Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
You clearly don't know the story, here is just some website, but there are many that interpret it that way:No, you read it. I already did. How does that apply to the apostates being discussed in the overall context? That they were lusting after angels?No.... that they were lusting after one another like beasts who are driven by instinct.
The use of sexual language referring to Sodom and Gomorrah indicates that this is a sexual kind of corruption. What, or who, were they defiling themselves with?
Sodomite = inhabitor of Sodom, that's it!
Any other word usage here, is a culture interpretation and nothing more! it does not refer to anal sexual relations, this is some made up word choice here. It derives from the city of Sodom, where the only thing sexually practiced and condemned in Scripture is raping of the visitors, raping of the angelic hosts that came to the City (strange flesh=heteros, another flesh), unwelcoming behavior, and repeated economic crimes. Sodom and Gomorrah were not destroyed for homosexual activity, but it was for repeated economic crimes. (See Ezekiel 16:48-50)
First, the city of Sodom was slated for destruction long before this homosexual incident. Ezekial 16:48-50 states it clearly, As I live, says the Lord GOD, your sister Sodom and her daughters have not done as you and your daughters have done. Behold, this was the guilt of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had pride, excess of food, and prosperous ease, but did not aid the poor and needy.. . .
Der Alter said:Total absolute rubbish.
Cohabitors of males will not inherit the kingdom of God
.Sodomite = inhabitor of Sodom, that's it!
Any other word usage here, is a culture interpretation and nothing more! it does not refer to anal sexual relations, this is some made up word choice here. It derives from the city of Sodom, where the only thing sexually practiced and condemned in Scripture is raping of the visitors, raping of the angelic hosts that came to the City (strange flesh=heteros, another flesh), unwelcoming behavior, and repeated economic crimes. Sodom and Gomorrah were not destroyed for homosexual activity, but it was for repeated economic crimes. (See Ezekiel 16:48-50)
Now, about this time the Sodomites, overweeningly proud of their numbers and the extent of their wealth, showed themselves insolent to men and impious to the divinity, insomuch that they no more remembered the benefits that 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 to uproot their city, but to blast their land so completely that it should yield neither plant nor fruit whatsoever from that time forward. ”
— Jewish Antiquities 1:194-195
nd the angels came to the city of the Sodomites...when the Sodomites beheld the young men, who were outstanding in beauty of appearance and who had been received into Lots’s house, they set about to do violence and outrage to their youthful beauty....Therefore, God, indignant at their bold acts, struck them with blindness, so that they were unable to find the entrance into the house, and condemned the Sodomites to destruction of the whole population. ”
— Jewish Antiquities 1:199-202
Let’s first look at the historic context of Sodom and Gamorrah. The story goes that God sends two angels to Sodom, where Abraham’s nephew, Lot, persuades them to stay in his home. Genesis 19 records that “all of the people from every quarter” surrounded Lot’s house demanding the release of the visitors so “we might know them” or in other words have sexual relations with them. Horrified by this gross violation of ancient hospitality rules, Lot refuses to give them over to the angry crowd. Lot flees Sodom with his family and the city it is destroyed by fire from heaven. Literalist and conservatives have contended that Sodom was destroyed because of homosexuality. However, there are at least three reasons why this story is not about homosexuality or its condemnation.
First, the city of Sodom was slated for destruction long before this homosexual incident. Ezekial 16:48-50 states it clearly, “As I live, says the Lord GOD, your sister Sodom and her daughters have not done as you and your daughters have done. Behold, this was the guilt of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had pride, excess of food, and prosperous ease, but did not aid the poor and needy.”
Second, all of Sodom’s people participated in the assault on Lot’s house, and in no culture has more than a small minority of the population been homosexual.
And finally, and most importantly, no other passages in the Bible that refer to the destruction of Sodom ever raise the issue of homosexuality. If indeed the story of Sodom and Gamorrah is about sexual morality, then Lot’s gesture to allow his daughters to be raped by the crowd instead of the visitors should put into question its modern moral value.
AGAIN, you quote UNINSPIRED documents to make your claims, when I cited with actual Scripture. You are losing, and you don't like it.
49Behold, this was the iniquity of your sister Sodom: pride, overabundance of food, prosperous ease, and idleness were hers and her daughters'; neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy.
50And they were haughty and committed abominable offenses before Me; therefore I removed them when I saw it and I saw fit.(A)
Ezekiel 16:48-50 INSPIRED SCRIPTURE FROM THE HOLY BIBLE.
Hi!You clearly don't know the story, here is just some website, but there are many that interpret it that way:
http://www.answers.com/topic/the-bible-and-homosexuality
Don't take it bad ... Then you can start to make it better.Intricatic said:Jude
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. They were haughty and did detestable things before me. Therefore I did away with them as you have seen. (Ezek 16:49-50, NIV)
But IMO He is much more wrathful, though forebearing in taking judgment, of the family with the $350,000 mini-mansion and the two SUVs, who give $100 a year to charity because it's the socially proper thing to do and it helps keep down their taxes, than he is of the gay couple who claim to love each other with an erotic sort of love.
And for that matter, it was sensual indulgence;6 And the angels who did not keep their proper domain, but left their own abode, He has reserved in everlasting chains under darkness for the judgment of the great day; 7 as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them in a similar manner to these, having given themselves over to sexual immorality and gone after strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.
8 Likewise also these dreamers defile the flesh, reject authority, and speak evil of dignitaries.
(Jude 1)
As has been pointed out, this book (Jude) has a lot of similarities with 2 Peter, so I like to look at that particular book to get a good bearing on what's being discussed here.16 These are grumblers, complainers, walking according to their own lusts; and they mouth great swelling words, flattering people to gain advantage. 17 But you, beloved, remember the words which were spoken before by the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ: 18 how they told you that there would be mockers in the last time who would walk according to their own ungodly lusts. 19 These are sensual persons, who cause divisions, not having the Spirit.
(Jude 1)
And further, we see reference to the sin of Balaam (whatever that may be);4 For if God did not spare the angels who sinned, but cast them down to hell and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved for judgment; 5 and did not spare the ancient world, but saved Noah, one of eight people, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood on the world of the ungodly; 6 and turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah into ashes, condemned them to destruction, making them an example to those who afterward would live ungodly; 7 and delivered righteous Lot, who was oppressed by the filthy conduct of the wicked 8 (for that righteous man, dwelling among them, tormented his righteous soul from day to day by seeing and hearing their lawless deeds)— 9 then the Lord knows how to deliver the godly out of temptations and to reserve the unjust under punishment for the day of judgment, 10 and especially those who walk according to the flesh in the lust of uncleanness and despise authority. They are presumptuous, self-willed. They are not afraid to speak evil of dignitaries, 11 whereas angels, who are greater in power and might, do not bring a reviling accusation against them before the Lord.
(2 Peter 2)
Of course, there are also a mingling of sexual sins referenced here that are only vaguely addressed, we can understand that the greatest thing being spoken against is the fact that these apostates were leading people astray, which led to their indulgence in sexual sin. But it's clear what sin they're discussing in regards to Sodom and Gomorrah; it's not rape, it's something obviously consensual that these apostates were indulging in with one another. Be that in the context of idolatry (as there are inferences to that idea in the text), or just reveling in shameful lusts, we can't tell for certain, but it wasn't rape. Another thing to point out is that inhospitality is a distinct part of the problem;12 But these, like natural brute beasts made to be caught and destroyed, speak evil of the things they do not understand, and will utterly perish in their own corruption, 13 and will receive the wages of unrighteousness, as those who count it pleasure to carouse in the daytime. They are spots and blemishes, carousing in their own deceptions while they feast with you, 14 having eyes full of adultery and that cannot cease from sin, enticing unstable souls. They have a heart trained in covetous practices, and are accursed children. 15 They have forsaken the right way and gone astray, following the way of Balaam the son of Beor, who loved the wages of unrighteousness; 16 but he was rebuked for his iniquity: a dumb donkey speaking with a man’s voice restrained the madness of the prophet.
17 These are wells without water, clouds carried by a tempest, for whom is reserved the blackness of darkness forever.
(2 Peter 2)
But singling out any one part of the text is to miss the context it's presented within.8 Likewise also these dreamers defile the flesh, reject authority, and speak evil of dignitaries.
(Jude 1)
Of course, there are also a mingling of sexual sins referenced here that are only vaguely addressed, we can understand that the greatest thing being spoken against is the fact that these apostates were leading people astray, which led to their indulgence in sexual sin. But it's clear what sin they're discussing in regards to Sodom and Gomorrah; it's not rape, it's something obviously consensual that these apostates were indulging in with one another. Be that in the context of idolatry (as there are inferences to that idea in the text), or just reveling in shameful lusts, we can't tell for certain, but it wasn't rape. Another thing to point out is that inhospitality is a distinct part of the problem;
I'm not talking about Sodom and Gomorrah. I'm talking about the letter of Jude. Plain and simple. It had nothing to do with raping angelic visitors. I'm sorry. It's not a chapter talking about Sodom and Gomorrah. It's talking about the conditions of the early Church. It's really not that hard.Yes, let's not change what it TRULY is about, and that is promiscuity, raping of the angelic visitors, and inhabitants as well as prostitution. Sodom and Gomorrah being an example of condemned homosexual, MONOGAMOUS, loving, same-sex relationships, is a joke at best.
Is this thread about Jude? What is the Opening Post about? Let's keep this on track, THAT isn't that hard, which is technically calledI'm not talking about Sodom and Gomorrah. I'm talking about the letter of Jude. Plain and simple. It had nothing to do with raping angelic visitors. I'm sorry. It's not a chapter talking about Sodom and Gomorrah. It's talking about the conditions of the early Church. It's really not that hard.
According to Ezekiel 16:49, the sins of the people of Sodom were having 'plenty of food, peace and security and not helping the poor and needy.'
The detestable things are already mentioned, read verses 49 and 50 for what is "detestable". Rocket Science!You just need the context:
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. 50 They were haughty and did detestable things before me. Therefore I did away with them as you have seen.
Oh really...care to share with us the detestable things mentioned in the chapter?No, those things are covered with haughty.
G
Oh really...care to share with us the detestable things mentioned in the chapter?
Even if you are proving the other "detestable" things, it is about rape, promiscuity/prostitution and nothing more. Unless of course you are affiliated with the mainstream churches who read more than what is there and love to be spoonfed like baby food doctrine handed to you on a plate...
Sodom and Gomorrah. I was discussing the relevant scripture to the account. All I'm asking is that people actually read it in context and not single out one passage and then selectively interpret it.Is this thread about Jude? What is the Opening Post about? Let's keep this on track, THAT isn't that hard, which is technically called
hijacking of a thread.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?