Member
Chad, I already apologized for that misunderstanding.
Your interpretation of Genesis 19 is merely a bias opinion that ignores the real sins of Sodom and Gomorrah which scripture has revealed for us. In his word, Chapter sixteen verses 49 and 50 the prophet Ezekial sheds some light on the issue: "Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her sisters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. They were haughty and did detestable things before me. Therefore I did away with them as you have seen." There is no mention of homosexuality, but he does speak of arrogance and a lack of concern for others. It is made clear in this pasage that inhospitality was the true reason for Gods wrath on Sodom and Gomorrah.
Now before you try to suggest that the word "detestable" refers to homosexuality you should let the Bible speak for itself. Proverbs 6 v 16-19 lists seven things which God considers repulsive: "There are six things that the Lord hates, seven that are detestable to him: haughty eyes, a lying tongue, hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that devises wicked schemes, feet that are quick to rush into evil, a false witness who pours out lies and a man who stirs up dissension among brothers." Again, homosexuality is not mentioned or even hinted at in these verses. However, it is obvious when you read Genesis 19 v 1-10 that those gathered around Lot's house intended to rape the two "angels". Rape was a common accurance in ancient cizilizations and was a violent way of demonstrating power over enemies. Rape and homosexual acts are two very different things even if the abuser and the victom are both of the same sex. I need not remind you rape is an act of violence, where as homosexuality is merely an innate identity. They are incomparable.
Lets take this a step further, for those who are well versed in the Bible, and take a look at Jude 7: "In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffere the punishment of eternal fire." Some versions have translated it as "strange flesh", however the origninal Greek words use were heteros sarx meaning "different flesh". Now if the writter was really referring to homosexual acts, it would have made more sense to use homos sarx, which means "same flesh". The Old Testament Pseudopigrapha has an alternative -- probably more accurate -- interpretation of the verse: "just like the wicked angels, the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah left their fist grace and gave themselves to idolatrous prostitution and the violent treatment of other people, so they have become an example by suffering the vengeance of the eternal fire."
Another mistranslation can be found in Genesis 19 v 40, and it concerns the use of the Hebrew word Enoshe: "Before they had gone to bed, all the men from every part of the city of Sodom -- both young and old -- surrounded the house." The thing here is that Enoshe is not gender specific. It indicateds mortals or people. If the writer had truely wanted to specify "men", the word esh should have been used. But, since Enoshe is the word found in this passage, it would not be appropriate to assume that all the people surrounding Lot's house were male. The problem with this verse and the reason I have brought it up is that this simple mistranslation gives the the wrong impression of what the story was saying and that impresion is that the house was surrounded only by gay men. In reality it was the people of Sodom who surrounded Lot's house according to the original Hebrew.
It is true these people surrounding the house were intending on raping the visitors. Rape is not regarded as a sexual act but rather it is an act of violence. It makes no sense to condemn all heterosexual sexual acts because some straight people are rapists, and so, for the very same reason, it is illogical to condemn all homosexual sexual acts because a handful of homosexuals act abusively.
Even Jesus made no mention of the men of Sodom's and Gomorrah's sexuality. He did have this to say, "If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, shake the dust off your feet when you leave that home or town. I tell you the truth, it will be more bearable for Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgement than for that town." (Matt 10 v 15) Jesus inderectly suggested the sins of those two cities was inhospitality.
The traditional view is the result of mistranslations, and bias opinions. It has nothing to do with God's word. The Bible does not condemn homosexuality, but it does speak against sexual violence, arrogance, and inhospitality.
Guess again. I'm not re-translating the Bible to suit my life. I'm looking at the text with an understanding that our modern translations aren't exactly true to the original. And I have given you some examples above with the use of both Hebrew and Greek terminology. Just because a bunch of televangelists and guys with Ph.D's say the our translations can be trusted doesn't mean they know what they are talking about. Infact, it's obvious to me that anyone who does say such a thing is not that informed. The Bible is full of contradictions, errors, forgeries, and interpolations.
This guy was probably not gay, but just experimented with it. He was a confused teenager, that's all. I was confused at one time too, only I pretended to be straight, but I knew deep inside I was lying to myself, God and everyone else.
I will pray that you all find the truth eventually, and that God will remove the blinders around your eyes.
Your interpretation of Genesis 19 is merely a bias opinion that ignores the real sins of Sodom and Gomorrah which scripture has revealed for us. In his word, Chapter sixteen verses 49 and 50 the prophet Ezekial sheds some light on the issue: "Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her sisters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. They were haughty and did detestable things before me. Therefore I did away with them as you have seen." There is no mention of homosexuality, but he does speak of arrogance and a lack of concern for others. It is made clear in this pasage that inhospitality was the true reason for Gods wrath on Sodom and Gomorrah.
Now before you try to suggest that the word "detestable" refers to homosexuality you should let the Bible speak for itself. Proverbs 6 v 16-19 lists seven things which God considers repulsive: "There are six things that the Lord hates, seven that are detestable to him: haughty eyes, a lying tongue, hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that devises wicked schemes, feet that are quick to rush into evil, a false witness who pours out lies and a man who stirs up dissension among brothers." Again, homosexuality is not mentioned or even hinted at in these verses. However, it is obvious when you read Genesis 19 v 1-10 that those gathered around Lot's house intended to rape the two "angels". Rape was a common accurance in ancient cizilizations and was a violent way of demonstrating power over enemies. Rape and homosexual acts are two very different things even if the abuser and the victom are both of the same sex. I need not remind you rape is an act of violence, where as homosexuality is merely an innate identity. They are incomparable.
Lets take this a step further, for those who are well versed in the Bible, and take a look at Jude 7: "In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffere the punishment of eternal fire." Some versions have translated it as "strange flesh", however the origninal Greek words use were heteros sarx meaning "different flesh". Now if the writter was really referring to homosexual acts, it would have made more sense to use homos sarx, which means "same flesh". The Old Testament Pseudopigrapha has an alternative -- probably more accurate -- interpretation of the verse: "just like the wicked angels, the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah left their fist grace and gave themselves to idolatrous prostitution and the violent treatment of other people, so they have become an example by suffering the vengeance of the eternal fire."
Another mistranslation can be found in Genesis 19 v 40, and it concerns the use of the Hebrew word Enoshe: "Before they had gone to bed, all the men from every part of the city of Sodom -- both young and old -- surrounded the house." The thing here is that Enoshe is not gender specific. It indicateds mortals or people. If the writer had truely wanted to specify "men", the word esh should have been used. But, since Enoshe is the word found in this passage, it would not be appropriate to assume that all the people surrounding Lot's house were male. The problem with this verse and the reason I have brought it up is that this simple mistranslation gives the the wrong impression of what the story was saying and that impresion is that the house was surrounded only by gay men. In reality it was the people of Sodom who surrounded Lot's house according to the original Hebrew.
It is true these people surrounding the house were intending on raping the visitors. Rape is not regarded as a sexual act but rather it is an act of violence. It makes no sense to condemn all heterosexual sexual acts because some straight people are rapists, and so, for the very same reason, it is illogical to condemn all homosexual sexual acts because a handful of homosexuals act abusively.
Even Jesus made no mention of the men of Sodom's and Gomorrah's sexuality. He did have this to say, "If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, shake the dust off your feet when you leave that home or town. I tell you the truth, it will be more bearable for Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgement than for that town." (Matt 10 v 15) Jesus inderectly suggested the sins of those two cities was inhospitality.
The traditional view is the result of mistranslations, and bias opinions. It has nothing to do with God's word. The Bible does not condemn homosexuality, but it does speak against sexual violence, arrogance, and inhospitality.
Guess again. I'm not re-translating the Bible to suit my life. I'm looking at the text with an understanding that our modern translations aren't exactly true to the original. And I have given you some examples above with the use of both Hebrew and Greek terminology. Just because a bunch of televangelists and guys with Ph.D's say the our translations can be trusted doesn't mean they know what they are talking about. Infact, it's obvious to me that anyone who does say such a thing is not that informed. The Bible is full of contradictions, errors, forgeries, and interpolations.
This guy was probably not gay, but just experimented with it. He was a confused teenager, that's all. I was confused at one time too, only I pretended to be straight, but I knew deep inside I was lying to myself, God and everyone else.
I will pray that you all find the truth eventually, and that God will remove the blinders around your eyes.
of God.