didn't seem too interested in Lot's virgin daughters. . Certainly not! The men of Sodom at this time were more interested in national SURVIVAL not romance (heterosexual, homosexual, or otherwise). Recall the horrendous war that the Sodomites had just endured prior to the angelic/messenger visitation (Gen. 14). Even the Sodomite King DIED in that war! (Gen. 14: 10). As a result of that war with all of it's loss, the Sodomites were trying to know (yada), ascertain, through direct observation the purpose of the visitation of these two angel/messengers.

Far from an unprecedented sexual encounter by 100% of Sodomite citizens upon two individuals, this inquisition at Lot's front door was an attempt at political or militaristic inquistion. The Sodomite concern about these two visitors was the natural and logical reaction given the disastrous results of the war that the Sodomites had suffered just preceding the angel/messenger visitation. That war is clearly recorded in Genesis 14. It turns out that the Sodomite concern about the militaristic intentions of these visitors was warranted too. The nation was destroyed by GOD, and the visitors played a vital role in that destruction. Thanks. latterrain77

 

I can't vote honestly for any of the choices. Sorry. This also means I can't see the results. Would someone mind PM'ing them to me, or posting them. Anyhow, here's what I say:

She's certainly not a great Bible Scholar, but she hasn't misinterpretated (sic) the Word of God as egregiously as the received notions about Sodom have. She oversimplifies, but no worse than most on the other side of the issue do.

Again, neither one. Her hermeneutics leave much to be desired, but the basic thrust of her argument is correct. She has twisted the Word of God, but not as tight as many antigay folks twist the same story. I have no basis for saying whether she's "attempted to justify her own sin" because I don't know what sin she has to justify. Certainly Sodom is an odd story to use to justify (or condemn) lesbianism. I don't hold lesbianism to be a sin, but if I did I would still think Sodom an odd place to seek its justification.

Haruo

 

latterrain77,

I wish I could return the favor and thank you for your comments, but I must say I find everything you said to be bunk!

Then why did Lot respond by offering to let them have sex with his two daughters instead? Your proposition has no merit in the context of this event. You're saying the town turned out to talk politics and Lot says, "hey, wanna have sex with my daughters?" Can you reference any notable theologian who shares your view? The great theologian John Gill says, "their meaning was, that they might commit that unnatural sin with them, they were addicted to, and in common used, and which from them to this day bears the name of Sodomy. As lawful copulation with a man's wife is modestly expressed by knowing her, Gen 4:1; so this unlawful and shocking copulation of man with man is expressed by this phrase; and that this was their meaning is plain from Lot's answer to them, Gen 19:8." Your notions are completely unsubstantiable. I'm sorry but I cannot debate/argue your off-the-wall exegesis. You can twist God's Word in your mind any way you want, but His truth stands whether you like or agree with what it says!

[ June 28, 2003, 02:05 AM: Message edited by: John Wells ]

 

What matters is does God? I think the Bible clearly says yes!

 

Recently a 2 hour TV documentary aired called "Trembling before G-d (sic)".

It is the view of homosexuality from the Hasidic Judaism point of view. Hasidism is the "ultra-orthodox" point of view, although they don't like the term "ultra-orthodox", you are orthodox or you are not a practicing Jew.

They were and are totally opposed to the homosexual life style. Not so much to homosexuality but the practice thereof.

Interestingly, the practice of lesbianism is not considered as serious as the homosexual practices among men (it has to do with the male "seed").

At the end of the show a conversation between a one time hasidic Jew and his one time rabbi, the following was said: The gay person said he couldn't help himself because he was born this way.
The rabbi answered (HaShem means God):
If HaShem has assigned you this desire, you must make the most of it in light of His Torah (Law).

HankD

 

We are living in an age similar to the time of Isaiah when he delivered God's warning, "Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!" Isa 5:20

Throughout our society there are many who are trying to force others to accept perversions of God's creation, which God plainly calls, sin. It was God's design to create us male and female. From the very beginning, man was to "leave his father and mother and cleave to his wife, and they shall become one flesh" (Genesis 2:24). Ever since this beginning, homosexuality and lesbianism have been a perversion of God's purpose for His Creation.

There are a lot of terrible sins besides homosexuality. But nowhere in the Word of God do you read where God destroyed a city or a culture for lying, murder, or stealing, yet He did for sexual perversion. Why? Because it is a direct attack upon God’s original purposes in creation. Through the male/female relationship, the human race was to grow and later bring a Savior into the world.

God did not create two men in the Garden of Eden. He did not create two women either. It was “Adam and Eve” not “Adam and Steve” or “Alice and Eve.” If it had been two men or two women, common sense would tell you that the human race would have never continued. Homosexuals cannot reproduce; they must recruit. If you asked the homosexual community whether or not they recruited, I’m sure they would say “no.”

Listen to this quote by practicing homosexual Gene Antonio, given in an article entitled, “AIDS: A Weapon In the Hands of Militant Homosexuals,” Intercessors for America Newsletter , June 1987, p. 2. “We shall sodomize your sons. We shall seduce them in your schools, in your dormitories, in your gymnasiums, in your locker rooms, in your sports arenas, in your seminaries, in your movie theatre bathrooms, in your army bunkhouses, in your truck stops, in all your male clubs, in your houses of congress.”

I am convinced that the homosexual’s situation is a hopeless one apart from the transforming power of God. The lifestyle of the homosexual is probably one of the most enslaving habits of life ever known to man.

The danger of homosexuality, or any other perversion, is that it is never satisfied. Romans 1:27 tells us the men, “burned in their lust one toward another.” The effect of burning lusts is that the fulfillment of them must become more and more shameful. A man or a woman who won’t be satisfied with the boundaries that God has drawn around the marriage relationship will never be satisfied no matter what extremes they seek.

Just like a fire destroys what it engulfs and then has to find something else if it is to continue to burn, so men search for new forms of perversion to satisfy their ever-increasing desires. Emperor Nero was a homosexual. After he had tried everything imaginable, he offered a reward to anyone who could come up with a new form of perversion.

Human sexuality is like a fire. Under control it is beautiful and helpful and proper. Out of control, it is ugly and dangerous and deadly. That is true whether it is in your personal life, your home, or in society as a whole.

Note: These are excerpts from my morning message for tomorrow 6/29/03. The entire message will be posted on THIS SITE later today. Just click on the "Sermon Notes" link.

 

Hi John. Thank you for your comments. You said; I wish I could return the favor and thank you for your comments, but I must say I find everything you said to be bunk! One man's bunk is another man's truth. For me, the idea of thousands of men (perhaps including woman too - Gen. 19: 4) - literally 100% percent of the entire population of a nation having sexual relations with two people simultaneously, is WAY beyond bunk. Additionally, IF women were included in the national mob (Gen. 19: 4 - "all the people from every quarter"), then the idea of a national homosexual encounter goes out the window de-facto (obviously and unquestionably).

You said; Can you reference any notable theologian who shares your view? . I prefer to leave the parroting of "notable theologians" to others. The history of many in the "notable theologian" camp reads like a bad soap opera (turns out the earth was NOT flat after all, black people are not "mud people," and human women did NOT have sexual relations with so-called Gen. 6: 4 extraterrestrial giants). I wouldn't want to ape the "notable theologian" Martin Luther for some of the nasty things he taught. Ditto the "notable theologian" John Calvin who made notable efforts to have a man burned at the stake (Michael Servetus) over petty egotistical powerplaying reasons. I'm not as impressed with titles as you are John. Thank GOD I'm in GREAT company (John 7: 15).

You said; You can twist God's Word in your mind any way you want, but His truth stands whether you like or agree with what it says! We agree completely this one. GOD's truth does stand whether you agree with it or not. Thanks John. latterrain77

 

Shouldn't that be "whether you or I agree with it or not," or do I detect a bit of self-righteousness?

You still didn't reconcile the question: Why did Lot respond by offering his daughters up for gang rape?

I guess when you take a radical line of interpretation of the Bible, one must denounce the great men of God through the ages!

 

Pastor Bob, I wish there were more pastors like you preaching Biblical truth from pulpits instead of to "itching ears." God Bless You.

 

Pastor Bob, I would love it if every minister here would post a link to their weekly sermons! I can't wait to read yours! Maybe we could start a permanent thread where the sermons were linked??

Again, I agree with SheEagle9/11! Well spoken dear sir!

Here's a link to a page that gives Biblical thoughts on homosexuality.

Click here for that page.

Diane

 

RE: Homosexuality, abortion...

God did not spare Israel for their sin why then would He spare our beloved America?

Pray for our nation and the Supreme Court judges that they repent.

Jeremiah 8:20 The harvest is past, the summer is ended, and we are not saved.

1 Peter 4:7 But the end of all things is at hand: be ye therefore sober, and watch unto prayer.

HankD

 

Hi John. Thank you again for your comments. You said; Shouldn't that be "whether you or I agree with it or not," or do I detect a bit of self-righteousness? I only paraphrased your own comment John. You said, and I quote; " You can twist God's Word in your mind any way you want, but His truth stands whether you like or agree with what it says!" Those are YOUR words John.

You said; You still didn't reconcile the question: Why did Lot respond by offering his daughters up for gang rape? I did. Go back and read one of the prior posts. I will be happy to now elaborate further, though I do so on the condition that you respond to the numerous questions/comments that I have put to you previously, which you have not answered.

Lot did NOT offer up his daughters for "gang rape" as you have said. Rather, Lot was trying to bargain with the Sodomites to prevent them from approaching and interrogating the visitors. This is shown by the statement in v4 "...for therefore came they under the shadow of my roof." Lot was more interested in protecting the interests of the visitors than he was in protecting his own daughters. Furthermore, and most significant to our discussion, Lot's daughters "having not known man" in the sexual sense (v8) does NOT jive with the fact that Lot's daughters were already MARRIED (Gen. 19: 14). Accordingly, the issue of Lot's offer appears more closely aligned to matters of becoming acquainted rather than the national "gang rape" that you suggest. The Sodomites, for their part, refused Lot's offer! As I previously stated, they were NOT interested in coming to know anyone other than those visitors, whom the Sodomites suspected were a threat to their National Security resulting from war that the Sodomite nation had just endured (Genesis 14). This is clearly illustrated in the next verse (Gen. 19: 9) where judicial and interrogatory policies are mentioned by the Sodomites, not the sexual or romantic ones that you suggest.

Please answer the questions that I have earlier put to you which you have not yet answered. Briefly they are; how can an entire nation of people have sexual relations with two individuals?, How do you reconcile your ideas about Jude 1: 7, when the word "Strange" ("heteros") in "strange flesh" (Jude 1: 7) does NOT mean "homosexual" (greek "malakos") in the New Testament (1 Cor. 6: 9)? Is it your understanding that when Gen. 19: 4 says "ALL THE PEOPLE from every quarter" that it includes the women of Sodom too? (Eze. 16: 49). You still have not confirmed that HETEROSEXUAL sexuality was rampant in Sodom with it's large population. Please confirm if you agree. If you don't agree, please explain how all of those Sodomites - sons and daughters - were born? Please give your thoughts on the vicious Sodomite war described in Genesis 14 and what emotional effect that war would have had on the Sodomite nation going forward.

You said; I guess when you take a radical line of interpretation of the Bible... I don't believe my view is radical John. I do believe that the idea of an entire nation - 100% of the people, supposedly attempting to have simultaneous sexual relations with two individuals is a radical idea.

You said; ...one must denounce the great men of God through the ages! Not at all. Those "great men" of GOD did and taught things that were self-denouncing (see my prior post's examples). Also, when you refer to anyone in humanity as being "great men," you do not square with what Jesus taught AT ALL (Matt. 19: 17, Mark 10: 18, Luke 18: 19). I'm looking forward to your answers to my questions. Thank you John. latterrain77

 

The Israelites were the Old Testament chosen people of God. They also lived in a theocracy.

The people of the United States are not the chosen people of God - but there are some chosen people of God living in the United States. We live in a secular constitutional republic.

Also, I fail to see how 5 judges voting a certain way on a particular issue that only concerns the sexual sin of about 2-3% of the population makes all 280,000,000 of us candidates to be wiped off the earth by God.

 

Well, you can keep on looking because the notions you put forth are unreasonable pure conjectures with no sound basis and not worth wasting the time to debate.

 

Proverbs 10:34 Righteousness exalteth a nation: but sin is a reproach to any people.

Proverbs 29:18 Where there is no vision, the people perish: but he that keepeth the law, happy is he.

 

Hi BibleboyII. Thank you for your comments. I'm not sure that we disagree about the sinful nature of Sodom. I agree, they were exceedingly sinful. However, they were NOT exclusively homosexual. THAT is the point.

You said; "Everybody get in line. Okay, you go first, then you, then you, then you, etc. etc. etc." This is as impossible as if it were simultaneous. Recall that it was the ENTIRE nation of Sodom - not just a few or number of people within it. The whole idea of a 100% entire population of people in a nation, sexually assaulting two individuals, no matter what the order, is so absurd and so wholly unsubstantiated by the text itself, that it borders on the frantic.

You said; "They were attempting to engage in a gang rape/orgy of sexual immorality. " An entire nation of people - thousands - trying to "rape/orgy" two individuals? It is a ridiculous idea, physically impossible, and not in the text.

You said; " btw: you don't call it Jude 1:7 because there are no chapters in Jude. It is simply Jude verse 7 " I'm well familiar with your "by the way" bibleboy. But LONG ago, I decided to use the "chapter" in single chapter books of the Bible becaue it's been my experience that many Christians in Bible study groups (and churches I've attended) became confused by doing it "your way" (i.e. "hey, there is no chapter 7 in Jude"). I'd rather edify the others than sticking to some pomp and circumstance first year Bible student rules. Accordingly, I properly use "chapters" in single chapter books - i.e. Jude, Philemon, 2 John, or any other single chapter book in the Bible. You may call it whatever you wish.

You said; ".... is dealing with sexual immorality, which includes homosexual actions in just about every biblical reference where the term sexual immorality is used. " The word "strange flesh" means "other or different" ("heteros"). It does NOT mean homosexual. In the New Testament, homosexual is described as the Greek word "malakos" (1 Cor. 6: 9). The phrase "other flesh" or "different flesh" does not mean homosexual in any manner - not in English and not in Greek. I agree with you that some of the context of Jude includes sexual immorality, but this is not exclusive to homosexuality, but rather all sexuality that occurs outside of marriage (Heb. 13: 4). Furthermore, the Jude text generally speaks towards wickedness in general - not specifically sexuality. For example, there was no sexuality practiced among the "angels who kept not their first estate" (Jude 1: 6).

You said; " I do not know what you are driving at with the Ezekiel 16:49 reference in relation to the Genesis 19:4 reference above." Eze. 16: 49 illustrates that the Sodomites had DAUGHTERS. Accordingly, the question I raised was whether these daughters were included in the Gen. 19: 4 text where it say's "ALL THE PEOPLE from every quarter." ALL the people from every quarter must mean ALL of them. Right?

You said; "Did some of or even all of the women of Sodom show up for this proposed mass orgy outside Lot's house? I don't know. I suppose that they could have." If yes, then the whole idea of an exclusively homosexual encounter goes out the window DE-FACTO.

You said; "As you point out the people of Sodom did engage in heterosexual relations which resulted in the procreation of children." I'm glad you see this. However, many (most?) so-called Christians, and society itself, cling to an imagery that Sodom was an exclusively 100% homosexual nation - which is untrue and unBiblical. This misconception continues right up until our day, and allows the word "Sodomite" to be used as a slur to describe homosexuals.

You said; "that means that it is reasonable to say that somewhere between 13 and 15 years have passed between the events of Genesis 14 and Genesis 19 (assuming a very strict chronology and depending on the exact dates of Ishmael's and Isaac's respective births). " 13-15 years is reasonable. The effects and memory of war linger MUCH longer than 15 years. For example, Viet Nam occurred over 30 years ago and it's effects and memory are still profoundly felt. We still remember and feel the results of WW1 and WW2 and that was MANY years ago - and all of these wars had largely positive outcomes for our Nation. The war of Sodom as described in Gen. 14 was disastrous for that nation with nothing positive in it at all. Even the king of Sodom was killed in that war (Gen. 14: 10). There is no doubt that the nation of Sodom would have been on heightened alert, security minded, and inquisitive concerning strangers entering the nation for many years to come. This is especially so when the host of those strangers (Lot) was a stranger himself! Gen. 19: 9 bears this out.

You said; "Anyway, regardless of the “emotional effects” of war we can not use the horror and ravages of war to justify our wicked and sinful behavior." . I agree. However, there is nothing wicked and sinful about National Security. In fact, it is wise and prudent.

You said; "They were an absolutely unrighteous, wicked, and sinful people. There were not even 10 righteous people among the entire population (Genesis 18:32) and that is why God destroyed them." I agree. But I do not believe that they were destroyed as a result of exclusive homosexuality, because they were NOT exclusively homosexual. Their huge population proves this to be so. Therefore, it is dishonest to refer to homosexuals as Sodomites. The overriding sin of Sodom was PRIDE, ARROGANCE, and lack of humility. Pride, arrogance and lack of humility are characteristics of some people who go to church every Sunday. Thank you again for your comments BibleboyII. latterrain77

[ June 29, 2003, 10:28 AM: Message edited by: latterrain77 ]