As of February 9, 2024, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is currently tracking 411 anti-LGBTQ bills in the United States[1]. There are also laws all over the world that do not allow people to be who God created them to be. In Texas last year SB17 was passed as law which called for public universities to close their Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion efforts and limit or ban training on these issues for public universities in the state.[2] These bills are trying to legislate who people are. These bills are focusing on making everyone the same, or at least trying to hide the parts of humanity people do not want to see. To make it harder for people to be who God created them to be.
There is a movement away from inclusion to a place where everyone is the same. And this is not how God created us. There are several texts in the Bible that are used to say that homosexuality is a sin. We have been taught this and it has been reinforced for many centuries, however is this the real meaning of these texts? Are we weaponizing scripture to keep the body of Christ from being what God intended?
This paper will look at the story of Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 18:16-19:38) and how it is used to say that homosexuality is wrong and against God’s will, thus the reason Sodom and Gomorrah was destroyed. Then the author will say how this interpretation of this disaster may not be what God intended and how the misuse of this text is keeping the Body of Christ from growing into the wonderful intended organism it was created to be.
To obtain a full understanding of what the theological understanding of the text was I used not only my own traditional upbringing understanding, I was baptized in an American Baptist congregation, and like many my age was raised in a “traditional” understanding of Christianity where homosexuality was a sin and to be avoided, but I also read two scholars’ articles on the text from Genesis 18:16-19:38 from conservative theologians, specifically, Brian Neil Peterson and Michael A Grisanti. I also reference an online article from John Piper, who is a known conservative Christian author.
In August of 2009 the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) was gathered in a churchwide assembly in Minneapolis, MN. They were voting on allowing congregations that choose to allow rostered leaders in lifelong monogamist same-sex relationships to be pastors at their congregations. This vote took place at 2 P.M. on August 19th. A tornado also hit town on the same date and time and did damage to the steeple of the church being used for the ELCA assembly. John Piper, founder/teacher at desiringgod.com and chancellor of Bethlehem College and Seminary, said, “Conclusion: The tornado in Minneapolis was a gentle but firm warning to the ELCA and all of us: Turn from the approval of sin. Turn from the promotion of behaviors that lead to destruction. Reaffirm the great Lutheran heritage of allegiance to the truth and authority of Scripture. Turn back from distorting the grace of God into sensuality. Rejoice in the pardon of the cross of Christ and its power to transform left and right wing sinners.”[3] John Piper said the tornado was an act of God to let the ELCA know that it was not following the will of God. God was warning the denomination to get their interpretation of scripture in line with what was traditionally understood as the meaning of the text and not stray from the norms of tradition.
This is the understanding a lot of Christians have about natural disasters. God is in control of them and uses them to punish the wicked. A tornado for a wayward denomination. A hurricane in New Orleans to judge the sexually loose. Terence E. Fretheim, biblical scholar and former professor at Luther Seminary, discussed this in his book Creation Untamed: The Bible, God, and Natural Disasters. Fretheim wrote, “Some good church people give this theological interpretation of natural disasters: God is in absolute control of these natural events and is aiming these disasters at certain communities, exacting a divine punishment for sins named and unnamed.”[4]
Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed because God, or the messengers of God, were exacting a divine judgment on the sexuality of the men of the city. Is the sin of Sodom homosexuality? Walter Brueggemann, an Old Testament Scholar and former Professor of Old Testament at Columbia Theological Seminary, wrote in his commentary of the book of Genesis:
This text (meaning Genesis 18:16 – 19:38) must be interpreted with extreme care. It easily lends itself to conclusions which are wooden, mechanical, and concrete-operational about the reality of God. Unless interpreted carefully, this passage will be taken as support for mistaken theological notions that are uncritical and destructive. The most obvious dangers of perverse interpretation relate to (a) the stylized and stereotyped description of judgment and destruction (19:24-28); (b) the appeal to numbers in 18:26-32 which will too easily reduce God’s righteous purpose to arithmetical calculation; and (c) the offense of Sodom which in popular usage and perhaps in 19:5 is homosexuality. If these three factors – stylized judgment, numerical calculation, and a simplistic moralizing on homosexuality – are brought together according to popular understanding, the text will yield a teaching remote from the gospel.[5]
Brueggemann says we cannot water down the text to simplify the message it gives us in black and white. Most Biblical texts are deeper than surface level. Brian Neil Peterson, an Evangelical theologian, wrote, “Today one is hard pressed to find a good contemporary biblical commentator willing to point out the clear sexual nature of the sins enumerated in Genesis 19.”[6] The traditional interpretation of Genesis 18:16-19:38 is where we get the term sodomy from. And this has been labeled an “unnatural” way to have intimacy with another person. According to the traditional understandings of sexuality, God intended sexual activity to result in precreation and any sexual activity that cannot result in procreation is unnatural. Traditional understanding focuses on the understanding of Sodom being the men wanting to know (yada) the visitors to Lot. While this verb is used 948 times in the Hebrew Scriptures, only 15 times is it used to mean sexual intercourse.[7] Even conservative theologians will admit this is correct. However, I agree with conservative theologians, like Peterson and Michael Grisanti, that the yada here in Genesis 19 doesn’t mean to have a conversation over coffee or tea and get to know each other better. There is something very sexual happening in this text, but does that mean that homosexuality, as we know it today, is the sin of Sodom?
In order to fully understand the story of Sodom and Gomorrah we must also look at Judges 19, which is in some Hebrew Scripture scholars’ understanding (including Walter Brueggemann) the same story with some different details. In Sodom there are two visitors, which the reader knows are angels appearing as men, and in Judges 19 there is a male visitor with his concubine. In both of these stories the travelers arrive before sun down and intend on sleeping in the town square but are met by hosts who are not native to the towns and urged to not stay in the town square but to come and stay in the home of the nonnative host. The travelers are shown hospitality by their host and then after sundown the men of the town come and surround the house of the host and demand the male visitors come out so the men might know (yada)[8] them. To some scholars this is a clear indication that the crowd want to rape the visitors.[9] The hosts, however, do not want to permit this. Both hosts offer up women in the place of the visiting men. In Judges it is the host’s daughter and the concubine of the visitor. In Sodom, Lot offers his two virgin daughters. This offer of the women is rejected in both stories and then the men move to make their way into the homes but are blocked; in Judges, the visitor pushed his concubine out the door and in Genesis, the visitors pull Lot back into the home. This then causes violence to happen outside in both stories, the rape of the concubine in Judges and the blindness of the men of the town in Genesis. [10] Robert Karl Gnuse says these stories are the same story in a different version. Judges is older, according to Gnuse, because it is rougher and more violent and the Genesis account wants to sanitize the story. Gnuse wrote,
“If you read Judges 19 after Genesis 19 you could theoretically argue, as some do, that the issue is about homosexuality because the threat of homosexual rape to the two angels in the first story carries over into the second story wherein the rape of a woman then is considered to be less offensive than the potential homosexual rape of a man. I personally find this argument horrible. If, however, you read Genesis 19 after Judges 19, I believe that it becomes more evident that the issue of rape is the focus of both accounts. In Judges 19 the threatened rape of a man and the actual rape of a woman then leads you to read Genesis 19 as a story of attempted rape of the two angels.”[11]
These stories are not two different happenings but a retelling of the same story. And if it is really about homosexuality being the sin, then why did both hosts offer women to appease the crowds of men? In the version of the story from Judges, the men intended to rape a man but settled for a woman, but if the sin is homosexuality why did the men rape a woman? Gnuse wrote “Using their logic of homosexual identity, that would assume that homosexuals suddenly became heterosexuals. No one seems to make that observation when they declare homosexual activity to be the common denominator.”[12]
If the sin is homosexuality, it is hard to see how the group of men from Judges went from wanting to rape the male visitor to raping the woman. We seldom read, if ever, about homosexuals who have suddenly become heterosexual, or heterosexuals who have suddenly become homosexual. When we read the texts in black and white, we are hard pressed to determine what the sin of Sodom is. The surface reading of the text would clearly say the sin is homosexuality, but this was not mentioned in the texts prior to Genesis 18 where Sodom is mentioned. In Genesis 13, it is written that Abraham settled in the land of Canaan and Lot settled in Sodom (verse 12) and verse 13 continues, “The citizens of Sodom were very evil and sinful against the Lord.” (Genesis 13:13, CEB)[13] It declares even before the story of Sodom that the people of the town were evil and went against God, but it never declares what the sin is. There is an outcry the Lord hears and that is why there is an investigation by the two visitors. But what is the outcry? We are not told in the text.
Brueggemann wrote, “Aside from the popular name of “sodomy” from Sodom, the text does not give much help in determining the offense.”[14] The text is not clear to the sin. Phyllis Trible, a Professor of Sacred Literature at Union Theological Seminary, writing from a feminist view point, wrote in Texts of Terror: Literary- Feminist Readings of Biblical Narratives about the story from Judges, “What is not accounts for what is: that ‘every man did what was right in their own eyes.’ Such internal anarchy produces violence and vengeance, as the narratives about the tribe of Benjamin amply demonstrate (chapters 19-21).”[15] The people did what they wanted regardless of what God was leading them or asking them to do. They took what they pleased and made sure people knew who had the power. I agree with Brueggemann, “the evidence in any case shows that the Bible itself did not agree that the sin was homosexuality.”[16]
If the sin of Sodom was homosexuality there is also the issue of all the men being homosexual. Colby Martin, cofounder and pastor of Sojourn Grace Collective and former conservative turned progressive Christian, in Un Clobber: Rethinking Our Misuse of the Bible on Homosexuality wrote
Do you notice how the storyteller points out that every man in the city shows up at Lot’s house? Several times, in fact, this detailed is highlighted. This should rule out, right off the bat, any interpretation that this story is about homosexual orientation or same-sex attraction. It simply cannot be the case that every man in Sodom, from the youngest to the oldest, was gay. Common sense (and statistics) tell us this. So if this is not a hoard of gay men overcome with desire to have sex with two out-of-towners, then who were they?[17]
Every man in Sodom could not have been gay. Yet the text informs us several times that all the men were there. All of the men from town, all the men of Sodom, from the youngest to the oldest. This implies that also present are those who should not be involved because they are too young, and those who might not physically be able to be involved because they are too old. But as Martin says it is not logical or statistically possible that all the men of Sodom were homosexual. This should be the first clue that the sin of Sodom was not homosexuality, and even if it was a sexual sin, it is not about gay men having a mutual loving relationship. And as Brueggemann wrote, it is “scarcely pertinent to contemporary discussions of homosexuality.”[18]
The mob of men want to know (yada) the visitors. It is interesting to note that this word as discussed above is used many more times in the Bible to mean something other than ‘know by sex’, and one of those instances is in our text of Genesis 18:16-19:38. In verse 18:19 God is speaking of Abraham and says, “For I have chosen him, that he may command his children and his household after him to keep the way of the Lord by doing righteousness and justice, so that the Lord may bring to Abraham what he has promised him.” (Genesis 18:19, ESV)[19] The word translated as chosen in this text is yada the word used for what the mob wants to do to the visitors. God’s relationship with Abraham is the same verb for the supposed homosexual act of the town’s men to the visitors. How does this impact our understanding? If the word is only for sexual knowledge does that mean God is homosexual? As I said earlier, I agree the use of yada in Genesis 19:5 as being sexual in nature is the proper translation but it is not to say that it is about a mutual loving sexual relationship. Martin wrote, “consent or mutuality is not on the mob’s mind. They want to do something to the men.”[20] It is not about sexual activity with another person, this is an act of power over another person. It is not about mutual love and respect, but it is about asserting dominance and control. Martti Nissinen, a Finnish theologian who is serving as Professor of Old Testament at the University of Helsinki, gives us an understanding of manhood and patriarchal society in his book Homoeroticism in the Biblical World: A Historical Perspective:
In a patriarchal society manly honor largely is equivalent to human value, to offend which is a grave shame. Gang rape of a man has always been an extreme means to disgrace one’s manly honor, to reduce one to a woman’s role, which inevitably has a homoerotic aspect. It is not a matter of exercising one’s homosexual orientation or looking for erotic pleasure but simply of protecting or threatening one’s masculinity.[21]
The men of Sodom were not looking for erotic pleasure from the visitors but wanted to show who was in power and who the real men in town were. This was seen as practiced by armies defeating another army and soldiers from the winning army raping soldiers from the losing army to degrade them. It was not about pleasure or sexual desire, it was about power and shaming. That is what the men were doing at Lot’s house that evening, showing the visitors who were the men in town and who had the power. This also is seen in the fact that the men of Sodom didn’t want the locals, the daughters of Lot. It was not sexual in nature; it was showing who had the power and making sure the town’s men’s manhood was clearly demarcated. As Gnuse wrote, “The crowd does not want locals, nor do they particularly want the women. Rather, they want to humiliate the men to make the point that this is their town, they run it, and strangers must recognize their power. Sexual preference is irrelevant. It is all about power rape and the humiliation of strangers.”[22] Martin Luther, Reformation Theologian, adds this:
After they had finished the meal and the time called for sleep, what happens? The men of the city, the men of Sodom (this repetition serves to aggravate the sin), are in such a frenzy that they not only showed no courtesy toward the guests but did not allow the tired men to rest even for an hour in someone else’s house. They vent their rage upon the weary men before these men go to bed, and they begrudge them their sleep. Is not this extraordinary rudeness and cruelty? But it is more serious and altogether unheard of for them to demand the men for their sensual desire. It is the men of the city who do this, not the unimportant people of the populace—hirelings, slaves, and sojourners—but the foremost citizens, whose obligation it was to protect others and to punish similar crimes in the case of others.
Accordingly, this, too, serves to make you realize that there were not ten righteous men in the city. These were the foremost citizens. They had wives. They had children and domestics, and they should have ruled these and accustomed them to discipline and modesty. But what are they themselves perpetrating? What are they attempting to do? And that in public and against innocent guests!
Moreover, Moses repeats and says that this was done by the men of Sodom, which is the chief city of the entire region and for this reason should have been an example for the neighboring cities. It usually happens that smaller states conform to the example of larger ones. But what shall be our opinion about those four lesser states, when so much vice is in evidence in the chief one, which was the leader, so to speak, of the others?[23]
Luther is saying that the men of Sodom would have known they were looked up to and their actions here are causing more harm. They were an example, and this example is one that leads the people of the region away from God. This would be a good example of how not to live as followers of God.
Michael A. Grisanti in his article Homosexuality – An Abomination or Purely Irrelevant?: Evaluating LGBT Claims in Light of the Old Testament (Gen. 18-19; Lev. 18:22; 20:13) wrote, “‘If Sodom’s sin had indeed been same-sex behavior, it’s highly unlikely that every written discussion of the city for centuries following its destruction would fail to mention that.’ John McNeill affirms that ‘the sin of Sodom was never interpreted in the Old Testament times as being primarily sexual; rather, it is portrayed as a sin of pride and inhospitality.’”[24] Grisanti uses these scholars to say that they are wrong and the sin of Sodom is homosexuality, even though it seems like the quotes make a good point and actually do not help Grisanti’s point of view. If the sin of Sodom was homosexuality why are there not more texts in the Bible that speak to homosexuality, because several authors/prophets, including Jesus, use Sodom as an example, but none of these prophets or uses ever mentions homosexuality as the sin. The Prophet Isaiah calls out the nation of Judah comparing them to Sodom. “9If the Lord of heavenly forces had not spared a few of us, we would be like Sodom; we would resemble Gomorrah. 10Hear the Lord’s word, you leaders of Sodom. Listen to our God’s teaching, people of Gomorrah! 16Wash! Be clean! Remove your ugly deeds from my sight. Put an end to such evil;17learn to do good. Seek justice: help the oppressed; defend the orphan; plead for the widow.” (Isaiah 1:9-10;16-17, CEB)[25] Isaiah here compares Judah to Sodom but does not say their sin or wrongdoing is homosexuality. Their wrongdoing is not seeking justice, not helping the oppressed, not defending the orphan, or not pleading for the widow. The sin here is not helping the outcast or the visitor. Gnuse wrote, “By implication the sins of social injustice in Judah are being attacked by the prophet, and the further implication of the comparison indicates that these were the sins of Sodom.”[26] Homosexuality was not the sin of Sodom, it was being unhospitable. Jeremiah 23:14, 49:18 and 50:40 also mentions Sodom without any mention of homosexual activity. The Prophet Ezekiel interprets the story to give what is seen by most scholars to be the clearest understanding of how Sodom and Gomorrah were seen by later generations of Jewish people. “48As surely as I live, says the Lord God, not even your sister Sodom and her daughters did what you and your daughters have done! 49This is the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were proud, had plenty to eat, and enjoyed peace and prosperity; but she didn’t help the poor and the needy. 50They became haughty and did detestable things in front of me, and I turned away from them as soon as I saw it.” (Ezekiel 16:48-50, CEB)[27] The prophet here says very clearly the sin of Sodom is they were proud, had plenty to eat and enjoyed peace and prosperity but didn’t help the poor or the needy, and were haughty. They did not welcome strangers or look out for the less fortunate. They were more concerned with asserting dominance than with doing what God was leading them to do. Luther wrote, “Furthermore, Ezekiel mentions ease or the good fortune of a quiet life. Everything was serene, and they experienced no famine, no plague, and no diseases; but, as Moses says of his own people (Deut. 32:15), they became as fat and thick as pigs. Therefore there also followed what pertains to the situation before us; they did not stretch out their hand to the poor, and they were inhospitable.”[28] Martin wrote about Ezekiel, “As far as Ezekiel saw it, it was not sexual immorality (let alone homosexuality or same-sex sex acts) that brought down the fire from heaven.”[29] Sirach 16:8 says “He didn’t spare Lot’s neighbors, whom he detested because of their arrogance. (CEB)[30].
All of the texts in the Hebrew Scriptures that mention Sodom and Gomorrah never explicitly mention homosexuality, but they do say that the people of Sodom were arrogant, and haughty, and not moved to help the poor or oppressed. They did not care for the stranger or take care of the widow. They only looked out for themselves and wanted to make sure that people who were traveling through knew who was in charge. Martin wrote, “In short, they were notoriously inhospitable.”[31] Reed Carlson, professor of Old Testament at United Lutheran Seminary, wrote that the sin of Sodom is recorded in scripture and remembered as oppression of the poor.[32] The sin of Sodom is not about homosexuality but is clearly about power and any interpretive attempt to make it about homosexuality is a way to maintain the power structures set in place that the text is actually meant to dismantle. To put this another way, Michael Coogan, professor of Religious Studies at Stonehill College and editor of The New Oxford Annotated Bible, in God & Sex: What the Bible Really Says wrote, “So the attempt to rape Lot’s visitors is an example of Sodom’s immorality, because they wanted to violate hospitality with violence against strangers in town.”[33] Luther wrote this about the sin of Sodom, “What makes their disgraceful action worse is that they have the audacity to do these things to strangers.[34]
Jesus says that those who reject the message of the gospel will suffer more than the inhabitants of Sodom. We hear this in Matthew 10:14-15, “14If anyone refuses to welcome you or listen to your words, shake the dust off your feet as you leave that house or city. 15I assure you that it will be more bearable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah on Judgment Day than it will be for that city. (CEB)”[35] We also see this in Luke 10:8-12, “8Whenever you enter a city and its people welcome you, eat what they set before you. 9Heal the sick who are there, and say to them, ‘God’s kingdom has come upon you.’ 10Whenever you enter a city and the people don’t welcome you, go out into the streets and say, 11 ‘As a complaint against you, we brush off the dust of your city that has collected on our feet. But know this: God’s kingdom has come to you.’ 12I assure you that Sodom will be better off on Judgment Day than that city.” (CEB)[36] Here, clearly, Jesus is talking about the towns and peoples being inhospitable and not about accepting the disciples sexually. It is not about sexual activity, but people being welcoming of the stranger and the sojourner. In Matthew 11:23-24, Jesus is speaking of cities and judging them according to their acts and he says that if he had done what he did in Capernaum in Sodom, Sodom would still be here. Which implies the sin of Sodom is not sexual but is based in how they acted towards others. Jesus never mentioned homosexuality in any of his teachings and one would think if the sin of Sodom was homosexuality, when Jesus mentioned Sodom he would have said something about homosexuality being their sin.
Another passage in the New Testament that mention Sodom and Gomorrah is Romans 9:29. Since Paul had already spoken to the Romans about homosexuality (Romans 1) would not Paul have referred to this in the quote of the Prophet Isaiah talking about Sodom, if the sin of Sodom was homosexuality? Paul does not mention the sin of Sodom in reference to the quote. We also see mention of Sodom in 2 Peter 2 which says people followed after corrupt cravings of a sinful nature but never mentions homosexuality. Revelation 11:8 mentions a city where the bodies of the two witnesses lay that is prophetically[37] called Sodom and Egypt. The witnesses were not welcomed and so the cities are named. Jude speaks of Sodom, specifically in verse 7: “In the same way, Sodom and Gomorrah and neighboring towns practiced immoral sexual relations and pursued other sexual urges. By undergoing the punishment of eternal fire, they serve as a warning.” (CEB)[38] This says the people practiced immoral sexual relations and pursued other sexual urges but does not specifically say this is same-sex sexual relations. This could still be what Nissinen referred to in homoerotic practices in patriarchal societies.
Coogan wrote, “Informed by these ancient interpretations, we can now define the ‘grave sin’ of Sodom: it was social injustice – mistreatment of the powerless.”[39] It was about maintaining the status quo and the power structures as is and not looking out for the poor, the needy, the downtrodden, the widow, the orphan, the stranger, the sojourner. Sodomites were more concerned with people knowing they were in control and did not really want to outsiders to be recognized, which as Brueggemann wrote “is a teaching remote from the gospel.”[40] Luther adds,
“This is what Moses wanted to point out, just as Ezekiel also says: “Behold, 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. They were haughty and did abominable things before Me” (16:49–50). These are very harsh words. He calls them proud despisers of the Word, that is, of God and of men; for they were practicing no reverence toward God and no love toward human beings. They had forgotten the kindness with which they had been treated by Abraham, and they assumed that they were the only ones whom God loved and who could not offend God, inasmuch as He was blessing them in this manner.”[41]
They forgot the blessings they had and were more concerned with keeping their power. God is calling us to focus on love of other. We need to show kindness to strangers, welcome to the sojourner, help to the downtrodden. We receive grace, mercy, and love from God and should then bestow that same grace, mercy, and love on neighbor, which is everyone, not just those that fit into our box.
Honestly is that not what any of us who use this text, as well as the other texts that make up the clobber texts[42], guilty of? These texts have been used throughout history to keep the status quo and to not allow people to be who God created them to be. We have used misinterpretations of texts to say and define heterosexual behavior as the norm, when really that is what is held up by a religious understanding to do what God told Adam and Eve to do when they were removed from the Garden of Eden, go and be fruitful and multiply. Traditional understandings of the interpretation of the Bible sees any sexual relation that does not have the ability to procreate as something that is an abomination. Gnuse wrote, “The Levitical sexual laws in general have their central focus upon maximizing the reproductive capacities of the ancient Israelites, because as a people they always faced a chronic population shortage. Levitical sexual laws condemn any sexual activity that wastes semen or any form of sexuality that does not seek procreation.”[43]
We have taken understandings of society that needed to maintain a certain way of life to maintain life and made it be what God intended for all people regardless of the understanding of how God made them. Procreation is necessary but is not the only outcome of sexual relationships. If every time a couple had sexual relations a child was born, can you imagine the population of the world? Sex is not just about producing offspring. It is also about us receiving and giving pleasure. But these clobber texts have been used to say that people are not living as God intended and therefore are not truly a part of the body of Christ.
When we use Genesis 18:16-19:38 to say that God destroyed Sodom because of homosexuality we are telling those members of the body of Christ that identify as LGBTQIA2S+ that they are less than what they should be. That they have somehow chosen to be who they are. It contradicts the idea that God has created us all exactly as we are and that would be unacceptable to God. By doing this we are doing the true sin of Sodom, being “notoriously inhospitable”[44] and “mistreating the powerless.”[45] We need to read these texts and see the message they are giving us, which Jesus Christ gave to us. Love the Lord your God and love your neighbor (Matthew 22:37-39).
Traditional Christian understanding though has taken these clobber texts and used them against part of the body of Christ. Fretheim wrote, “Phyllis Trible has put this point in a helpful way: God is now present, ‘not as an authoritarian controller of events, but as the generous delegator of power who even forfeits the right to reverse human decisions.’”[46] Fretheim is talking about the naming of the animals, but I feel like this quote fits the situation we have made with Sodom. We have taken the text out of context and used it to keep those in the LGBTQIA2S+ community from being full participants in the body of Christ because we have interpreted the story to say that homosexuality is the sin and God has allowed us the power to do that, not because it’s right but because creation is always creating and evolving. This also goes to what Fretheim wrote, “God created the world good, not perfect.”[47] We are part of the good world even when we do evil, and creation is still becoming. Fretheim explains, “It may be said that much, if not all, of the violence associated with God in the Bible is due to God’s decision to use agents that are capable of violence. And God does not perfect agents before deciding to work in and through them.”[48] God allows us to be who we are and still works through us.
We need to see the diversity of God’s creation and realize that we are all a part of that and without all of us, creation is not what God intended for it to be. How do we move beyond what we knew or how we learned the meaning of the text to see the text of Genesis 8:16-19:38 for what it says. Maybe it is time, in the wise words of Yoda, “you must unlearn what we have learned”[49] Sometimes this is hard for us to do. To let go of the past, as my Hebrew Scriptures professor from seminary told us, to learn something different than what we learned as a kid is to question everything we learned as a kid. We have to accept that time changes information and what might have been good for a certain time, now may not work and we need to move forward from where we were with the new information. This doesn’t mean what we learned was wrong, but what we knew then, but now we know better and therefore we need to do better. We need to unlearn our past and do better. We need to see Genesis 18:16-19:38 from the point of view it is trying to help us see. As Martin wrote in Un Clobber, “when understood properly, the entire point of Genesis 19 is that the people of God are called to be people who receive the outcast and the outsiders, and not create them.”[50] As Christians, we are called to be accepting and welcoming of all people, not trying to find ways to see who fits and who does not. This is not about making sure all of the people fit into the hole that says Christian on the box. It is not about us judging who is in and who is out. Genesis 19 clearly states that we need to welcome the sojourner and stranger and be hospitable in all ways. We do not assert our dominance but as Jesus said, the last will be first and the first will be last (Matthew 20:16). We need to be servants of all and not puff ourselves up. Genesis 19 helps us see that we should not judge others but in every way love as God has loved us. We need to welcome those who are different not to conform them to our ways but to see the beauty in creation that God has made. Beth Allison Barr, Associate Professor of History and Associate Dean of the Graduate School at Baylor University, in The Making of Biblical Womanhood: How the subjugation of Women Became Gospel Truth wrote, “Paul wasn’t telling the early Christians to look like everyone else; he was telling them that , as Christians, they had to be different.”[51] This is reference to the household codes that Paul wrote to the communities about. Rachel Held Evens, a contemporary Christian author, explained the Christian household codes were a “Jesus Remix” of Roman Patriarchy.[52] The Christian household codes took what society accepted as the way we live in harmony with each other, and the roles people played according to gender and status, and turned them upside down and made people equal, put us all on a level playing field. We need to think of our re-understanding of scripture as a “Jesus Remix”. We need to live into the love that Christ has given all of us and see the way Jesus is calling us to act and move in the world. It is not about us asserting our dominance and being right. It is about us welcoming the stranger and being a place of refuge for the sojourner. It is about us seeking justice, acting rightly to the poor and needy, being an ally for the widow and orphan. Standing for the one who does not have a voice and being there for the marginalized. Until we are standing up for all of God’s creation, we are not being hospitable, and we are allowing the sin of Sodom to continue to rot the body of Christ.
Jamie Bruesehoff, a member of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America and outspoken transgender ally, wrote an excellent book called Raising Kids Beyond the Binary: Celebrating God’s Transgender and Gender-Diverse Children. She wrote is as a memoir of sorts about the journey her family went through as their daughter lived into who God made her as. The struggle was real and the pain is there, as is the love of a family deeply rooted in religion, and a community of faith. The story might be further complicated by the fact that Jamie’s husband is an ELCA pastor. The story is one of hope as we see the person God created be an active part of the body of Christ. This is a story we should all hear and feel the struggle of a mom who works actively to accept the person God has placed in her life, not by controlling or manipulating, (although some have said she did manipulate her daughter into doing what she did, but by loving and accepting). That is the fullest whole understanding to Genesis 19. Loving and accepting. Showing hospitality to the creation God has allowed you to experience. Bruesehoff talks about the imago Dei, the image of God, and how all people are made in God’s image. Genesis 1:27 says “God created humanity in God’s own image, in the divine image God created them, male and female God created them.” (CEB)[53] All of humanity is created in God’s image. There is not a single person you will ever see or encounter that was not created by God. And all of those people are in the image of God. In one of my classes for my Doctor of Ministry degree we were talking about the image of God and a classmate asked, are we all the image of God individually, or does it take all of us to make the image of God? Meaning is God like one of those pictures made up of little pictures? Meaning we do not actually see the image of God until we are all united and together? It takes all of humanity to see the image of God. And when we exclude a person because they do not fit in our God box, and are not following our rules for acceptance, then we actually do not see the image of God. In the section on the image of God, Bruesehoff wrote, “Transgender and gender-expansive people teach us more about the God who created all of us and give us a fuller understanding of our faith. They are a gift to the church and the world.”[54] Does the church see transgendered people as a gift? Should not the church see all people as gifts to the church and the world? Because depending on your answer to the above thoughts on the image of God, we will never see the image of God is our transgendered siblings are not included.
There is so much hate and exclusion in the world, why are we as the church perpetuating hate against the body of Christ? Isn’t it time we let go of our first world readings and antiquated understanding of scripture to see a view of God that is not about our box, or anyone’s box, but about what God has called us to be? What if we loved like Jesus and saw everyone as a beautiful contribution to the spectrum that is the world God created. Fretheim wrote, “Ultimately, the creation is in God’s hands, yes, but in the meantime, human beings are called not to passivity but to genuine engagement, and the decisions we make and actions we take will have significant implications for the future of this untamed creation and even for the nature of God’s future.”[55]
We cannot allow traditional thought to control creation; we are called to help the world unlearn the negativity and see the bountiful creation of God and help all people accept the beauty of diversity around them. We all need to work for justice and peace in the world, that means working for diversity, equity, and inclusion, not against it. It means working to get over polarization caused by people not accepting everyone in the body of Christ as God created them. It means being hospitable to all people, even those we do not agree with or understand. We are called to love all and accept all. Until the body of Christ is a place that all belong as they are, then we still have work to do. It is about belonging. Not being accepted or included. Belonging. Belonging is having a part in decisions and being asked your opinion on what is happening. Accepted or included means you are there and tolerated until you change to fit in the box, the way you are supposed to. Belonging means you are who God created you and fully a part and needed to make the picture complete.
Sodom and Gomorrah is about hospitality not homosexuality and how God destroyed the city because they were exerting dominance instead of care. When we are more concerned with maintaining power and our own status quo rather than showing love, we miss the mark and fall from the path God is guiding us to walk. We need to assert care instead of dominance because we are not ultimately in control. God has loved all of us and created a beautiful spectrum of people to give us diversity and beauty, why do we want to make that all look the same? Love the world as Christ loves you and allow the fullness of the image of God to be seen in everything.
Homosexuality is not a sin from a Biblical witness. We need to stop judging others by their sins and start working on our own sins and loving everyone in the process. God has called us all to love and stand for injustice, that is the story of Sodom. That is what we should learn from Gomorrah. Love has to reign supreme. Do not get bogged down in judging others: get bogged down in love! Love like Jesus and allow the untamed creation of God be the beautiful thing it is, in all its diversity.
Works Cited
Beth Allison Barr. The Making of Biblical Womanhood : How the Subjugation of Women Became Gospel Truth. Grand Rapids, Michigan, Brazos Press, A Division Of Baker Publishing Group, 2021.
Brueggemann, Walter. Genesis. Westminster John Knox Press, 1982.
Bruesehoff, Jamie. Raising Kids beyond the Binary. Augsburg Fortress Publishers, 2023.
Carlson, Reed. “The Open God of the Sodom and Gomorrah Cycle.” Journal of Pentecostal Theology, vol. 21, no. 2, 2012, pp. 185–200, https://doi.org/10.1163/17455251-02102001. Accessed 10 Feb. 2024.
Coogan, Michael David. God and Sex : What the Bible Really Says. Grand Central Publishing, 2010.
“Ezekiel 16:48-50 CEB – – Bible Gateway.” Www.biblegateway.com, http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ezekiel+16%3A48-50&version=CEB. Accessed 10 Feb. 2024.
Fretheim, Terence E. Creation Untamed : The Bible, God, and Natural Disasters. Grand Rapids, Mich., Baker Academic, 2010.
“Genesis 1:27 CEB – – Bible Gateway.” Www.biblegateway.com, http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+1%3A27&version=CEB. Accessed 10 Feb. 2024.
“Genesis 13 – Common English Bible.” Bible Gateway, http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=genesis+13&version=CEB. Accessed 10 Feb. 2024.
“Genesis 18 – English Standard Version.” Bible Gateway, http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=genesis+18&version=ESV. Accessed 10 Feb. 2024.
Gnuse, Robert K. “Seven Gay Texts: Biblical Passages Used to Condemn Homosexuality.” Biblical Theology Bulletin: Journal of Bible and Culture, vol. 45, no. 2, 22 Apr. 2015, pp. 68–87, https://doi.org/10.1177/0146107915577097.
Grisanti, Michael A. “Homosexuality-an Abomination or Purely Irrelevant?: Evaluating Lgbt Claims in Light of the Old Testament (Gen. 18-19; Lev. 18:22; 20:13).” The Master’s Seminary Journal 28, no. 2 (2017): 115–33.
“Isaiah 1 – Common English Bible.” Bible Gateway, http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah+1&version=CEB. Accessed 10 Feb. 2024.
“Jude 1 CEB – – Bible Gateway.” Www.biblegateway.com, http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Jude%201&version=CEB. Accessed 10 Feb. 2024.
“Luke 10:8-12 CEB – – Bible Gateway.” Www.biblegateway.com, http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+10%3A8-12&version=CEB. Accessed 10 Feb. 2024.
Luther, Martin. Luther’s Works, Vol. 3: Lectures on Genesis: Chapters 15-20, ed. Jaroslav Jan Pelikan, Hilton C. Oswald, and Helmut T. Lehmann, vol. 3 (Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1999)
“Mapping Attacks on LGBTQ Rights in U.S. State Legislatures in 2024.” American Civil Liberties Union, http://www.aclu.org/legislative-attacks-on-lgbtq-rights-2024. Accessed 10 Feb. 2024.
Martin, Colby. UnClobber. Westminster John Knox Press, 28 Sept. 2016.
Martti Nissinen, and Kirsi Stjerna. Homoeroticism in the Biblical World a Historical Perspective. Minneapolis, Minn. Fortress Press, 1998.
“Matthew 10:14-15 CEB – – Bible Gateway.” Www.biblegateway.com, http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+10%3A14-15&version=CEB. Accessed 10 Feb. 2024.
McGee, Kate. “Texas Senate Approves Bill That Would Ban Diversity Programs in Public Universities.” The Texas Tribune, 20 Apr. 2023, http://www.texastribune.org/2023/04/19/texas-senate-dei-universities/. Accessed 10 Feb. 2024.
Peterson, Brian Neil. “The Sin of Sodom Revisited: Reading Genesis 19 in Light of Torah.” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 59, no. 1 (March 2016): 17–31.
Piper, John. “The Tornado, the Lutherans, and Homosexuality.” Desiring God, 19 Aug. 2009, www.desiringgod.org/articles/the-tornado-the-lutherans-and-homosexuality. Accessed 10 Feb. 2024.
“Revelation 11:18 NRSVUE – – Bible Gateway.” Www.biblegateway.com, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation+11%3A8&version=NRSVUE. Accessed 12 Feb. 2024.
“Sirach 16:8 CEB – – Bible Gateway.” Www.biblegateway.com, http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=sirach+16%3A8&version=CEB. Accessed 10 Feb. 2024.
Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back. Directed by Irvin Kirschner, 20th Century Fox Home Entertainment, 2013.
Trible, Phyllis. Texts of Terror. Fortress Press, 1984.
[1] “Mapping Attacks on LGBTQ Rights in U.S. State Legislatures in 2024,” accesses February 10, 2024, https://www.aclu.org/legislative-attacks-on-lgbtq-rights-2024
[2] “Kate McGee,” Texas Senate approves bill that would ban diversity programs in public universities. The Texas Tribune, accessed February 10, 2024, https://www.texastribune.org/2023/04/19/texas-senate-dei-universities/
[3] “John Piper,” The Tornado, the Lutherans, and Homosexuality, Desiring God, accessed February 10, 2024, https://www.desiringgod.org/articles/the-tornado-the-lutherans-and-homosexuality
[4] Terence E. Fretheim, Creation Untamed: The Bible and Natural Disasters (Theological Explorations for the Church Catholic; Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2010), 3
[5] Walter Brueggemann, Genesis (Interpretation A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching;Atlanta, GA: John Knox Press, 1982), 163
[6] Brian Neil Peterson, “The Sin of Sodom Revisited: Reading Genesis 19 in Light of Torah,” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 59, no. 1 (March 2016): 18.
[7] Michael A Grisanti, “Homosexuality-an Abomination or Purely Irrelevant?: Evaluating Lgbt Claims in Light of the Old Testament (Gen. 18-19; Lev. 18:22; 20:13),” The Master’s Seminary Journal 28, no. 2 (2017): 120.
[8] “They clearly indicate that they wish to rape the visitors (Judg 19:22; Gen 19:5). They wish to “know” the men. The same verb, yada‘, is also used in Genesis 4:1, 17, 25; 24:16; 38:26; Judges 11:39; 19:22, 25; 1 Samuel 1:19; 1 Kings 1:4 with the meaning of direct sexual activity. Though few examples out of the 943 usages of the verb refer to sexual activity, the contexts clearly indicate that this is the meaning in those instances where we translate it as such (contra several commentators who believe the Sodom crowd simply wished to talk with the angels).” Robert Karl Gnuse, “Seven Gay Texts: Biblical Passages Used to Condemn Homosexuality,” Biblical Theology Bulletin 45, no. 2 (May 2015): 71, https://doi.org/10.1177/0146107915577097.
[9] IBID 71.
[10] IBID 72.
[11] IBID 72
[12] IBID 72-73
[13] Bible Gateway, accessed February 10, 2024, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=genesis+13&version=CEB
[14] Brueggemann, Genesis 164
[15] Phyllis Trible, Texts of Terror: Literary- Feminist Readings of Biblical Narratives (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1984) 65
[16] Brueggemann 164
[17] Colby Martin, Un Clobber: Rethinking Our Misuse of the Bible on Homosexuality (Louisville, KY: John Knox Press, 2016) 54
[18] Brueggemann Genesis 164
[19] Bible Gateway, accessed February 10, 2024, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=genesis+18&version=ESV
[20] Martin, Un Clobber 54
[21] Martti Nissinen, Homoeroticism in the Biblical World: A Historical Perspective (trans. Kirsi Stjerna; Minneapolis, MN: Fortress, 1998), 48
[22] Gnuse, “Seven Gay Texts: Biblical Passages Used to Condemn Homosexuality,” 73
[23] Martin Luther, Luther’s Works, Vol. 3: Lectures on Genesis: Chapters 15-20, ed. Jaroslav Jan Pelikan, Hilton C. Oswald, and Helmut T. Lehmann, vol. 3 (Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1999), 252–253.
[24] Grisanti, Homosexuality an Abomination or Irrelevant, 121-122
[25] Bible Gateway, accessed February 10, 2024, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah+1&version=CEB
[26] Gnuse, “Seven Gay Texts: Biblical Passages Used to Condemn Homosexuality,” 74
[27] Bible Gateway, accessed February 10, 2024, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ezekiel+16%3A48-50&version=CEB
[28] Martin Luther, Luther’s Works, Vol. 3: Lectures on Genesis: Chapters 15-20, ed. Jaroslav Jan Pelikan, Hilton C. Oswald, and Helmut T. Lehmann, vol. 3 (Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1999), 248–249.
[29] Martin, Un Clobber, 58
[30] Bible Gateway, accessed February 10, 2024, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=sirach+16%3A8&version=CEB
[31] Martin, Un Clobber, 58
[32] Reed Carlson, “The Open God of the Sodom and Gomorrah Cycle,” Journal of Pentecostal Theology 21, no. 2 (2012): 190, https://doi.org/10.1163/17455251-02102001.
[33] Michael Coogan, God & Sex: What the Bible Really Says (New York: Hachette Book Group, 2011) 124-125
[34] Martin Luther, Luther’s Works, Vol. 3: Lectures on Genesis: Chapters 15-20, ed. Jaroslav Jan Pelikan, Hilton C. Oswald, and Helmut T. Lehmann, vol. 3 (Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1999), 255.
[35] Bible Gateway, accessed February 10, 2024, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+10%3A14-15&version=CEB
[36] Bible Gateway, accessed February 10, 2024, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+10%3A8-12&version=CEB
[37] Bible Gateway, accessed February 12, 2024, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation+11%3A8&version=NRSVUE
[38] Bible Gateway, accessed February 10, 2024, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Jude%201&version=CEB
[39] Coogan, God & Sex, 130.
[40] Brueggemann, Genesis, 163
[41] Martin Luther, Luther’s Works, Vol. 3: Lectures on Genesis: Chapters 15-20, ed. Jaroslav Jan Pelikan, Hilton C. Oswald, and Helmut T. Lehmann, vol. 3 (Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1999), 247.
[42] There are seven texts often cited by Christians to condemn homosexuality: Noah and Ham (Genesis 9:20-27), Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 19:1-11), Levitical laws condemning same-sex relationships (Leviticus 18:22, 20:13), two words in two Second Testament vice lists (1 Corinthians 6:9–10; 1 Timothy 1:10), and Paul’s letter to the Romans (Romans 1:26-27). Gnuse, “Seven Gay Texts” Abstract.
[43] Gnuse,“Seven Gay Texts”, 76
[44] Martin, Un Clobber, 58
[45] Coogan, God & Sex, 130.
[46] Fretheim, Creation Untamed, 36.
[47] Fretheim, Creation Untamed, 11.
[48] Fretheim, Creation Untamed, 56
[49] Kershner, Irvin, Director. 2013. Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back. 20th Century Fox Home Entertainment, 2013. Blu-Ray Disc.
[50] Martin, Un Clobber, 60.
[51] Beth Allison Barr, The Making of Biblical Womanhood: How the subjugation of Women Became Gospel Truth, (Grand Rapids, MI: Brazos Press, 2021) 47.
[52] Barr, The Making of Biblical Womanhood, 47.
[53] Bible Gateway, accessed February 10, 2024, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+1%3A27&version=CEB
[54] Jamie Bruesehoff, Raising Kids Beyond the Binary: Celebrating God’s Transgender and Gender-Diverse Children, (Minneapolis, MN, 2023), 131.
[55] Fretheim, Creation Untamed, 155.
aSacredRebel 