Taking a closer look at the record of Sodom

A.ModerateOne

Active Member
Supporter
Sep 24, 2018
191
129
79
Florida
✟33,541.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
When dealing with God's word, it is imperative to keep the following instruction in mind:

"Now these things, brethren, I have in a figure transferred to myself and Apollos for your sakes; that in us ye might learn not to go beyond the things which are written; that no one of you be puffed up for the one against the other." (1Cor 4:6, ASV)
also
"Every word of God is tried: He is a shield unto them that take refuge in him. Add thou not unto his words, Lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar." (Prov 30:5-6, ASV)

I am a stickler in striving for accuracy with the definitions of words, so that is how I begin taking a closer look at Sodom.

"...every male among the men of Abraham's house.." Gn. 17:23 ASV
That is a strange sounding phrase today. English "male" here is the Hebrew zaka and means MALE; the English "men" here is the Hebrew enosh and means man, humans, mankind, mortals, people. Because of changes in language in recent years, this needs to be pointed out.

"Now the men (enosh; NRSV, GNB92 "people", LXX anthropos) of Sodom were wicked and sinners against Jehovah exceedingly." (Gen 13:13, ASV) *Gn 18:32 shows that the city did not have 10 righteous persons in the entire city of Sodom.

"But before they lay down, the men(enosh, people) of the city, even the men(enosh, people) of Sodom, compassed the house round, both young and old, all the people from every quarter;" (Gen 19:4, ASV)

The words "both young and old, all the people from every quarter" shows enosh here is including females as well as males. Observing mob violence and demonstrations in this day like Antifa or the females march 1/20/17 shows females can be as violent as men.

The phrase "that we may know them" in this context brings to mind the gang rapes in prisons. Is this about affection and sexual desire, or about humiliation and domination?

And he said, I pray you, my brethren, do not so wickedly. (Gen 19:7, ASV)

The English "brethren" is the Hebrew ach, and Strong's Hebrew Dictionary states "used in the widest sense of literal relationship and metaphorical affinity or resemblance". The BDB gives examples such as "member of same tribe", "of same people", "allies", etc. There is no basis to restrict "brethren" here to males.

"And they said, Stand back. And they said, This one fellow came in to sojourn, and he will needs be a judge: now will we deal worse with thee, than with them. And they pressed sore upon the man, even Lot, and drew near to break the door." (Gen 19:9, ASV)

What is here in the Sodom account is a record of violence, attempted gang rape. This sort of sexual violence is in a very similar account in Judges with one major difference, in Judges the wicked ones are indicated to be males:

"As they were making their hearts merry, behold, the men of the city, certain base fellows, beset the house round about, beating at the door; and they spake to the master of the house, the old man, saying, Bring forth the man that came into thy house, that we may know him." (Judg 19:22, ASV)

The underlined above, in Hebrew is: 'the men of the city, men, the sons of wickedness.' The repetition of "men" and then "sons" seems to indicate these are males.

In the next chapter, 20:5, these men are called "masters of Gibeah"(YLT); "lords of Gibeah"(NRSV); "leaders of Gibeah"(NETbible); "owners of Gibeah"(EBR). This would be males in Hebrew culture.

Ellicott's Commentary for English readers states on this verse:
"Literally, the lords of Gibeah, as in Judges 9:2. We cannot infer that they were heathen inhabitants of the town, though they behaved as if they were. If the phrase implies that they were men in positions of authority, it perhaps shows why there was no rescue and little resistance. This is also probable, because there could not have been the same unwillingness to give up to justice a few lawless and insignificant offenders."

Most importantly, we have the sin of Sodom given to us by God Himself:

"As I live, saith the Lord Jehovah, Sodom thy sister hath not done, she nor her daughters, as thou hast done, thou and thy daughters. Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom: pride, fulness of bread, and prosperous ease was in her and in her daughters; neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy. And they were haughty, and committed abomination before me: therefore I took them away as I saw good." (Ezek 16:48-50, ASV)

The vice list starts with "pride" and ends with being "haughty" and committing abomination. The Hebrew here for abomination is to ebah and it is found 41 times just in the book of Ezekiel alone and overwhelmingly it refers to things connected with idolatry. The BDB gives "idolatrous practices" for Eze. 16:50. There is no male to male sexual sin here listed. I will not read into this and add what is not there, violating 1 Cor. 4:6 and Prov. 30:5,6.

In Jer. 23:14; Sodom is associated with adulterers, liars, supporters of evil doers. In Jer. 49:16-18 Sodom is associated with "the pride of thy heart. Later in the New Testament we have the following:

"And angels that kept not their own principality, but left their proper habitation, he hath kept in everlasting bonds under darkness unto the judgment of the great day. Even as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities about them, having in like manner with these given themselves over to fornication and gone after strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the punishment of eternal fire." (Jude 1:6-7, ASV)

The phrase "in like manner with these" is referring back to the angels who left their proper habitation, see Gen. 6:1-4. The non-canonical book of 1 Enoch is quoted in Jude 14,15 and the same book of Enoch seems to be behind the thought of Jude 6,7. The "sons of God" came down and mated with women. In similar fashion, the mob of Sodomites were going after angels in Gen. 19. The phrase "strange flesh" in the Greek is: strange = heteros meaning "other" or "different"; flesh = sarx. Can "different" or "other" flesh refer to another human being, or to another something or someone different? From the following it must mean the angels.

"All flesh(sarx) is not the same flesh(sarx): but there is one flesh(sarx) of men, and another flesh(sarx) of beasts, and another flesh(sarx) of birds, and another of fishes." (1Cor 15:39, ASV)
"All flesh is not the same: there is human flesh, flesh of beasts, of birds, and of fishes—all different." (1Cor 15:39, REB)

In the Apocrypha, a non-canonical but historic record, we have 2 references to show us how the Jews viewed the sin of Sodom:

3Ma_2:5 RSVA "You consumed with fire and sulphur the men of Sodom who acted arrogantly, who were notorious for their vices; and you made them an example to those who should come afterward."

Sir_16:8 RSVA "He did not spare the neighbors of Lot, whom he loathed on account of their insolence. "

So, what was the sin of Sodom? I'll stay with God's word in Eze. 16:48-50 and not add modern psychological concepts and words that do not fit, nor did they exist in biblical times.
 

Tolworth John

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Mar 10, 2017
8,278
4,680
68
Tolworth
✟369,559.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
So, what was the sin of Sodom? I'll stay with God's word in Eze. 16:48-50 and not add modern psychological concepts and words that do not fit, nor did they exist in biblical times.

And your point after writting all you did is?
 
Upvote 0

Andrewn

Well-Known Member
CF Ambassadors
Supporter
Jul 4, 2019
5,801
4,309
-
✟678,402.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
The phrase "in like manner with these" is referring back to the angels who left their proper habitation, see Gen. 6:1-4. The non-canonical book of 1 Enoch is quoted in Jude 14,15 and the same book of Enoch seems to be behind the thought of Jude 6,7. The "sons of God" came down and mated with women. In similar fashion, the mob of Sodomites were going after angels in Gen. 19.
Jude is a one chapter book but it raises more issues than it sheds light. Sometimes I wonder how it ever came to be included in the NT.
 
Upvote 0

hedrick

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Feb 8, 2009
20,250
10,565
New Jersey
✟1,147,348.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
Jude is a one chapter book but it raises more issues than it sheds light. Sometimes I wonder how it ever came to be included in the NT.
There's no easy answer to questions like that. The canon developed over time, and I think in the end it was what books proved popular. The official criterion was apostolicity, but that was defined broadly. In this case I believe it was regarded to have been written by a half-brother of Jesus, because he claims to have been a brother of James.

The weirder things in it seem to be based on Enoch. That was around in the 1st Cent, and was popular in certain circles.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Andrewn
Upvote 0

Andrewn

Well-Known Member
CF Ambassadors
Supporter
Jul 4, 2019
5,801
4,309
-
✟678,402.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
The weirder things in it seem to be based on Enoch. That was around in the 1st Cent, and was popular in certain circles.
Yes, and what he says about the assumption of Moses:

7 Just as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the surrounding cities in like manner, gave themselves to immorality and went after different flesh, they serve as an example by suffering the punishment of eternal fire. 8 Likewise, these ungodly dreamers defile the flesh, reject authority, and slander celestial beings. 9 Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil in a dispute about the body of Moses, did not dare to pronounce upon him a railing judgment. But he said, “The Lord rebuke you!” 10 But these men slander those things that they do not understand. But they destroy themselves in those things that, like unreasoning animals, they know by instinct.

What does Jude mean?
 
Upvote 0

hedrick

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Feb 8, 2009
20,250
10,565
New Jersey
✟1,147,348.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
What does Jude mean?
Unfortunately answering that requires knowing what he was responding to. We don't. The part about Sodom is a little easier to figure out, but not the slandering celestial beings.

The whole section is about celestial beings (not necessarily angels as we think of them). Jude 6 refers to stories that celestial beings had sex with humans. It seems reasonable to think that 7s reference to going after other flesh refers to human lusting after celestial beings. After all, the beings the Sodomites wanted to rape were angels, and the whole context is about celestial beings.

But what slandering the glorious one means, is anyone's guess. The Logos commentary reports 5 guesses, and they're all over the map. They think the slander is of the angels through which (traditionally) the Law was given, so it's a sign of antinomianism. I guess that's possible, but then why vs 9?

I hope no one wants to build doctrine on Jude.
 
Upvote 0

Andrewn

Well-Known Member
CF Ambassadors
Supporter
Jul 4, 2019
5,801
4,309
-
✟678,402.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Unfortunately answering that requires knowing what he was responding to. We don't. . . . But what slandering the glorious one means, is anyone's guess.
This is a great question and it got me thinking. Is it possible that Jude was responding to gnostic ideas ideas about the demiurge? These ideas probably came about early on in Christianity as they had already existed in Judaism, Zoroastrianism, and perhaps mystery religions.

According to Wikipedia, "Philo had inferred from the expression "Let us make man" of the Book of Genesis that God had used other beings as assistants in the creation of man, and he explains in this way why man is capable of vice as well as virtue, ascribing the origin of the latter to God, of the former to His helpers in the work of creation. The earliest Gnostic sects ascribe the work of creation to angels, some of them using the same passage in Genesis."

I can see allusions to gnostic ideas being a problem in the church in the later epistles: Timothy, second Peter, first John, and Revelation.

Attributing evil in creation to the archons would be slandering them. Does this make sense to you?
 
Upvote 0

hedrick

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Feb 8, 2009
20,250
10,565
New Jersey
✟1,147,348.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
This is a great question and it got me thinking. Is it possible that Jude was responding to gnostic ideas ideas about the demiurge? These ideas probably came about early on in Christianity as they had already existed in Judaism, Zoroastrianism, and perhaps mystery religions.

According to Wikipedia, "Philo had inferred from the expression "Let us make man" of the Book of Genesis that God had used other beings as assistants in the creation of man, and he explains in this way why man is capable of vice as well as virtue, ascribing the origin of the latter to God, of the former to His helpers in the work of creation. The earliest Gnostic sects ascribe the work of creation to angels, some of them using the same passage in Genesis."

I can see allusions to gnostic ideas being a problem in the church in the later epistles: Timothy, second Peter, first John, and Revelation.

Attributing evil in creation to the archons would be slandering them. Does this make sense to you?
It’s one of many possibilities. It seems a bit odd in context though. And it involves Jude in accepting the mythology. Of course it’s hard to avoid an exegesis that involves at least some mythology.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,279
8,499
Milwaukee
✟410,918.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
When dealing with God's word, it is imperative to keep the following instruction in mind:

"Now these things, brethren, I have in a figure transferred to myself and Apollos for your sakes; that in us ye might learn not to go beyond the things which are written; that no one of you be puffed up for the one against the other." (1Cor 4:6, ASV)
also
"Every word of God is tried: He is a shield unto them that take refuge in him. Add thou not unto his words, Lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar." (Prov 30:5-6, ASV)

I am a stickler in striving for accuracy with the definitions of words, so that is how I begin taking a closer look at Sodom.

"...every male among the men of Abraham's house.." Gn. 17:23 ASV
That is a strange sounding phrase today. English "male" here is the Hebrew zaka and means MALE; the English "men" here is the Hebrew enosh and means man, humans, mankind, mortals, people. Because of changes in language in recent years, this needs to be pointed out.

"Now the men (enosh; NRSV, GNB92 "people", LXX anthropos) of Sodom were wicked and sinners against Jehovah exceedingly." (Gen 13:13, ASV) *Gn 18:32 shows that the city did not have 10 righteous persons in the entire city of Sodom.

"But before they lay down, the men(enosh, people) of the city, even the men(enosh, people) of Sodom, compassed the house round, both young and old, all the people from every quarter;" (Gen 19:4, ASV)

The words "both young and old, all the people from every quarter" shows enosh here is including females as well as males. Observing mob violence and demonstrations in this day like Antifa or the females march 1/20/17 shows females can be as violent as men.

The phrase "that we may know them" in this context brings to mind the gang rapes in prisons. Is this about affection and sexual desire, or about humiliation and domination?

And he said, I pray you, my brethren, do not so wickedly. (Gen 19:7, ASV)

The English "brethren" is the Hebrew ach, and Strong's Hebrew Dictionary states "used in the widest sense of literal relationship and metaphorical affinity or resemblance". The BDB gives examples such as "member of same tribe", "of same people", "allies", etc. There is no basis to restrict "brethren" here to males.

"And they said, Stand back. And they said, This one fellow came in to sojourn, and he will needs be a judge: now will we deal worse with thee, than with them. And they pressed sore upon the man, even Lot, and drew near to break the door." (Gen 19:9, ASV)

What is here in the Sodom account is a record of violence, attempted gang rape. This sort of sexual violence is in a very similar account in Judges with one major difference, in Judges the wicked ones are indicated to be males:

"As they were making their hearts merry, behold, the men of the city, certain base fellows, beset the house round about, beating at the door; and they spake to the master of the house, the old man, saying, Bring forth the man that came into thy house, that we may know him." (Judg 19:22, ASV)

The underlined above, in Hebrew is: 'the men of the city, men, the sons of wickedness.' The repetition of "men" and then "sons" seems to indicate these are males.

In the next chapter, 20:5, these men are called "masters of Gibeah"(YLT); "lords of Gibeah"(NRSV); "leaders of Gibeah"(NETbible); "owners of Gibeah"(EBR). This would be males in Hebrew culture.

Ellicott's Commentary for English readers states on this verse:
"Literally, the lords of Gibeah, as in Judges 9:2. We cannot infer that they were heathen inhabitants of the town, though they behaved as if they were. If the phrase implies that they were men in positions of authority, it perhaps shows why there was no rescue and little resistance. This is also probable, because there could not have been the same unwillingness to give up to justice a few lawless and insignificant offenders."

Most importantly, we have the sin of Sodom given to us by God Himself:

"As I live, saith the Lord Jehovah, Sodom thy sister hath not done, she nor her daughters, as thou hast done, thou and thy daughters. Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom: pride, fulness of bread, and prosperous ease was in her and in her daughters; neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy. And they were haughty, and committed abomination before me: therefore I took them away as I saw good." (Ezek 16:48-50, ASV)

The vice list starts with "pride" and ends with being "haughty" and committing abomination. The Hebrew here for abomination is to ebah and it is found 41 times just in the book of Ezekiel alone and overwhelmingly it refers to things connected with idolatry. The BDB gives "idolatrous practices" for Eze. 16:50. There is no male to male sexual sin here listed. I will not read into this and add what is not there, violating 1 Cor. 4:6 and Prov. 30:5,6.

In Jer. 23:14; Sodom is associated with adulterers, liars, supporters of evil doers. In Jer. 49:16-18 Sodom is associated with "the pride of thy heart. Later in the New Testament we have the following:

"And angels that kept not their own principality, but left their proper habitation, he hath kept in everlasting bonds under darkness unto the judgment of the great day. Even as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities about them, having in like manner with these given themselves over to fornication and gone after strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the punishment of eternal fire." (Jude 1:6-7, ASV)

The phrase "in like manner with these" is referring back to the angels who left their proper habitation, see Gen. 6:1-4. The non-canonical book of 1 Enoch is quoted in Jude 14,15 and the same book of Enoch seems to be behind the thought of Jude 6,7. The "sons of God" came down and mated with women. In similar fashion, the mob of Sodomites were going after angels in Gen. 19. The phrase "strange flesh" in the Greek is: strange = heteros meaning "other" or "different"; flesh = sarx. Can "different" or "other" flesh refer to another human being, or to another something or someone different? From the following it must mean the angels.

"All flesh(sarx) is not the same flesh(sarx): but there is one flesh(sarx) of men, and another flesh(sarx) of beasts, and another flesh(sarx) of birds, and another of fishes." (1Cor 15:39, ASV)
"All flesh is not the same: there is human flesh, flesh of beasts, of birds, and of fishes—all different." (1Cor 15:39, REB)

In the Apocrypha, a non-canonical but historic record, we have 2 references to show us how the Jews viewed the sin of Sodom:

3Ma_2:5 RSVA "You consumed with fire and sulphur the men of Sodom who acted arrogantly, who were notorious for their vices; and you made them an example to those who should come afterward."

Sir_16:8 RSVA "He did not spare the neighbors of Lot, whom he loathed on account of their insolence. "

So, what was the sin of Sodom? I'll stay with God's word in Eze. 16:48-50 and not add modern psychological concepts and words that do not fit, nor did they exist in biblical times.

So not gay pride then?
 
Upvote 0