The Story of Lot
by Chris Hubble
 Trade Paper 96 pages $12.95 ISBN 0-595-29869-9 About the Writer... Christopher Hubble is a Gay Christian who grew up in Boulder, Colorado. He graduated in 1989 from Rice University in Houston, Texas, with a Bachelor of Arts in History. Also a certified massage therapist, Christopher resides in Denver, Colorado, and can be reached at the following e-mail address: LGLProject@msn.com. | The
Story of Lot by Chris Hubble The story in Genesis 19 about the destruction of Sodom is widely misunderstood. A rational and objective examination of the evidence yields a different conclusion than that most often presented by antigay religious and political activists. There are strong linguistic, cultural, and contextual arguments that the real moral lesson of the story is entirely different from a condemnation of homosexuality. Sodom was condemned by God, who subsequently sent two angels to visit Lot and warned him to leave the city before it was destroyed. Although himself a stranger in Sodom, Lot lived at the city gate and was obliged to keep an eye on those passing in and out of the city. The people of the town were suspicious of Lot’s angelic guests, came to his house, and insisted that they be allowed to speak with his guests so that they might “know” them. The interpretation advocated by religious homophobes is that the men of the city were seeking to rapeLot’s guests and that this was the main reason for the city’s destruction. There are many objections to this particular interpretation. God sealed Sodom's fate long before the angels actually visited Lot. They went to the city to warn Lot to leave. The offense committed at Lot’s house by the people of Sodom was an afterthought, a side note, and only one trivial reason of many for the city’s destruction – not the sole reason. At least one scholar has also pointed out that Lot’s guests were angels, not humans. [i] If the men of the town were in fact seeking to have sex with them, the sexual offense would have been that they were seeking to have sex with angels. Homosexuality wasn’t the issue at all. This point might help explain Jude’s reference to Sodom: “Even as Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh,” (Jude 1:7). One of the primary concerns of the writers of Hebrew Scripture was idolatry.[ii] They authored many religious and ritual proscriptions because they were most interested in persuading their fellow Israelites to avoid the religious, ritual practices of the cultures with whom they coexisted. If this story refers at all to homogenitality, it, at best, refers to it within this context. One religious, ritual practice of Israel’s neighbors was temple prostitution. In cults throughout the ancient Near East, it was not uncommon for men to have sex with men as part of temple worship rituals. We can reasonably assume that some portion of Sodom’s population also partook of these practices. It may be that the writers of this story were interested in condemning these practices – but not loving and mutually consenting same-sex, same-gender relationships. The antigay interpretation of this text hinges on the translation of one key word. In many biblical variations of this story, translators ascribe to the Hebrew word “yada” the meaning “have sex with”. “Yada”, however, is used in a variety of other contexts throughout the Hebrew scriptures. It is rarely used to mean “have sex with”.[iii] This is one of the few instances where this particular interpretation or translation is given. Based on this linguistic criticism, many scholars have argued that the people of Sodom really were only seeking to familiarize themselves with Lot’s guests because they were generally suspicious of all strangers. Wisdom 19:13says that the sin of Sodom was a “bitter hatred of strangers”. The real offense of the people of Sodom was inhospitality to strangers – a violation of the ancient desert code.[iv] In the ancient desert cultures of the region, this would have been considered a grievous offense. One was obliged to give refuge to all who sought it, even if the party seeking refuge was one’s enemy. To be denied refuge in the desert was to be condemned to death at the hands of the elements. Some have countered that Lot confirmed the sexual intent of the men of the town by offering his daughters to the men. Lot, however, was not necessarily committing a sexual offense by offering his daughters in lieu of his guests. Ancient Hebrew culture regarded women as property. Being “known” by the men would have substantially diminished the value of Lot’s daughters in the eyes of any suitors.[v] And the fact that he would have been so willing to suffer this property loss while also implicating himself in such a tragic and violent crime indicates how important Lot felt was his obligation to show hospitality to his other-worldly visitors. The best authority for interpreting biblical stories is the Bible itself.[vi] Isaiah 1:10-17 and 3:9, Jeremiah 23:14, and Zephaniah 2:8-11 also refer to the “sin of Sodom”. The sins referenced in these verses were injustice, oppression, partiality, adultery, lies, and encouraging evildoers. Only one of those sins has a sexual component.[vii] So who are today’s real Sodomites? Those who seek to love as they are created and called by God? Or those who condemn and cast God’s lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered children out of their churches? Ezekiel 16:48-49 answers this question best: “This was the guilt of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had pride, surfeit of food and prosperous ease, but did not aid the poor and needy.” When we consider the overall tone and ethos of both the Hebrew Scriptures and the New Testament, failure to aid “the poor and needy” is one of the greatest offenses in the eyes of God. We are all called to extend “mercy” to our neighbors and to actively work for social justice. Notes: i.
What the Bible
Really Says About Homosexuality: Millennium Edition. Daniel A.
Helminiak, Ph.D. (2000) Alamo Square Press; P.P. 117-119.
Author of Lord Given Lovers: The Holy
Union of David
& Jonathan, Christopher Hubble can be
reached at P.O.
Box 18494, Denver, CO, 80218-0494 or LGLProject@msn.com.
Visit his website
for more of his writing.ii. Jonathan Loved David: Homosexuality in Biblical Times. Tom Horner, Ph.D. (1978) The Westminster Press; P.P. 59-70. iii. Stranger At The Gate: To Be Gay and Christian in America. Rev. Dr. Mel White. (1994) PLUME, Penguin Books USA, Inc.; P. 37-38. iv. Our Tribe: Queer Folks, God, Jesus and the Bible (Millennium Edition). Rev. Nancy Wilson. (2000) Alamo Square Press; P. 145. v. The Bible and Homosexuality, Fifth Edition. Rev. Michael E. England. (1998) Chi Rho Press, Inc.; P. 37. vi. What the Bible Really Says About Homosexuality: Millennium Edition. Daniel A. Helminiak, Ph.D. (2000) Alamo Square Press; P. 47-49. vii. What the Bible Really Says About Homosexuality: Millennium Edition. Daniel A. Helminiak, Ph.D. (2000) Alamo Square Press; P. 47-49. Copyright © 2004. All Rights Reserved. |
Page
9