Sodom and Gomorrah?

[Seeker47]

I do not wish to be confrontational, nor do I craft lies. I am not LGBT+, but am a regular pew-dweller and fellowship follower who listens to what is said.

 

[posthuman]

the thing is when he escaped, literally ran for his life,

He didn't run for his life. He hesitated so the angels took him by the hand and dragged him out.

 

[OrphanedRepublican]

Speaking of Sodom, there's a guy on You Tube that believes he's found the city. He has a 9-part you tube presentation on what he's found. I found it interesting.

 

[2ndTimothyGroup]

What impresses me about Sodom and Gomorrah is God's reaction to their sin. God would not destroy the city if there were remnants of His people in the city. It tells me that we Christians are important to the Lord.

Nice. I like that.

 

[Ahwatukee]

What impresses me about Sodom and Gomorrah is God's reaction to their sin. God would not destroy the city if there were remnants of His people in the city. It tells me that we Christians are important to the Lord.

So true! And from the conversation that Abraham had with the Lord, He does not punish the righteous with the wicked.

 

[crossnote]

At some point many churches need to contemplate and reconsider their views on homosexuality. DON'T SHOOT.....I know it's a sin and earnestly pray for those who have been deceived. Yet time and time again I hear churches and preachers rail against this " abomination" as if it were the only sin, or perhaps the greatest of sins. This sin is held up and pointed out as the sin that proves our degeneration. I rarely hear sermons about about drinking, smoking, lust, abortion; or the cause if all sin, the soul crushing sin of pride.

In my experience organized Christianity sometimes has difficulties with the repentance they preach to others.

OK....let it begin.

It's usually pointed out because it is marked in Scripture as the last set of sins before a nation hits a point of no return...when judgment falls as it did with S&G...

Romans 1:26-27 (NASB) For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.

 

[Magenta]

Someone in a recent post suggested that the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah was that the men were idle and neglected the poor. I'm sure that this is not the reason that the Lord destroyed all the cities in the plain. This reason is evident when the men wanted Lot to bring out those two angels and Lot responds with "don't do such a wicked thing!" And also offers up his daughters claiming that they had never slept with a man. This in itself tells us exactly what this mob wanted, which was to have sexual relations with those angels.

I gave Scripture, which you disagree with

 

[Ahwatukee]

I gave Scripture, which you disagree with

I believe that it was one of the other members who said that Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed because they were idle and neglected the poor. However, the context does not bear that out. Scripture makes it clear that they were destroyed because of their sexual perversions, i.e. going after strange flesh (men having sex with men which would include woman going after women).

 

[Nehemiah6]

My wife's friend states its about pedophilia!! How does everyone interpret it?

Sodom and Gomorrah may represent every kind of sexual perversion or deviation. The modern LGBTQ movement (which managed to leave out "H") represents the same thing. So there is no need to try and pick these apart.

 

[Deuteronomy]

I do not wish to be confrontational, nor do I craft lies. I am not LGBT+, but am a regular pew-dweller and fellowship follower who listens to what is said.

Hello again Seeker47, I'd like to apologize if my words seemed confrontational to you, because that was never my intention. I was simply trying to convey my thoughts, knowledge, and personal experiences about this topic (just like you were).

I also want to make sure that you know that I was not pointing my finger at you as the one who "crafted lies". That honor goes to certain, talented folks who work for the various LGBTQ+ organizations and are paid to come up with them, and who make sure that they are propagated widely.

This topic is a sensitive one for me, because I have so many gay friends and family members (I'm from a family of more than 5,000, and I went to music school and then made my living for about three decades as a symphony musician, where my best friend was, in fact, gay).

I also became a Christian at age 30, and because of music, my large family, my church, and my involvement in parachurch missionary organizations, I've attended or been part of church services in at least 100 different churches/denominations, as well parachurch services and regional and national conferences that were not part of my own church, and I have NEVER experienced what you described in your first post at any of them.

In fact, I've experienced the very opposite scenario on many occasions in different liberal churches (e.g. Lutheran, Episcopal, Unitarian and, of course, my old denomination, the PCUSA), and that as far back as the early 90's. Typically, it's always the liberal and unorthodox churches that spend $$ on the arts .. well, and Catholic churches too, of course (who are also never guilty of preaching day in and day out on homosexual sin, just FYI).

In services at those denominations, homosexuality was never referred to as a sin, rather, the only thing about homosexuality that was considered to be sinful was a congregant's choice to call it a sin So, rather than teaching against homosexuality, these churches promoted it by preaching pro-gay messages from the pulpit, ordaining practicing homosexuals as ministers, marrying gay couples, etc., which is done out in the open now, but was done in secret for decades.

So you and I come at this from very different places. I have no doubt that there are milder versions of Westboro Baptist out there among our churches (perhaps yours in one of them), but I do not believe that such churches are representative of even a small minority of our churches, in general. I would be saddened to find out otherwise, but for that I would need to have substantial evidence, which as I said earlier, simply does not exist (to the best of my knowledge).

God bless you!

~Deut

 

[posthuman]

What impresses me about Sodom and Gomorrah is God's reaction to their sin. God would not destroy the city if there were remnants of His people in the city. It tells me that we Christians are important to the Lord.

and that it wasn't even for Lot's sake but for Abraham's -

And it came to pass, when God destroyed the cities of the plain, that God remembered Abraham, and sent Lot out of the midst of the overthrow, when He overthrew the cities in which Lot had dwelt. ​

(Genesis 19:29) ​

​

despite how much Lot balked and argued with the angels every step of the way, they grabbed him and those of his family that were with him, and forcibly took them to safety. "sent" because He remembered Abraham!
the Lord's faithfulness and mercy is very great to us, even when we are not particularly acting very worthy
because the Son has loved us, and we have believed Him, He will not forsake us - Christ prayed for us ♥

 

[Lanolin]

He didn't run for his life. He hesitated so the angels took him by the hand and dragged him out.

well, I think he was running but he didnt want to run TOO far to the mountains. Just to Zoar the nearest city.

 

[Lanolin]

Speaking of Sodom, there's a guy on You Tube that believes he's found the city. He has a 9-part you tube presentation on what he's found. I found it interesting.

I watched something else about Sodom and Gomorrah on National Geographic I think it was called secrets of the Bible. It talked about the tar pits and cities in the canyons and rocks, and how theres brimstone there and the dead sea.

it didnt really specifically mention homosexuality just that people were wicked.

Its funny how 'wicked' has become child slang for something desirable or cool. I dont know why that is. I wouldnt use that word myself but have heard others use it and I think do you even know what you are saying?!

Even the minsitry of education uses it.

 

[posthuman]

well, I think he was running but he didnt want to run TOO far to the mountains. Just to Zoar the nearest city.

actually... i think he's full of it in Genesis 19:18-20

Lot was arguing with the angels yet again disobeying what they told him to do. they told him to go to the mountains, and he said oh, it's too far. the guy who is being carried by the hand of angels. so he wanted to go to Zoar instead, one of the wicked cities being destroyed - and amazingly, again, the angels concede to him, and spare that city from being destroyed.
he says in verse 19 he doesn't want to go where they are sending him 'lest some evil overtake me' -- i mean his argument isn't that he's too tired. his argument boils down to he doesn't think God will protect him if he goes where God is sending him. same God who just forcibly & supernaturally dragged him out of Sodom and saved him from a mob consisting of every single man in the whole city surrounding his house. Lot thinks a mountain lion is going to get him or something?? it's kind of faithless on his part, IMO??

so Lot and his two remaining daughters go to Zoar against the advice of the angels. after that it's not exactly clear how they end up in a cave ((where God was intending him to go in the first place?)) with a lot of wine and why his daughters think there are no men left on earth ((verse 31 - tho maybe this just means they thought no one on earth would have them?)).



all through this account it really strikes me, and i'm amazed by how obstinate and contrary Lot is about the whole thing. the angels want to stay in the plaza but he argues with them. the angels have to convince him to go talk to his family but he only talks to half of them. he's out there trying to negotiate and the angels have to drag him back into his house. fire and brimstone are about to come down and he doesn't want to leave, they have to grab him and take him out. they tell him to go to the mountains and he tries to talk them out of it. he ends up in the mountains anyway. it's like almost all of his salvation is sort of against his will!
he's the kind of example someone who hates predestination & believes in eternal-insecurity-of-the-believer really wants to avoid talking about! and then Peter calls him righteous, not because of his works or faith, but because he was vexed by all the evil he saw every day where he lived. this is amazing!

 

[Truth7t7]

So true! And from the conversation that Abraham had with the Lord, He does not punish the righteous with the wicked.

Revelation 9:6-3 below is a prime example, those that dont have the (Seal Of God) will be tormented 5 months, the Sealed Church on earth will be protected.

All Saved Believers are Sealed By God, Eph 1:13, 4:30

Ephesians 4:30KJV
30 And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption

Revelation 9:6-3KJV
3 And there came out of the smoke locusts upon the earth: and unto them was given power, as the scorpions of the earth have power.
4 And it was commanded them that they should not hurt the grass of the earth, neither any green thing, neither any tree; but only those men which have not the seal of God in their foreheads.
5 And to them it was given that they should not kill them, but that they should be tormented five months: and their torment was as the torment of a scorpion, when he striketh a man.

 

[Seeker47]

Hello Seeker47, we preach exegetically at my church, so if a particular sin is on the pages of the Bible that the sermon is taken from, that's the one we hear about.

As for churches discussing homosexuality more than any other sin (save Westboro Baptist, of course ), I think it only 'looks' that way because it's so often made public, so it enters the news cycle and regularly makes its way onto headlines, and into social media outlets, of course.

The other, obvious reason that the sin of homosexuality seems more prevalent in discussions today is because it's always in our faces.

For instance, if there had been.....

1. Alcoholic or Smoker or Adulterer or Rapist or Murderer Pride Parades going on for 60 years now (like the LGBTQ+ have been doing),​

​

2. if we had national organizations leading marches, rallies, sit-ins, having special days set apart at places like Disney in honor of those other sins, ​

​

3. if they also followed the LGBTQ+ lead by insisting that their sins are not only 'not' sinful, but a perfectly normal, alternative lifestyle choice,​

​

4. and if they insisted that their sin must be taught as normal behavior to our children, from pre-school on,​

.....then those sins would be front and center in our lives too.

Fortunately, that's not what happens with other types of sinful behavior because, normally, people are ashamed of all of the other sins (to one degree or another), so they don't make them into a public spectacle and insist that their sinful behavior is normal and that it must be accepted as such, rather, they do their very best to hide the fact that they are involved in those sins.

~Deut
p.s. - just FYI, this 'idea' that our churches, in general, have become homophobic and overly concerned with a single sin has no basis in fact whatsoever. Rather, it's a well-crafted lie that's being perpetuated as part of the LGBTQ+'s political agenda (and thanks to the folks at Westboro Baptist, it's a lie that everyone, so far, has accepted as believable, even though there have been no demands for any factchecking concerning it).

Hello again Seeker47, I'd like to apologize if my words seemed confrontational to you, because that was never my intention. I was simply trying to convey my thoughts, knowledge, and personal experiences about this topic (just like you were).

I also want to make sure that you know that I was not pointing my finger at you as the one who "crafted lies". That honor goes to certain, talented folks who work for the various LGBTQ+ organizations and are paid to come up with them, and who make sure that they are propagated widely.

This topic is a sensitive one for me, because I have so many gay friends and family members (I'm from a family of more than 5,000, and I went to music school and then made my living for about three decades as a symphony musician, where my best friend was, in fact, gay).

I also became a Christian at age 30, and because of music, my large family, my church, and my involvement in parachurch missionary organizations, I've attended or been part of church services in at least 100 different churches/denominations, as well parachurch services and regional and national conferences that were not part of my own church, and I have NEVER experienced what you described in your first post at any of them.

In fact, I've experienced the very opposite scenario on many occasions in different liberal churches (e.g. Lutheran, Episcopal, Unitarian and, of course, my old denomination, the PCUSA), and that as far back as the early 90's. Typically, it's always the liberal and unorthodox churches that spend $$ on the arts .. well, and Catholic churches too, of course (who are also never guilty of preaching day in and day out on homosexual sin, just FYI).

In services at those denominations, homosexuality was never referred to as a sin, rather, the only thing about homosexuality that was considered to be sinful was a congregant's choice to call it a sin So, rather than teaching against homosexuality, these churches promoted it by preaching pro-gay messages from the pulpit, ordaining practicing homosexuals as ministers, marrying gay couples, etc., which is done out in the open now, but was done in secret for decades.

So you and I come at this from very different places. I have no doubt that there are milder versions of Westboro Baptist out there among our churches (perhaps yours in one of them), but I do not believe that such churches are representative of even a small minority of our churches, in general. I would be saddened to find out otherwise, but for that I would need to have substantial evidence, which as I said earlier, simply does not exist (to the best of my knowledge).

God bless you!

~Deut

"So you and I come at this from very different places."

I think you are right. My experiences has been in several different denominations, and a couple "non-denominations", all located in the deep of the bible belt. I also, sadly, agree with you about the silence of the Catholic Church on this issue. My experience in the PCUSA also reflects yours. I just react negatively when I hear this one sin singled out as a super-sin.

 

[Lanolin]

actually... i think he's full of it in Genesis 19:18-20

Lot was arguing with the angels yet again disobeying what they told him to do. they told him to go to the mountains, and he said oh, it's too far. the guy who is being carried by the hand of angels. so he wanted to go to Zoar instead, one of the wicked cities being destroyed - and amazingly, again, the angels concede to him, and spare that city from being destroyed.
he says in verse 19 he doesn't want to go where they are sending him 'lest some evil overtake me' -- i mean his argument isn't that he's too tired. his argument boils down to he doesn't think God will protect him if he goes where God is sending him. same God who just forcibly & supernaturally dragged him out of Sodom and saved him from a mob consisting of every single man in the whole city surrounding his house. Lot thinks a mountain lion is going to get him or something?? it's kind of faithless on his part, IMO??

so Lot and his two remaining daughters go to Zoar against the advice of the angels. after that it's not exactly clear how they end up in a cave ((where God was intending him to go in the first place?)) with a lot of wine and why his daughters think there are no men left on earth ((verse 31 - tho maybe this just means they thought no one on earth would have them?)).



all through this account it really strikes me, and i'm amazed by how obstinate and contrary Lot is about the whole thing. the angels want to stay in the plaza but he argues with them. the angels have to convince him to go talk to his family but he only talks to half of them. he's out there trying to negotiate and the angels have to drag him back into his house. fire and brimstone are about to come down and he doesn't want to leave, they have to grab him and take him out. they tell him to go to the mountains and he tries to talk them out of it. he ends up in the mountains anyway. it's like almost all of his salvation is sort of against his will!
he's the kind of example someone who hates predestination & believes in eternal-insecurity-of-the-believer really wants to avoid talking about! and then Peter calls him righteous, not because of his works or faith, but because he was vexed by all the evil he saw every day where he lived. this is amazing!

Lot was like the doubleminded man who is always sitting on the fence and didnt want to offend anyone but ends up being highly offensive. Also I personally think he lazy though the angels were basically telling him to escape for his life and hurry and DO IT NOW.

He was stalling. The part where he tries to convince the sodomites banging on the door to have his daughters was a farce. Its like you dont have to molest me, molest my daughters instead! what?! That they ended up getting him drunk and sleeping with him then seems no surprise.