Chapter Two: Sodom Revisited

 

Introduction

In this chapter, the story of Sodom is recounted in order for us to come to a better understanding of what is represented by it as well as by other Biblical references to it and to the ill-chosen word sodomite(s).

 

Abraham Pleads for Sodom

Many of you are already familiar with the story of Sodom. Ideally, it would be helpful if you took a few minutes to reread the introduction to it in Genesis 18:20-33 before you continue. There, you will find that Abraham pleaded with the Lord God Jehovah (Yahweh) to spare Sodom on behalf of his nephew Lot. He asked the Lord to spare the city if fifty righteous men could be found in it. Let us assume that the "fifty" referred to men and did not include women, because, at that time, women held extremely subservient and subordinate roles, and, generally speaking, were not counted. So, for the sake of historical accuracy, we will say that only men were being numbered in the count. The Lord said to Abraham, "All right, if there are fifty righteous men within the city, then I'll spare the city." Abraham was delighted, of course, and quickly moved to ask the Lord to consider forty-five: "Will you spare the city if there are only forty-five righteous men?" And the Lord said, "Yes." So, Abraham continued to barter with God from forty-five to forty to thirty to twenty and, finally, to ten. Though the Lord's patience may have been tried, He ultimately answered, "For the sake of ten, I will not destroy Sodom." Thus, the deal that Abraham worked out with the Lord was that the Lord would spare the city if ten righteous men could be found within its walls.

At the time of Abraham's conversation with the Lord, righteousness was not yet contingent on adherence to the rules, regulations, and ordinances of Levitical law found in the Pentateuch or Torah (i.e., the first five books of the Bible), because Levitical law had not yet been laid down. To be sure, Levitical law was not put into effect until the time of Moses, more than four centuries after Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob:

The law, introduced 430 years later [i.e., after the length of time the Israelite people lived in Egypt], does not set aside the covenant previously established by God [with Abraham] and thus do away with the promise [God made to Abraham]. Galatians 3:17 NIV [brackets mine] (See also Genesis 15:1-21 and Exodus 12:40-41.)

Instead of adherence to Levitical law, righteousness from the time of Abraham until the time of Moses was based on faith in the Lord, as it is still based in these New Testament times. For the sake of clarity, faith is herewith defined as "believing in the Lord and acting unwaveringly on that belief." From Scripture, we know that faith is a gift from God, (Ephesians 2:8) that faith comes from hearing (or, reading) the good news of salvation through Jesus Christ, (Romans 10:17) that without faith it is impossible to please the Lord, (Hebrews 11:6) and that Jesus Christ is "the author and finisher [or, perfecter] of our faith." (Hebrews 12:2 KJV) [brackets mine] Scripture clearly teaches that Abraham had faith and that righteousness was imputed to him because of his faith. (Romans 4:20-22 and James 2:23) From our knowledge of what happened to the city, it should be clear that Sodom did not even have ten men who had faith or righteousness in the Lord.

 

The Biblical Story of Sodom

Upon reading Genesis 19:1-15, we learn that two angelic visitors came to Sodom and that Lot saw the visitors and beckoned them into his home, cautioning them not to spend the night in the town square. Why? Town squares then were much like inner downtown areas of many older cities today. They were dangerous and hostile, especially to strangers. Once the angels were inside Lot's home, it is recorded that the men of the city gathered together and called out, "Send the two visitors out that we may know them." (Genesis 19:5 KJV)

The Hebrew word from which the word "know" is derived is , or, Ya-daw'. "So that we may know them," then, really indicates to know carnally --- or, more specifically in this context, "so that we might rape them."

Naturally, Lot was horrified by this for a number of reasons, but especially because these visitors were guests within his own home. People at that time respected and honored the Law of Hammurabi, which dictated that, when you extended hospitality to visitors, you agreed to provide them protection even at the cost of your own life as well as the lives of your household. As a result, Lot proffered his daughters to the men of the city, but the men refused them. What happened next is that the angelic visitors struck the men blind, and Lot and his family immediately left the city. The city was then destroyed. Unfortunately, and inaccurately, the story of Sodom is often linked to modern-day homosexuality.

In order to better understand the events just described, we need to recognize that what was intended by the men of Sodom was not the desire for consensual intimacy but, rather, a brutal group rape. Fortunately, we are living in a time when we understand that rape is not so much a sexual act as it is a psychosexual action meant to demean and victimize others. Rape is based on the desire to dominate or domineer as well as to demonstrate one's seeming superiority over others (who are, generally speaking, physically weaker). Rape is intended by the criminal mind to draw attention to its victim's supposed gross vulnerabilities, infirmities or character defects at the same time that it draws attention away from the perpetrator's own feelings of inadequacy, inferiority, and lack of control. Rape is an act of violence, domination and rage, meant to victimize others in order to humiliate as well as control them. Again, the issue in the story of Sodom is not an issue of consensual sexual activity --- or, intimacy between two people --- but an issue of violence and victimization through group rape.

In addition to what I have just described relative to a contemporary understanding of rape, it is also essential for us to know that warring peoples (i.e., barbarians) throughout most of ancient history commonly raped conquered peoples, both women and men, in order to indicate that they (the conquerors) had complete statutory control over those vanquished as well as to warn other potential aggressors of their ferocity.

Many insights to the Genesis 19 account of Sodom are provided by a very similar set of circumstances within the Bible that begins in Judges 19:1 and ends at Judges 20:5. Although I will now share some of the parallels between the two accounts and draw some analogies, I would also encourage you to read them for yourself.

In the Judges 19 account, we find a Levite (a male of the tribe of Levi) traveling with his concubine. In today's language, and in this context, a concubine might be considered a married man's mistress or sexual partner who has no legal rights or spousal entitlements. As they are traveling, they happen upon the city of Gibeah, where they, too, were cautioned not to stay in the town square (like the angels who visited Sodom) by a resident of Gibeah, who says, "No, please do not stay in this dangerous place. Instead, come to my home, where I will provide for you and protect you." So the Levite and his concubine end up going home with the man of Gibeah. Then, interestingly, Scripture also reports that the men of Gibeah gathered around the residence, where the two guests (i.e., the Levite and his concubine) were staying, and demanded that the host send out the Levite in order that they might know him --- (Ya-daw') again --- or, as indicated previously, that they might rape him. In response, the man of Gibeah replies, "Oh, no, please do not do so; take, instead, his concubine and my daughter and use them accordingly, but do not do so to the male visitor." Eventually, they send out the Levite's concubine, and the men of the city end up raping her until she falls down dead at the doorstep of the home of the man from Gibeah.

The parallels that exist between Genesis 19:1-15 and Judges 19:1-20:5 are summarized in Figure Two.

 

Parallels between Genesis 19 and Judges 19

Sodom Account	Gibeah Account
two visitors or travelers:
two angels	a Levite and his concubine
cautioned not to spend the night in the town square:
by Lot	by an old man of Gibeah
demands of group rape by the men of the city
two women offered instead:
Lot's virgin daughters	the concubine and the old man's virgin daughter
Genesis 19:5: "know" (KJV) "have sex " (NIV)	Judges 19:28 "raped" (NIV)

Figure Two

 

A very important principle in understanding difficult passages in the Bible is expressed by the statement, "Scripture interprets Scripture." In other words, as we read and study a difficult passage in the Bible, we will eventually discover that there are helpful explanations as well as keys to unlock its truer meaning provided in other passages located elsewhere in the Bible. Consequently, it is very important that we all read and study the Word of God completely or we may fall into the same trap that many people fall into by stopping short of a full understanding and, then, sharing their imperfect knowledge of truth, or incomplete understanding, with others. However, if we study God's entire Word, the Holy Spirit will guide us to the whole truth that is written. Remember, there is great continuity in the Bible from beginning to end and we must hold the whole Bible while we simultaneously attend to its various parts in order to understand and apply the truth contained therein.

To be hermeneutically sound, an accurate interpretation of the Genesis 19 account must consider the Judges 19:1-20:5 account. To be sure, it is in Judges 20:5 that we are provided tremendous insight relative to the intentions of the men of Gibeah and, also, transferably so, to the intended rape of the two angelic visitors in Sodom. In retelling the story when he returned home, the Levite states:

During the night the men of Gibeah came after me and surrounded the house, intending to kill me. They raped my concubine, and she died. Judges 20:5 NIV

When the Levite himself describes what would have happened to him, he said, "The men of the city surrounded his residence, intending to kill me." The Levite's statement tells us that the men of Gibeah had fully intended to violently kill him by raping him, and that they had succeeded in doing this to his concubine is proof of their evil intention. Also, we need to understand that this intended raping of a man by men --- especially in the case of Judges, Chapters 19 --- was not by homosexuals: As a homosexual male, let me assure you that there are no homosexual males that I know of who are capable of raping a female. That the men of Gibeah would have stepped out of their heterosexual "nature" to victimize the Levite should be clear, much like modern day prisoners step outside of their heterosexual nature to rape other inmates. Additionally, what is also provided by the story of Gibeah is that the intended male-male group rape recounted in Genesis 19 was not an isolated activity specific to Sodom, but rather more widespread in the land.

Relative to the depiction of women in the Sodom and Gibeah stories, I think it important to emphasize that most ancient societies subscribed to the notion of female inferiority. Indeed, women were regarded no better than chattel. That the Bible recounts these stories does not mean that Scripture condones the condition of women during these times. Rather, the Bible here is retelling events that occurred and how they occurred. Remember to consider these stories in their historical and literary contexts and not in the context of current movements toward equality and fairness for women. Also, remember that most of the great strides that women have made in modern-day societies were really not made until the 20th century.

In comparison to murder, whether rape is the penultimate or ultimate act of contempt for another person you must decide for yourselves. Neither act takes into consideration the victim's desires or wants; and, both acts are intended to victimize and brutalize others. Regardless of your decision, it should be clear to you that the story of Sodom has nothing to do with loving, monogamous, committed relationships between consenting adults of the same sex.

 

Canaanite Pagan Deities

Genesis 10:19 indicates that "the borders of Canaan reached from Sidon toward Gerar as far as Gaza, and then toward Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah and Zeboim, as far as Lasha." Sodom and Gomorrah, then, were part of Canaan, the land that was eventually conquered by the children of Israel. And, not only were these cities part of Canaan geographically, they were part of Canaan culturally. This is especially germane to our story, since Canaanite fertility cults played a particularly important role in the day-to-day activities of the aboriginal peoples who inhabited this general region. Indeed, "Canaanite fertility cults, which were more lewd and influential than any other nature cults of the Middle East, made incursions into the austere, wilderness-born faith of Israel." (18)

In order to consider further the issue of Sodom, we need to cover some historical background relative to a few of the more popular fertility pagan deities that were worshipped during much of the two millennia preceding the birth of Christ.

Though there were other pagan deities worshipped in Canaan, the major fertility deities included the gods Molech and Baal and the goddess Ashtoreth (all summarized in Figure Three):

Molech . In Old Testament times, Molech was a male fertility god to whom devotees sacrificed the lives of their "seed," or children, by ritualistic burning. (See Leviticus 18:21 and 20:2-5.) The word Molech is derived from the word Melek, which means "king" in Hebrew:

The Lord said to Moses, "Say to the Israelites: 'Any Israelite or any alien living in Israel who gives any of his children to Molech must be put to death. The people of the community are to stone him. I will set my face against that man and I will cut him off from his people; for by giving his children to Molech, he has defiled my sanctuary and profaned my holy name. If the people of the community close their eyes when that man gives one of his children to Molech and they fail to put him to death, I will set my face against that man and his family and will cut off from their people both him and all who follow him in prostituting themselves to Molech. Leviticus 20:1-5 NIV

Baal. Often, the Baal-type god was specific for different city-states that existed within the Canaanite region. At times, Baal was used as an umbrella term for all "Baalim" (the Hebrew "-im" ending here denoting the masculine plural) or "Baal gods" of the region. Variant forms of the name Baal include "Bel," and "Beel." The name Baal, or one of its variant forms, was often incorporated into the names of various pagan people, like Jezebel, who was a devotee, or priestess, of Baal or her father, Ethbaal:

In the thirty-eighth year of Asa king of Judah, Ahab son of Omri became king of Israel, and he reigned in Samaria over Israel twenty-two years. Ahab son of Omri did more evil in the eyes of the Lord than any of those before him. He not only considered it trivial to commit the sins of Jeroboam son of Nebat, but he also married Jezebel daughter of Ethbaal king of the Sidonians, and began to serve Baal and worship him. He set up an altar for Baal in the temple of Baal that he built in Samaria. Ahab also made an Asherah pole and did more to provoke the Lord, the God of Israel, to anger than did all the kings of Israel before him. 1 Kings 16:29-33 NIV

It was not by accident that Jesus Christ referred to the Devil as "Beelzebub," (Matthew 12:26-27) which is derived from "Baal-Zebub, the god of Ekron," (2 Kings 1:2), whose literal meaning is "lord of the flies" --- an apt description for Satan, who, indeed, is behind every form of idolatrous worship. (Just as dung draws flies here on earth, so does Satan draw every unclean spirit, devil and demon in the world of the unseen.) Though Baal represents an evil thing, the word Baal itself is not evil; it simply means "lord" or "master" in Hebrew. However, "Baal" should not be confused with "Adonai" or "Shem" (i.e., "Hashem"), both of which are often used in place of the unpronounceable Hebrew tetragrammaton (i.e., the most holy name of God, or "YHWH") and often translated in the Old Testament with all upper case letters as "Lord."

Ashtoreth. The singular form for many feminine nouns in Hebrew ends in "-eth". For such nouns, it is the "-oth" ending that makes the plural form. In other words, although "Ashtaroth" looks similar to "Ashtoreth," the former is the plural form. And, just as there were many manifestations or representations of the god Baal, so, too, were there many representations of the goddess Ashtoreth. Ashtoreth is the very same goddess referred to in Babylonian and Assyrian times as "Ishtar" and "Ashtar" and in Greek and Roman times as "Astarte." We even find that the Scandinavian fertility goddess "Easter" is most likely derived, symbolically as well as etymologically, from "Astarte" (hence the fertility symbols of eggs and rabbits used at "Easter"). Finally, Ashtoreth, Ishtar, Ashtar, and Astarte represent the pagan goddess often referred to by the appellation "Queen of Heaven." (See Jeremiah 7:18; 44:17-19; and 44:25.) The "Asherah pole," mentioned in the previously quoted section in 1 Kings 16:33, was a huge pole, totem, or stone erected in honor of one of the manifestations of Ashtoreth and thought to be in the form of a phallus. (19)

The king [Josiah] also desecrated the high places that were east of Jerusalem on the south of the Hill of Corruption --- the ones Solomon king of Israel had built for Ashtoreth, the vile goddess of the Sidonians . . . Josiah smashed the sacred stones and cut down the Asherah poles and covered the sites with human bones [to indicate that these sites were vile and cursed]. 2 Kings 23:13-14 NIV [brackets mine]

And the children of Israel did evil again in the sight of the Lord, and served Baalim, and Ashtaroth. Judges 10:6 KJV

 

Common Fertility Gods and Goddesses

  

Figure Three

 

The pagan deities worshipped in Canaanite times were attributed special powers of fertility. In order to curry their favor and blessings of abundance upon crops, livestock and offspring, the ways that they were worshipped by their acolytes included orgies and partnered sexual activities as forms of sacrifice to each deity. I know it sounds absurd from the standpoint of contemporary society, in which very few people would confuse sexual activity with worship (with the exception of Satanists); but, the idea here is that the priests and priestesses who existed then were functionaries of these fertility cults. (And "fertility cults" is really a good descriptor for them.) In order to honor these pagan deities, worshippers either offered their seed (i.e., their "life") through masturbation or sacrifice of their children and/or committed sexual acts with the so-called priests and priestesses who worked either in the temples constructed to these false gods or in quarters adjacent to them. To be sure, there were many different cult priests and priestesses who functioned as temple prostitutes throughout antiquity in lands that bordered the Mediterranean Sea, including Canaan, Egypt, Greece and Rome.

Idolatry is what the children of Israel were faced with when they entered into the Promised Land. One of the reasons that the Lord God Almighty had told them to slay everyone and get rid of all of the people who were occupying the land of Canaan was to prevent the children of Israel from gradually being influenced by their idolatrous worship practices and, consequently, ending up estranged from the Lord God Almighty by adopting such profane behaviors. Hence, the following directive from the Lord:

You must destroy all the people the Lord your God gives over to you. Do not look on them with pity and do not serve their gods, for that will be a snare to you. Deuteronomy 7:16 NIV

The images of their gods you are to burn in the fire. Do not covet the silver and gold on them, and do not take it for yourselves, or you will be ensnared by it, for it is detestable ["abominable"] to the Lord your God. Do not bring a detestable thing [i.e., idol] into your house or you, like it, will be set apart for destruction. Utterly abhor and detest it, for it is set apart for destruction. Deuteronomy 7:25-27 NIV [brackets mine]

But if you turn away and ally yourselves with the survivors of these [pagan] nations that remain among you and if you intermarry with them and associate with them, then you may be sure that the Lord your God will no longer drive out these nations before you. Instead, they will become snares and traps for you, whips on your backs and thorns in your eyes, until you perish from this good land, which the Lord your God has given you. Joshua 23:12-13 NIV [brackets mine]

Unfortunately, in the end, "the Israelites lived among the Canaanites, Hittites, Amorites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites [ --- the very pagan peoples they were commanded to slay]. They took their daughters in marriage and gave their own daughters to their sons, and served their gods." (Judges 3:5-7 NIV) [brackets mine] Even King Solomon, son of King David, fell to such idolatrous worship:

King Solomon, however, loved many foreign women besides Pharaoh's daughter --- Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, Sidonians, and Hittites. They were from nations about which the Lord had told the Israelites, "You must not intermarry with them, because they will surely turn your hearts after their gods." Nevertheless, Solomon held fast to them in love. He had seven hundred wives of royal birth and three hundred concubines, and his wives led him astray. As Solomon grew old, his wives turned his heart after other gods, and his heart was not fully devoted to the Lord his God, as the heart of David his father had been. He followed Ashtoreth, the goddess of the Sidonians, and Molech, the detestable god of the Ammonites. So Solomon did evil in the eyes of the Lord; he did not follow the Lord completely, as David his father had done. On a hill east of Jerusalem, Solomon built a high place for Chemosh, the detestable god of Moab, and for Molech, the detestable god of the Ammonites. 1 Kings 11:1-7 NIV

Yes, the children of Israel were constantly tugged in the direction of idolatrous worship practices (i.e., always pulled in the direction of worshipping fertility gods and goddess and other pagan deities) until, finally, "God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity." (Romans 1:24 NIV)

 

The Role of Temple Cult Prostitution

This historical background concerning Canaanite pagan deities is of particular significance relative to the word sodomite. In the old King James Version of the Bible, first published in 1611, the word sodomite exists in its singular form only once, and that is in Deuteronomy 23:17; its plural form, sodomites, is found in four additional references, including 1 Kings 14:24, 15:12 and 22:46 as well as 2 Kings 23:7:

There shall be no whore of the daughters of Israel, nor a sodomite of the sons of Israel. Deuteronomy 23:17 KJV

And there were also sodomites in the land; and they did according to all the abominations of the nations which the Lord cast out before the children of Israel. 1 Kings 14:24 KJV

And he took away the sodomites out of the land, and removed all of the idols that his fathers had made. 1 Kings 15:12 KJV

And the remnant of the sodomites, which remained in the days of his father Asa, he took out of the land. 1 Kings 22:46 KJV

And he [King Josiah] brake down the houses of the sodomites, that were by the house of the Lord, where the women wove hangings for the grove [or, "Asherah"]. 2 Kings 23:7 KJV [brackets mine]

The combined five times that the singular and plural forms of the word sodomite(s) are used is particularly significant, because most people (even most people who are not Christian) view the words homosexual and sodomite as synonyms --- which is to say, that they are interchangeable.

In other words, even when most students of the Bible read the words sodomite or sodomites, they automatically assume that the meaning of the words is "homosexual" or "homosexuals." But, relative to their etymology, they are not interchangeable. In other words, relative to the Hebrew derivation from which sodomite(s) has been translated, a sodomite is not a homosexual.

If we go back to the original Hebrew, we find that the word sodomite has been translated from the Hebrew word (qdesh or qadesh, or what could be pronounced as "kaw-dash" or "kaw-dash-e"). You will notice that there are three different characters relative to this Hebrew word. In Hebrew, one reads from right to left, so the first character (called "kof") on the right roughly represents the "q," "k," or "g" sound, the second character (called "dalet") represents the "d" sound, and the third character (called "shin") represents the "sh" sound (hence "qadesh" or "kawdeshe" or "gadeshe"). The plural of the masculine form ("qadesh") is "qadeshim," which, of course, refers to more than one "sodomite." Female counterparts are "qadeshah" and "qadashoth," the "-oth" ending here indicating the feminine plural form (just as "Ashtaroth" is the plural form of "Ashtoreth.")

Now, the word qadesh itself is not an evil word --- just like the Hebrew word Baal is not a "evil" word --- but it represents an evil thing. Actually, in contexts different from that currently considered, the word qadesh simply means "sacred, "set apart," "consecrated," or "holy." However, the true Hebrew meaning of "sodomite" in these particular literary contexts (i.e., the indicated five verses in which sodomite/s is found) refers to a male consecrated to idolatrous worship through sacrificial prostitution. In Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, we find that "qadesh" or "kawdashe" has a significantly different meaning from "homosexual." Basically, what it means in this context is "a quasi-sacred person --- that is, technically, a male devotee by prostitution to licentious idolatry." (20) In this case, the male devotee was devoted in idolatrous worship to one of the Canaanite fertility deities (including Molech, Baal, and Ashtoreth).

So, sodomite is an unfortunate word choice representing qadesh in the old Kings James Version of the Bible for two reasons: 1) It does not represent "someone from Sodom;" and, 2) it is erroneously associated with modern-day homosexuals. Actually, by extension, it could mean "someone from Sodom" from the standpoint of licentious idolatry and the "priestly" male prostitutes who served pagan deities and who certainly lived in the Canaanite cities of Sodom and Gomorrah. But, that is not what most people think of when they hear or read the word sodomite; they do not understand that the original Hebrew term means "male temple cult prostitute" and not "homosexual." Most Bible scholars are knowledgeable of what qadesh means. Yet, despite its true meaning, we find that in all five citations in the King James Version of the Bible, the translated form is "sodomite" or "sodomites" rather than "male temple cult prostitute(s)." Some renderings of qadesh(im) in other translations and paraphrases are even worse.

In the Modern Language Version of the Bible, we find that qadesh in Deuteronomy 23:17 is translated as "temple prostitute," which is certainly more accurate than "sodomite," but, then, the plural form for the other four verses is translated only as "male prostitutes." This is unfortunate, since "male prostitutes" is just not accurate enough. To be sure, there are male prostitutes who exist in every major city in the United States, but that does not mean that they are idolaters to the extent that they are involved in temple cult prostitution. Though "male prostitutes" is closer to the true meaning than "sodomites," it still does not accurately represent the meaning intended in the original Hebrew.

If we consider the New International Version of the Bible, "shrine prostitute" is used in place of "sodomite" and, in the majority of the verses that use the plural form, "male shrine prostitutes" is used in place of "sodomites." Although this rendering is accurate, the preferred translation relative to clarity concerning this particular issue (i.e., the issue of temple cult prostitution versus homosexuality) happens to be in the Revised Standard Version of the Bible. In the Revised Standard Version of the Bible, the majority of the references is to "male cult prostitutes."

Unfortunately, the New King James Version of the Bible does not do a very good job. It translates "qadesh(im)" as "perverted person(s);" so, if readers are already biased (i.e., believing that homosexuals are perverted), there would be no reason for them to question the accuracy of the New King James Version relative to this particular issue.

The absolute worst rendering is in the Living Bible, which is very popular. Many of you may know, or recall, that the Living Bible is not a word-for-word translation of the Bible but, rather, a paraphrase. It is an attempt to make things more understandable in terms of common language. The writers took a fair measure of liberty from the original in order to contemporize the language in an attempt to more easily engage its readers. For example, the phrase in 1 Samuel 25:22 that reads ". . . pisseth against the wall" in the King James Version is rendered ". . . went to the bathroom" in the Living Bible. Obviously "bathrooms" as we know them today did not exist back then, but that is the rendering used, since most people are familiar with the expression "go (or went) to the bathroom."

Compare Deuteronomy 23:17-18 in the Revised Standard Version with that in the Living Bible:

There shall be no cult prostitute of the daughters of Israel, neither shall there be a cult prostitute of the sons of Israel. You shall not bring the hire of a harlot, or the wages of a dog, into the house of the Lord your God in payment for any vow; for both of these are an abomination to the Lord your God. Deuteronomy 23:17-18 RS

No prostitutes are permitted in Israel, either men or women; you must not bring the earnings of a prostitute or a homosexual, for both are detestable to the Lord your God. Deuteronomy 23:17-18 LB

The writers of the Living Bible have promoted the error that all homosexuals are prostitutes. It would be just as inaccurate for us to conclude that, because we have seen female heterosexual prostitutes, this must mean that all female heterosexuals are prostitutes. How unfair that would be!

Now compare 1 Kings 14:24 in the Revised Standard Version with that in the Living Bible:

And there were also male cult prostitutes in the land. They did according to the abominations of the nations which the Lord drove out before the people of Israel. 1 Kings 14:24 RS

There was homosexuality throughout the land, and the people of Judah became as depraved as the heathen nations which the Lord drove out to make room for His people. 1 Kings 14:24-25 LB

If you are an average heterosexual Christian --- or homosexual Christian, for that matter --- and, if you are studying the Bible, there would be no reason for you to scrutinize every single word and wonder, "Did the translators or paraphrasers get this particular word or phrase right?" Or, if you are not doing analytical Bible study, and you come across the rendering in the Living Bible that states, "There was homosexuality throughout the land," (I Kings 14:24) you are not going to pause and say, "Maybe this is inaccurate; maybe there really wasn't homosexuality in the land." To be sure, the average reader generally gives credence to what he or she is reading, especially when it is in the Bible! This misunderstanding is especially reinforced if you regularly listen to a pastor or televangelist who harps on how immoral and wrong homosexuality is. All of this just ends up further supporting the average reader's idea that the Bible must be speaking about those perverted people known as homosexuals and that "abominations" refers to the sexual acts in which they engage.

When many heterosexuals begin to focus on intimate acts between two homosexuals, they think of the imagined intimacies as the "detestable practices," "abhorrences," or "abominations" referred to in the various translations of 1 Kings 14:24. Actually, such imaginings provide no clue about the companionship and sharing that might exist between two people of the same sex in a committed, monogamous relationship. To be sure, there is a reason why intimate acts are called "intimate." They are supposed to remain private.

Perhaps the most damning of all detestable practices, or abominations, adopted by the children of Israel relative to male temple cult prostitution is that indicated in 2 Kings 23:7:

He [King Josiah] tore down the houses of the male prostitutes in the area of the house of the Lord, where the women wove robes for the shame image. 2 Kings 23:7 ML

He [King Josiah] also tore down the quarters of the male shrine prostitutes, which were in the temple of the Lord and where women did weaving for the Asherah. 2 Kings 23:7 NIV

And he [King Josiah] broke down the houses of the male cult prostitutes which were in the house of the Lord, where the women wove hangings for the Asherah. 2 Kings 23:7 RS

Then he [King Josiah] tore down the ritual booths of the perverted persons that were in the house of the Lord, where the women wove hangings for the wooden image. 2 Kings 23:7 NKJV

He [King Josiah] also tore down the houses of male prostitution around the Temple, where the women wove robes for the Asherah-idol. 2 Kings 23:7 LB

It is especially clear in the Revised Standard Version that the idol, or Asherah, was "in the house of the Lord" (i.e., the Jerusalem Temple built by Solomon for Yahweh). The image was indeed detestable, since it was a pole, or totem, carved in the shape of a giant phallus to honor the goddess Ashtoreth! It was this image for which the women wove "hangings" or "robes" (which may have even been pulled down to represent the foreskin being pulled back during a penile erection).

Though you may think it absolutely unbelievable that the form of the penis was worshipped, all you have to do is wander past the display cases in most museums that house antiquities, and take a look at the artifacts that have survived from both ancient Greek and Roman societies, and from many earlier cultures and civilizations as well, and you will find that, in the majority of these pagan societies, the penis was worshipped. I was fortunate to have lived in Chicago at the time that the Pompeii exhibit was brought to that city. As I looked at the artifacts from Pompeii, it was absolutely amazing to me that a major focus was on external genitals, specifically the phallus. For example, an ashtray or little decorative piece that might have been hanging from someone's wall would have multiple phallic symbols dangling from it! Truly, it was a decadent, depraved, immoral society that crept into the consciousness of the children of Israel and encroached upon their worship of the Lord God Almighty, even going so far as to introduce phallus worship (vis-ˆ-vis the worship of the Asherah) within the temple of the Lord God Almighty in Jerusalem!

In summary, the pagan deities that were worshipped (Molech, Baal, and Ashtoreth) had significant impact not only on the Canaanite people but also on the children of Israel. Though reforms were introduced at various times, they did not seem to do a lot of good relative to keeping the children of Israel from often departing from their faith in Yahweh. However, it should be noted that after their exile due to their Babylonian captivity, the remnant of Jews who returned to the Promised Land never again returned to idolatry. The Book of Maccabees relates how some even preferred martyrdom rather than eating ceremonially unclean food. It is their renewed commitment to Yahweh and resolve to eschew idolatry that helps us to understand the psychological profile of 1st century Jews as well as the historical contexts for the Apostle Paul's horror and anger concerning sexual idolatry, which he witnessed during his own lifetime and reacted to in his various epistles.

 

"Dogs" are Male Cult Prostitutes, Not Homosexuals

Recently (1990), David H. Stern translated the New Testament from the original Greek in an attempt to bring out its Jewishness linguistically, culturally, religiously and theologically. For the most part, he did an excellent job in producing a work most valuable for students of the New Testament who need to better recognize its Jewish roots. I write, "for the most part," because of his mistranslation of the word "dogs" from the following verse:

Outside are the dogs, those who practice magic arts, the sexually immoral, the murderers, the idolaters and everyone who loves and practices falsehood. Revelation 22:15 NIV

Though the original Greek kuneV (kunes) in Revelation 22:15 clearly means "hounds" or "dogs," Stern, who is a Messianic Jew, renders it as follows:

Outside are the homosexuals, those who misuse drugs in connection with the occult, the sexually immoral, murderers, idol worshippers, and everyone who loves and practices falsehood. Revelation 22:15 JNT (21)

To be sure, there is a basis for connecting "dogs" to sexual acts in the Old Testament as recorded in Deuteronomy, the fifth book of Moses:

There shall be no cult prostitute [qadeshah] of the daughters of Israel, neither shall there be a cult prostitute [qadesh] of the sons of Israel. You shall not bring the hire of a harlot [zonah] or the wages of a dog [kelev] into the house of the Lord your God in payment for any vow; for both of these are an abomination [toevat] unto the Lord your God. Deuteronomy 23:17-18 RS [brackets mine]

Clearly, both of the previously-quoted verses are referring to temple cult prostitutes not homosexuals. The interchangeability of male temple cult prostitutes and "dogs" has been noted by David F. Greenberg in his book The Construction of Homosexuality:

The words zonah and qadeshah were sometimes used interchangeably, as in the story of Judah and Tamar [Genesis 38:15,24]. The parallel construction in Deuteronomy [23:18-19] identifies qadesh and kelev as a male counterpart. (22)  [brackets mine]

Further, Greenberg states:

A Phoenician inscription on Cyprus dating from the fourth century B.C., referring to a category of temple personnel who played a role in the sacred service of Astarte, identifies the kelev ["dog"] as a religious functionary. (23)

Revelation 22:15 in toto describes pseudo-sacred cultic behaviors and delineates who is excluded from the heavenly city known as New Jerusalem. That dogs are excluded from this holy city is not referring to either canines or homosexuals but to male temple cult prostitutes, who, unmistakably, serve Satan rather than Yahweh.

Interestingly, when Jesus spoke of "dogs," (Matthew 15:26) he was referring to the Gentiles of his day, most of whom were idolaters and pagans.

 

Additional Biblical References to Sodom

In order to make our study of the biblical use of the word Sodom complete, let us turn to the four additional times that Sodom is referred to in the Old Testament.

In Isaiah 1:10-11, Israel's degenerate condition is figuratively compared to Sodom and Gomorrah:

Hear the word of the Lord, you rulers of Sodom; listen to the law of our God, you people of Gomorrah! "The multitude of your sacrifices-- what are they to me?" says the Lord. "I have more than enough of burnt offerings, of rams and the fat of fattened animals; I have no pleasure in the blood of bulls and lambs and goats." Isaiah 1:10-11 NIV

In Isaiah 3:8-9, the sinful conditions of both Judah and Jerusalem are compared to Sodom. The Lord God Almighty is not speaking of the sins of Sodom but of the sins of Jerusalem and Judah:

Jerusalem staggers, Judah is falling; their words and deeds are against the LORD, defying His glorious presence. The look on their faces testifies against them; they parade their sin like Sodom; they do not hide it. Woe to them! They have brought disaster upon themselves. Isaiah 3:8-9 NIV

Jeremiah, 23:13-14 specifically refers to how the children of Israel were lead astray by followers of Baal. Keep in mind as you read the word adultery in the following passage that it is referring to idolatrous worship practices. Here, also, is noted the spiritual wickedness of false prophets, who are detestable, abhorrent and abominable to the Lord God Almighty (as they should be, for He is Holy!):

Among the prophets of Samaria I saw this repulsive thing: They prophesied by Baal and led my people Israel astray. And among the prophets of Jerusalem I have seen something horrible: They commit adultery and live a lie. They strengthen the hands of evildoers, so that no one turns from his wickedness. They are all like Sodom to me; the people of Jerusalem are like Gomorrah. Jeremiah 23:13-14 NIV

In Ezekiel 16:47-50, the Lord specifically identifies the sin of Sodom and her "daughters" (i.e., other adjacent urban areas that sprang from her). The phrase "detestable things" in the passage should not trigger "homosexual acts" within your mind unless your mind is playing recordings from old mental tapes. In other words, if you go to the Bible already with the preconceived notion that God is referring to homosexuals as inhabitants of the city of Sodom, then you would naturally interpret the "detestable things" to be homosexual acts. However, I would submit to you that what was detestable were the pagan orgies and ritualistic "consecrated" sexual acts that occurred within the temples erected to honor Baal, Ashtoreth, and Molech --- which included sexual acts with both male and female temple prostitutes as well as with animals. (Yes, bestiality occurred within the pagan temples and their related houses of cult prostitution, too.):

You not only walked in their ways and copied their detestable practices, but in all your ways you soon became more depraved than they. "As surely as I live," declares the Sovereign Lord, "your sister Sodom and her daughters never did what you and your daughters have done. 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. Ezekiel 16:47-50 NIV

Naturally, we have a tendency to interpret things from a modern-day standpoint. Because we do not see such pagan activities, and we do not have a temple built to Molech or Baal or Ashtoreth, or to any of the other deities that we find later in ancient Greek and Roman times, we distance ourselves from sex in the context of pagan worship. Most people today cannot even imagine it; they do not really have a good sense of what it meant, or means, to worship fertility gods and goddesses, or what religious practices were actually involved.

As stated previously, God is against idolatry, for, in the eyes of the Lord, idolatry is spiritual adultery. Another way to put it is that, if someone is an idolater, he or she is worshipping for God what is not God. Now, we understand today that idolatry goes well beyond worshipping graven images, statues, poles, totems and icons. We understand that it can also be the worship or practice of materialism and other such vain philosophies, which, generally speaking, are not identified by particular figurines, statues or pictures. Yes, God hates idolatry. Idolatry is abominable to Him:

And God spoke all these words: "I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery. You shall have no other gods before me. You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me." Exodus 20:1-5 NIV

Idolatry --- taken together with the detestable things that people did, and still do in different parts of the world today (i.e., integrating sexual activities into the worship of false gods and goddesses) --- is what God hates.

As one studies the entirety of Scripture, it becomes increasingly obvious that Bible verses commonly used to clobber homosexuals are not speaking about homosexuals but about "qadeshim." Remember, "qadeshim" are not homosexuals but temple cult prostitutes. If Martin Luther understood that qadeshim should be translated as "Tempelhurer" (i.e., "male temple whores"), then why has that meaning been lost to contemporary society? Why is qadeshim now translated "homosexuals?" Please tell my homosexual brothers and sisters --- who have been persecuted by bullies, despised by those who fear what is different, condemned by society, rejected by family members, excommunicated from churches and even killed by homophobes because of their homosexuality --- why that is.

Interestingly, when we come to passages in the New Testament in which Christ Jesus refers to Sodom, we find that he refers to it in the context of hospitality to the gospel (i.e., receptivity to the good news of salvation through Jesus). That is interesting, especially since we find there was also an issue of hospitality in the original story of Sodom. The Messiah told his itinerant disciples that, if the cities they would visit were not hospitable to the message of salvation, then it would be more bearable for Sodom on the day of judgment. In other words, God's wrath will visit the cities that have rejected His gospel to an even greater extent than that visited upon Sodom! Jesus said:

I tell you the truth, it will be more bearable for Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town. Matthew 10:15 NIV

And you, Capernaum, will you be lifted up to the skies? No, you will go down to the depths. If the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Sodom, it would have remained to this day. But I tell you that it will be more bearable for Sodom on the day of judgment than for you. Matthew 11:23-24 NIV

As part of the Great Commission, Jesus tells his followers that we are to "go," "preach," "make disciples," "teach," and "baptize in his name." However, He also tells us what to do when we have done our part and the hearers of the gospel reject its message:

And if any place will not welcome you, shake the dust off your feet when you leave, as a testimony against them. Mark 6:11 NIV

Those of us who carry a message that God has asked us to deliver should not take it personally if we are rejected. Rather, we should remember what the Lord said to Samuel: "'They have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me.'" (1 Samuel 8:7 KJV)

The Lord Jesus Christ, when referring to Sodom, did so relative to the hospitality of cities concerning the Gospel. So, basically, our Lord was saying that if the inhabitants of a city are inhospitable to the gospel message, then leave the city and it will be far worse for them than it was for Sodom. In other words, when the two types of inhospitality are compared, it will be worse to be judged inhospitable to the evangel rather than being judged inhospitable to angels.

By the way, Jesus nowhere in the Bible addresses the issue of homosexuality. Nowhere. He was as silent about it as he was about electricity. Indeed, our Lord was, and is, aware of everything, because He is omniscient. He was certainly aware that electricity would develop, but He made no comment about it. And, without a doubt, He was aware that there would be homosexuals as we know them today, but He made no direct comment about them. (Though we will see in Chapter Three how he may have made an indirect comment about homosexuals when he referred to "eunuchs.")

 

"Sodomites" in the New Testament

In the King James Version of the Bible, the word sodomite(s) is not used in the New Testament. In the New King James Version, however, it is used to translate the Greek word arsenokoitai

(arsenokoitai) regarding those who will not inherit the kingdom of God:

Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 NKJV

Upon first glance, it would appear that there is some redundancy in the previously-quoted passage (i.e., "homosexuals" and "sodomites"). The translations of the two words here is somewhat puzzling, especially when homosexuals and sodomites are supposed to be the same thing! Actually, there is no redundancy in the Greek, just inconsistency and inaccuracy in the English translations of the two words malakoi (translated in the NKJV as "homosexuals") and arsenokoitai (translated in the NKJV as "sodomites").

We find that these two important words used in 1 Corinthians 6:9 are often inaccurately rendered by Bible translators, who really do not know exactly what to do with them. This inability to accurately translate them is underscored by the variety of ways in which each word has been rendered (or avoided) in various versions and paraphrases of the Bible:

Malakoi

For example, in the New International Version of the Bible, the Greek work malakoi (malakoi) is interpreted as "male prostitutes." In the Modern Language Version, both malakoi and arsenokoitai are rendered together as "partakers in homosexuality." The Revised Standard translates malakoi as "sexual perverts," and the Living Bible, as you might guess, combines both words in the appellation "homosexuals."

In the King James Version of the Bible, malakoi is translated as "effeminate." As we relate "effeminate" to modern English, it is extremely easy for many people, especially those who think that the average profile for homosexual males includes so-called feminine mannerisms, to assume that the word is referring to gay males. To be sure, this is stereotypic and not representative of all male homosexuals (and certainly not the majority of male homosexuals with whom I have been acquainted over the years).

Since the word malakoi --- as we relate it to various modern English word forms --- has a portion in common with the root of the English word malleable, which refers to something "soft" or "pliable," some translators would prefer to render the word malakoi as "soft ones," which, in fact, is its true literal meaning. However, because the literal meaning of malakoi does not fit exactly within the literary context of 1 Corinthians 6:9, it most likely had another connotation in the colloquial speech of St. Paul's day. This is especially likely, since the Apostle Paul wrote his letters in Koine (i.e., common) Greek rather than classical Greek.

There are those who would argue that malakoi, by extension, might be referring to "lazy people," "indolent ones," or "the pampered rich" --- which message would not be so far afield from this statement by Christ Jesus:

I tell you the truth, it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God. Matthew 19:23-24 NIV

However, "malakoi" referring to the pampered rich is really quite a stretch here. Since the word is sandwiched between sexual sins in 1 Corinthians 6:9, it is probably referring to moral weakness or a particular type of immorality.

In The Zondervan Parallel New Testament in Greek and English, the word malakoi has been translated as "voluptuous persons." (24) Who are voluptuous persons? Voluptuous persons are those who have a "come-hither" look --- which is to say, those who are trying to sell their "wares," or sexual favors. Consequently, some scholars might prefer to translate malakoi as "abusers of themselves as women" (i.e., persons deceptively presenting themselves as women though they are not), which, in a way, would be most revealing. To be sure, such a perspective is in agreement with that of Robin Scroggs, (25) who argues that, by the time of the Apostle Paul, the word malakoi had assumed a pejorative slang meaning in reference to young call boys or youths who actively sought sexual encounters with men for money, something considered distasteful in both Greek and Roman societies. (Even in accepted pederastic relationships, the youth was to appear reluctant or resistant to the interests of the older man --- not eager. And never for money!)

Personally, I think that a most substantive clue for the meaning of malakoi can be found in Saint Jerome's Latin Vulgate version of the Bible, published in 405 AD. In order to translate the Hebrew Old Testament and Greek New Testament into Latin, Saint Jerome (c. 345 - 420 AD) had to be a scholar of Hebrew, Greek and Latin. What he tried to do was translate the Old Testament Hebrew and the New Testament Greek into an overall Latin version that could be used within the developing church. Interestingly, Saint Jerome chose to translate qadeshim in the Old Testament using the Latin word effeminati. Saint Jerome understood that effeminati were not just people who were "effeminate," but people who donned female clothing in order to serve as male transvestite temple cult prostitutes --- who were an integral part of cult prostitution in many Canaanite religions as well as many Greek and Roman religions (some of the latter having been derived from the former). Further, in place of the Greek word malakoi, Saint Jerome used a Latin synonym to effeminati --- which is to say, molles. Thus, like the "effeminati, the "molles" (Latin) or "malakoi" (Greek) are also transvestite temple cult prostitutes. (This also helps to explain the King James scholars' choice of "effeminate" in 1611.) To be sure, malakoi and molles are based on the same etymologic root.

All things taken together, I believe that the most accurate rendering of malakoi is "male transvestite temple cult prostitutes!" David Greenberg states:

More plausibly, the term in this context [1 Corinthians 6:9] referred to . . . cult prostitutes. Corinth and Ephesus, where Timothy was stationed, were strongholds of the Mother Goddess and had long-established religious prostitution. (26) [brackets mine]

Many fertility Mother-Goddess cults existed in Ancient Greek and Roman societies. Those attended by transvestite and/or castrated male priests who engaged in same-sex ritualistic practices included cults devoted to Cybele, Aphrodite, Hekate, Artemis, Magna Mater, Ma, Anaitis, and Astarte. (27) (Again, "Astarte" is essentially the same goddess known as "Ashtoreth" in the Old Testament.) Indeed, these perverted "shriners" were very common during the Apostle Paul's lifetime.

Arsenokoitai

Though malakoi is only used once in the New Testament, arsenokoitai is used twice. In addition to its use in 1 Corinthians 6:9, it is also used in 1 Timothy 1:10, where it, too, is translated as "sodomites" in the New King James Version of the Bible:

. . . the [Levitical] law is not made for a righteous person, but for the lawless and insubordinate, for the ungodly and for sinners, for the unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, for fornicators, for sodomites, for kidnappers, for liars, for perjurers, and if there is any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine. 1 Timothy 1:9-10 NKJV [brackets mine]

Because arsenokoitai is not a classical Greek word, it has no clearly translatable modern-day meaning. Either the Apostle Paul coined the word himself or it had already been coined by the society of Paul's day. Simply stated, there is no extant literature before the Apostle Paul that contains this word. (28)

Koine Greek was the language of the streets, or conventional vernacular, that the Apostle Paul used to write and/or dictate his now-famous letters to the Christian peoples of his day. Rather than the language of the more literate elements of ancient society, Koine Greek is the language that the Apostle Paul used to try to reach the common person. Unfortunately, little has survived that provides a clear understanding of the word arsenokoitai. Indeed, the exact meaning of this word is unknown today. This helps to account for the wide range of interpretations provided by various Bible scholars.

Arsenokoitai can be divided into two portions: the base word koitai, referring to active sexual partners who provide sexual service, and the prefix arseno, which simply means "male." It is unclear if the arseno prefix is used here in a qualifying or objective sense (i.e., that those who were providing the sexual service were themselves male or that they were servicing males). This uncertainty is especially germane, since in ancient societies that predate Greece and Rome, there existed male temple cult prostitutes who sexually serviced both male and female temple-worshippers that participated in their pagan rituals.

Relative to this issue, John Boswell states:

In no [Greek] words coined and generally written with the form "arseno-" is the prefix demonstrably objective . . . [brackets mine]

"Arsenokoitai," then, means male sexual agents, i.e., active male prostitutes, who were common throughout the Hellenistic world in the time of Paul. That such a designation existed in the Latin of the time is well known: [these were] male prostitutes capable of the active role with either men or women. [brackets mine]

"Arsenokoitai" was the most explicit word available to Paul for a male prostitute. (29)

Some have argued that the Apostle Paul or the Hellenistic Jewish society of his day coined arsenokoitai from the Septuagint Greek translation of Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13, where the uncompounded Greek phrase arsenoV koithn (arsenos koitun) is used to translate the original Hebrew of "lying with a male," which would help show Paul's intended meaning, since, as I will demonstrate in Chapter Three, the historical and literary contexts for Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 are idolatrous and prostitutional in nature.

For arsenokoitai, St. Jerome used "masculorum concubitores." "Concubitor" denotes an active sexual partner, just as "concubine" denotes its female passive counterpart. In the case of "concubitor" or "concubine," the implication is a sexual partner who has been bought and paid for either on a one-time basis or for a longer period of time. Thus, St. Jerome's Latin rendering could be translated "the male prostitutor of men." This is certainly in keeping with the types of male-male sex with which the Apostle Paul was familiar.

The Apostle Paul was not exposed to homosexuals who pursue committed monogamous relationships. He was not writing about Christian homosexuals. He simply did not know any.  In the final analysis, the arsenokoitai are most probably male temple cult prostitutes who sexually serviced temple-worshippers, both male and female alike, who participated in pagan fertility rituals.

The types of male-male sexual relationships that were common in ancient Greece and Rome are summarized in the Figure Four, which follows:

 

Types of Male-Male Sex Common in the Apostle Paul's Day

Figure Four

 

To be sure, there were other Greek words that the Apostle Paul could have used, whose meanings today would be much clearer than malakoi and arsenokoitai. For example, philerastes and pederastes constitute a Greek word pair that indicated transgenerational males who were involved in same-sex sexual activities. "Transgenerational" here refers to the relationship between an older soldier and/or mentor and a younger male in his mid-teens to early twenties, whose temporary sexual pairing was really quite common in both ancient Greek and Roman societies. In ancient Greece, there was even a god of such unions, called "Eros." Regardless, malakoi and arsenokoitai do not mean "modern-day homosexuals." Modern-day homosexuals did not exist at the time that Paul lived. Quite paradoxically, committed monogamous relationships between members of the same sex, who were of the same social standing and roughly the same age, were derided in both ancient Greek and Roman societies. They were to be avoided, because they suggested weakness in those who might so bond.

Is male temple cult prostitution abominable to the Lord God Almighty? Of course it is! To be sure, in some ways, it is even worse than simple prostitution, since it was not done just for money or to satisfy an unhealthy sexual addiction but in an attempt to bring "honor" and so-called praise to false deities (as part of Satan's attempt to rob the Creator of His glory and praise). Chapter One of the Apostle Paul's Epistle to the Romans helps make this recurring magnetic pull toward pagan cultism crystal clear, since it speaks of the tendency of worshippers to turn from God toward idolatry.

 

Paul's Letter to the Romans

Let us now consider Romans 1:18-34, paying particular attention to the phrases that I have either underlined or made bold for emphasis:

{18} The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, {19} since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. {20} For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities -- his eternal power and divine nature -- have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse. {21} For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. {22} Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools {23} and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles. {24} Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. {25} They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshipped and served created things rather than the Creator --- who is forever praised. Amen. {26} Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. {27} In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion. {28} Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved [or, reprobate] mind, to do what ought not to be done. {29} They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, {30} slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; {31} they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless. {32} Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them. Romans 1:18-32 NIV [brackets mine]

It should be clear from the context that the people in question here are those who turned from worshipping the one true and only real God, whom they had already come to know (i.e., "although they knew God . . . they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God"), and that these same people turned toward worshipping pagan idols (i.e., "images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles"). That these idolatrous people were "reprobate" means that they had failed the test of remaining true to God. And it was not that they had been worshipping God only as the "unknown God," whom Paul had spoken of in his address to the people of Athens (Acts 17:23). No, in Chapter One of his epistle to the Romans, the Apostle Paul describes people who had come to know God but refused to live their lives in consecration to Him; as a result, they were "illegitimate children and not true sons" (Hebrews 12:8).

In verses 22 through 26 are found at least three pairs of parallel constructions all referring to people who exchanged one thing for another: 1) verse 24 describes people who exchanged the glory of God for graven images; 2) verse 25 describes people who exchanged the truth of God for a lie; and, 3) verse 26 describes people who exchanged "natural" relations for "unnatural" ones. All three verses are describing the same people. In other words, the Apostle Paul is not speaking of homosexuals who seek to live their lives in consecrated monogamous relationships; rather, he is describing people who were involved in sexual activity within the context of pagan idolatry. Regarding verses 24, 26, and 27, the Life Application Bible Commentary: Romans helps educate us relative to the context of the sexual impurity addressed:

Here [in verse 24] Paul introduces the subject of sexual impurity. He returns to it in verses 26 and 27. The context indicates that he is referring in part to cultic prostitution and the fertility cults that made use of temple prostitutes in their rites. . . . Paul, writing from Corinth, the home of the temple of Aphrodite, was surrounded by evidences of the horrible evil of such belief (see also 1 Corinthians 6:9-10; 2 Corinthians 12:21). (30)

So, the "they," "them," and "their" of Romans 18 through 34 refers to idolaters --- specifically, those who reverted back to idolatry after having come to know the one true and only real God. Again, what kind of idolaters, and what kind of idolatry existed during Paul's time? The same kind that existed during Canaanite times, where worship of fertility gods and goddesses was the order of the day.

In his History of Orgies, Burgo Partridge details the sado-masochistic orgiastic debaucheries that occurred throughout the Roman empire, where participants regularly reveled in animal instincts in frenzied group sexual activities:

The worship of Cybele, besides involving self-castration in a state of frenzy, and dedication of the severed organs to the goddess, had also, as an important part of the ritual, a baptism by blood which came, appropriately enough, from a bull or ram. Banquets were given in honour of this goddess at private houses, but the actual consummation of her worship appears to have been performed by the priests alone. According to Apuleius, the priests of Cybele also indulged in [same-sex] practices with strong young peasants. (31)

Partridge gives example after example of this utterly contemptible society in which temple cult and brothel prostitution abounded and where huge phallic symbols were worshipped on almost every street corner by emperor and subject alike.

If you still believe that the Romans passage is unequivocally against modern-day Christian homosexuals, you need to understand the mind of God relative to this issue: True science does not contradict true religion nor vice versa. True science shows that there are exceptions to the so-called absolute scriptural rule of "male and female" (Genesis 1:27) in the form of intersexuals; and, true religion shows that there are exceptions to that rule in the form of eunuchs --- of whom, Christ Jesus said, "some [are] born that way." (Matthew 19:12) In other words, intersexuals serve as biological prototypes for modern-day homosexuals and eunuchs serve as scriptural prototypes for them. Thus, God accounts for exceptions to the rule both naturally and scripturally. All you need do is apply these exceptions to the previously cited passage in Romans, which stresses that the people left what was "natural," or instinctive, to them for what was not "natural," or instinctive, to them. (The Greek word fusikhn --- translated in Romans 1:26 as "natural" --- also means "instinctive.") To be sure, homosexuality is not natural, or instinctive, to heterosexuals. Neither is heterosexuality natural, or instinctive, to homosexuals.

From a biological standpoint, the presence or absence of genitals is a state of nature; and gender is a state of mind, which state is ultimately responsible for an individual's instincts. If you think that the homosexual orientation is a perverted instinct, then you have made heterosexuality a law unto itself, which law is contradictory to the full spectrum of what occurs in nature. Indeed, such an absolute fails to take into consideration the myriad departures in nature that deviate from the norm (norm defined here as "that which occurs most frequently"). It also fails to take into consideration spiritual law, which states that in Christ there is neither "male nor female" (Galatians 3:28).

Through science as well as scripture, we now know that some intersexuals and eunuchs are born that way. Can we deny their existence? No, just as we cannot deny the existence of homosexuals.

Given the context of idolatry, and given pagan sexual ritual in the context of orgies that included group sex as well as sex without commitment, Chapter One of Romans is also referring to what is spiritually unnatural, which is to say, foreign and repugnant to God --- who requires covenant ties between individuals before they consummate their union. In Romans 1:27, it says that the men "were inflamed with lust for one another." Does this describe unholy thinking, unholy behavior and unholy union? Of course it does. Lust is sexual obsession. Lust is the reduction of another individual to an object for one's own self gratification, which is always wrong in the eyes of God --- both for heterosexuals as well as for homosexuals. That people exchanged committed monogamous relationships for group sexual activities in the open is indeed depraved, and appropriately labeled "unnatural" and "against instinct."

It is very, very important for us to come to an understanding that --- if we hold the whole Bible as we simultaneously attend to its various parts --- the Bible address same-sex behaviors only from the standpoint of: 1) idolatry, 2) prostitution, and 3) lust. It never addresses the issue of homosexual relationships from the standpoint of committed monogamous relationships. It never addresses that. Not once.

The sum of the matter is this: teach homosexuals to be moral, because you cannot teach them to be heterosexual, for that would be unnatural to them (i.e., contradictory to what is innate and instinctive within them).

To help understand this, you must either grasp the multivariate nature of biological life or transcend using only a physical referent.  

         

Closing the Chapter on Sodom

The last reference to Sodom in the Bible that is often used against homosexuals is found in Jude, verse 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 suffer the punishment of eternal fire.

Rather than describing homosexuality, the two Greek words rendered together as "perversion" in the NIV and separately as "strange flesh" in the KJV could just as well be describing the bestiality common to many Canaanite fertility rites as it could be describing the attempt by the townsmen of Sodom to rape the two angelic visitors, whose flesh was indeed "strange," or "different." The latter explanation is especially plausible in view of the verse's comparison ("in a similar way") to the fallen angels in the previous verse, who "abandoned their own home" (Jude, verse 6) to commingle with human beings by having sex with them (see Genesis 6:2). Ironically, the two words translated as "strange flesh" in the KJV are eteraV sarkoV (heteras sarkos) --- which is to say, "hetero[sexual] flesh," and not "homosexual flesh." And, although my use of "hetero[sexual]" in the previous sentence is obvious hyperbole, it takes one no more far afield than requiring students of the Bible to believe that the perversion written about in verse 7 of Jude is homosexuality.

The Word Biblical Commentary on Jude is in agreement with the latter interpretation just given:

As the angels fell because of their lust for women, so the Sodomites desired sexual relations with angels. The reference is to the incident in Genesis 19:4-11. sarkoV eteraV, "strange flesh," cannot, as many commentators and most translations assume, refer to homosexual practice, in which the flesh is not "different" (eteraV); [therefore] it must mean the flesh of angels. The sin of the Sodomites (not strictly, of the other towns) reached its zenith in this most extravagant of sexual aberrations, which would have transgressed the order of creation as shockingly as the fallen angels did. (32)