The sin of Sodom is rife in the world today. The Western nations are particularly guilty. And it takes very little research to discover that in many churches, even evangelical and fundamentalist ones, this terrible sin is not only tolerated and condoned, it is even encouraged! Videos, tapes and books are freely, even openly, passed from person to person telling church members how to indulge in this disgusting practice: children are exposed to this material, and preachers tell congregations that it is quite OK, even right, good and desirable. Television programmes and adverts shown at family viewing time carry the same message.
Yet many of the prophets thundered against it. And the apostle James warns against it, and against giving honour to those who engage in it.
We know that the messengers who visited Sodom to rescue Lot and his family were threatened with a dangerous gang who wanted to abuse them. The men in the gang were quite frank about their intentions and cravings, which were definitely directed at the messengers as men (they wouldn’t accept Lot’s offer of his daughters to protect his guests). Lot knew that this kind of incident was common; that was why he had insisted on the messengers spending the night in his house. Probably because of this shocking account, it has been concluded that open and habitual homosexuality was the reason, or the main reason, for God’s disapproval of that city, hence the term “the sin of Sodom”.
Sodom’s notoriety has not been based alone on the attack of this gang. Long before the messengers ever set foot in Sodom, the city was already doomed to destruction. Genesis describes the inhabitants of Sodom as “exceedingly wicked and sinful against YHWH,” and records that when God visited Abraham to talk over his thoughts of destroying Sodom and Gomorrah, he said that, “the outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is great and their sin is very grave.” No more detail than that is given, but since Genesis is generally pretty blunt in describing intimate behaviour, perhaps delicacy was not the overriding reason for this vagueness.
Yet Ezekiel is the only one who will come right out and describe the sin of Sodom in detail. He says,
“this was the guilt of … 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.” (Ezekiel 16:49)
Violence, coercion, degradation, exploitation, and indifference to the sufferings of their victims; these are most of all what characterise the gang of men in Sodom, and indeed the whole attitude of that society.
The behaviour of this mob shows plainly that they had no interest in the friendship or welfare of those they were asking for; they did not even care whether the objects of their lust gave consent. We do know that this particular gang had a marked preference for males - but would their attitudes and actions be any less reprehensible if the intended victims were women? Gays are an easy target: the great majority of the population are not remotely tempted by homosexuality, and many even find it repugnant, so they can safely and comfortably condemn it.
Acquisitiveness and a lust for luxury and novelty, however - well, that’s a different story, because these are temptations for nearly all of us. And this is not merely a private temptation, or even one aroused only by bright, bouncy adverts offering gratification to our senses. Which of us hasn’t been urged by family members, pastors and mentors to acquire bigger and better homes, furniture, cars, audio equipment, more fancy clothes and jewellery? Who among us has never been encouraged to find an occupation with higher pay, even though they are happier and more useful in the job they hold? We all know what this is like. We know the sense of shame when well-meaning people pity or chide us for not having the luxuries they think we shouldn’t be able to live happily without. Yes, shame! - even when we have freely chosen simply to use our money in a different way. It’s easy to denigrate those for whom we feel no identification, especially when they are tempted by, or even practice, what we find revolting. But it’s not so easy to resist and speak out about the unthinking expectations of people amongst whom we want to relax and be accepted.
There was a man called Amos who would not keep quiet about this. Here is part of his well-deserved rant:
"Hear this word, you cows of Bashan, who are on the mountain of Samaria, Who oppress the poor, Who crush the needy, Who say to your husbands, “Bring wine, let us drink!” … You tread down the poor and take grain taxes from him … afflicting the just and taking bribes; Diverting the poor from justice at the gate … resting on beds of ivory, stretched out on soft seats, feasting on lambs from the flock and young oxen from the cattle-house … drinking wine in basins, rubbing themselves with the best oils…”
Amos had an important message which is still urgently needed. But most of us would never have even heard of Amos if someone had not lived and died the exact antithesis of his description.
Jesus was always motivated by love, making the needs of others his top priority. His birth, life and death were motivated by concern for others, not himself, nor his own development or enrichment. The writer of Hebrews tells us that Jesus, though he was rich, yet for our sakes (not for his own sake) he became poor.
To rescue the world from death and evil, Jesus did not use the wealth and power at his disposal as the Son of God - instead, he laid it aside.
He was born in an occupied country, in a quite primitive time, with poor hygiene and possibly without even a midwife. His conception was such that all his life he was taunted by the innuendoes of the holier-than-thous. He who had known the breadth of the universe was confined in a uterus and then had his tiny body wrapped so tightly he could hardly move (swaddling is done in the belief that it comforts the baby). The only devoted servants attending him were his mother and Joseph, both exhausted from the journey and the birth, and any animals who might have been there. No lace-canopied, feathery cradle either: just the hay that was kept as animal feed.
So the very expression of God made his entrance into the world - not among the wealthy or powerful, not even among slaves and outcasts, but among domesticated animals, regarded as lower than the lowest slave, and only there to provide power, transport and food.
Jesus’s life was not motivated by striving for his own enrichment or spiritual development, but entirely for the welfare of others. Here is his stunning inaugural statement. Notice how his whole mission is directed at the wellbeing of others, as he quotes words familiar to all in his audience:
“The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he has sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives and recovery of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed; to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord.” (Isaiah 61:1-2, as quoted in Luke 4:18-19)
We know that he lived by this, giving himself to rescue people from illness, despair, disability and even, sometimes, death. He gave the moments of his life, and his strength, thoughts and desires, for others, and in the end he gave up his reputation and his life itself as he suffered the death reserved for the lowest ruffians in the Roman Empire.
How different this is from the picture we have of Sodom.
John the Baptist urged people to honour God by living equitably in relation to those around them. He was talking about the world welcoming the arrival of the liberator. This is described as a levelling and straightening:
“Prepare the way of the Lord, make his paths straight. Every valley shall be filled, and every mountain and hill shall be brought low, and the crooked shall be made straight, and the rough ways shall be made smooth; and all flesh shall see the salvation of God.”
When the seer says, “all flesh shall see the salvation of God,” this is by no means divorced from the rest of the statement, but an integral part of it. Jesus’s vision was to change the shape and modus operandi of society out of recognition; this is a huge aspect of the salvation that is promised to “all flesh”. Jesus portrayed God’s ‘party’ as being one to which the street people and beggars were invited, he encourages people to invite those who are unable to invite them back, and to give to those who can’t repay them. He tells us that this is what God is like. He tells us that it is those who don’t know God who boss others around and are called benefactors for it. He tells us that his society will be nothing like that, but will be filled with people eager to serve and benefit others.
Jesus came into the world, not to lord it over others, though he of all people had the right to do so. But instead he came to give what he had to us - to give his life to us, who were sentenced by the law of entropy to death to give his love to us, who were cold and wounded - to give the light of truth to us, who were stumbling about in darkness.
It’s good to be reminded of Jesus’ humility & particular care for the needy & unpopular - always a challenge. I also agree that salvation for everyone fits very well with that.
Thank you for sharing this, Ruth