Sodom and Gomorrah: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 21:11, 19 October 2006

According to the Book of Genesis, Sodom (סְדוֹם, Standard Hebrew Sədom, Tiberian Hebrew Səḏôm) and Gomorrah (עֲמוֹרָה, Standard ʿAmora, Tiberian Ġəmôrāh, ʿĂmôrāh) were two cities destroyed by God for their sins. In Hebrew, Sodom means Burnt and Gomorrah means A Ruined Heap. Respectively, these names seem to have been given after the disaster, and were not their original names.

The story of Sodom has given rise to words in several languages, including English: the word "sodomy", meaning acts (stigmatized as "unnatural vice") such as homosexuality, anal sex, and the word "sodomite", meaning one who practices such acts. For the unnatural sins of their inhabitants Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, and Zeboim were destroyed by "brimstone and fire from the Lord out of heaven" (Genesis 13:13; 18:20; 19:24, 29; Hosea 11:8). Since then, their names are synonymous with impenitent sin, and their fall with a proverbial manifestation of God's just wrath (Deuteronomy 29:23; 32:32; Isaiah 1:10 sqq.; Ezekiel 16:49; Matthew 11:23 sq.; 2 Peter 2:6; Jude 7). The Septuagint's Greek rendering katestrephe (Genesis 19:25) probably led to the opinion that the destruction of Sodom was accompanied by great upheavals of the earth, and even to the formation of the Dead Sea.

Situation

Sodom was the chief town of a group of five towns, Pentapolis (Wisdom 10:6; Genesis 14:2): Sodom, Gemorah, Admah, Zevoiim, and Bela -- later called Tzoar (Genesis 19:22). Their exact location is unknown (cf. Genesis 14:3, 8, 10, 17; 19:20-22, 30, 37; Deuteronomy 34:3). Josephus identifies Segor with "Zoara of Arabia" at the south end of the Dead Sea ("Bel. Jud.", IV, viii, 4; cf. "Ant. Jud.", I, xi, 4; XIII, xv, 4; XIV, i, 4). Conder identifies it with Tell esh-Shaghur, seven miles north of the Dead Sea; Burkhard, Wetstein, and others with Chirbet es-Safich, three miles south of the Dead Sea; E. Robinson puts it on Lisan, etc.

The Pentapolis region is also collectively referred to as "The Cities of the Plain" (which included Zoar/Misar), i.e. "the country about the Jordan" (Genesis 13:10) on the plain of the Jordan River, in an area that constituted the southern limit of the lands of the Canaanites (Genesis 10:19).

According to the Bible, Lot, a nephew of Abram (Abraham) chose to live in Sodom, because of the proximity of good grazing for his flocks.

The Biblical text

In Genesis 18, God informs Abraham that He plans to destroy the city of Sodom because of its gross immorality. Abraham pleads with God not to destroy Sodom, and God agrees that He would not destroy the city if there were 50 righteous people in it, then 45, then 30, then 20, or even 10 righteous people. The Lord's two angels only found one righteous person living in Sodom, Abraham's nephew Lot. Consequently, God follows through with His plans to destroy the city.

In Genesis 19:4–5, the final episode in the story of Sodom is described as the angels visit Lot to warn him to flee:

4. When they had not yet retired, and the people of the city, the people of Sodom, surrounded the house, both young and old, the entire populace from every end[of the city].

5. And they called to Lot and said to him, "Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us, and let us be intimate with them." (Judaica Press)

Lot refused to give the visiting angels to the men of Sodom and instead offered them his two daughters. The men refused to accept this compromise. The men were struck with blindness, allowing Lot and his family, who were then instructed to leave the city, to escape, and Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed with fire and brimstone by God.

A similar event is recorded in the Judges 19:20–22, this time involving the town of Gibeah. This suggests that the occurrences in Sodom were not unique:

20. And the old man said, "Peace be to you, just let all your needs be upon me, but do not lodge in the street."

21. And he brought him into his house, and gave fodder to the donkeys, and they washed their feet, ate and drank.

22. As they were enjoying themselves, and behold, the men of the city, men of wickedness, surrounded the house, (and were) beating at the door. And they spoke to the man, the elderly master of the house, saying, "Bring out the man that came into your house, so that we may be intimate with him. (Judaica Press)

Jewish views

Classical Jewish texts do not specifically indicate that God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah because the inhabitants were homosexual. Rather, they were destroyed because the inhabitants were generally depraved and uncompromisingly greedy. Rabbinic writings affirm that the primary crimes of the Sodomites were terrible and repeated economic crimes, both against each other and outsiders.

A rabbinic tradition, described in the Mishnah, postulates that the sin of Sodom was related to property: Sodomites believed that "what is mine is mine, and what is yours is yours" (Abot), which is interpreted as a lack of compassion. Another rabbinic tradition is that these two wealthy cities treated visitors in a sadistic fashion. One example is the story of the "bed" that guests to Sodom were forced to sleep in: if they were too short they were stretched to fit it, and if they were too tall, they were cut up.(compare Procrustes)

The Talmud also recounts the incident of a young girl (some sources say it was a daughter of Lot) who gave some bread to a poor man who had entered the city. When the townspeople discovered her act of kindness, they smeared her body with honey and hung her from the city wall until she was stung to death by bees. (Sanhedrin 109a) It is this gruesome event (and her scream, in particular), the Talmud concludes, that are alluded to in the verse that heralds the city’s destruction: "So Hashem said, ‘Because the outcry of Sodom and Gomorrah has become great, and because their sin has been very grave, I will descend and see…" (Genesis 18:20–21)

The view of Josephus

Flavius Josephus, a Romano-Jewish historian, wrote:

"Now, about this time the Sodomites, overweeningly proud of their numbers and the extent of their wealth, showed themselves insolent to men and impious to the Divinity, insomuch that they no more remembered the benefits that they had received from Him, hated foreigners and avoided any contact with others. Indignant at this conduct, God accordingly resolved to chastise them for their arrogance, and not only to uproot their city, but to blast their land so completely that it should yield neither plant nor fruit whatsoever from that time forward." Jewish Antiquities 1:194-195

and Josephus recounts that angels came to Sodom to find good men they were instead greeted by rapists and sodomists[1]:

"And the angels came to the city of the Sodomites...when the Sodomites beheld the young men, who were outstanding in beauty of appearance and who had been received into Lots’s house, they set about to do violence and outrage to their youthful beauty....Therefore, God, indignant at their bold acts, struck them with blindness,623 so that they were unable to find the entrance into the house, and condemned the Sodomites to destruction of the whole population." Jewish Antiquities 1:199-202

Reformist Torah approach with Hebrew translations

"Before they had gone to bed, all the men from every part of the city of Sodom—both young and old—surrounded the house"

The traditional interpretation of this story largely stems from the gender biased translation of the word enoshe 582 in Genesis 19:4. Most versions say "men", which is incorrect. The Hebrew word enoshe is not gender-specific; it indicates mortals or people. The word esh would have been used to mean "man" or eshal to mean "woman" if gender specific terminology was meant. This translation gives the impression that just the men of the city had surrounded Lot's house and the further impression that they were all homosexuals out to have sex with the angels. The word enoshe is used in Genesis 17:23 with the word zechar meaning "male" demonstrating this point.

There is no Old Testament text in which yadha specifically refers to homosexual coitus, with the single exception of this disputed Sodom and Gomorrah story in Genesis. The less ambiguous word shakhabh, however, is used for homosexual, heterosexual, and bestial intercourse. Shakhabh appears fifty times in the Old Testament; if it had been used instead of yadha in the Sodom story, the meaning of the text would have been unmistakable. Based on this interpretation, we lack conclusive grounds to assume that the men of Sodom only wanted to rape the visitors. We simply know that their intentions were unfriendly.

Looking at the scriptures in Hebrew, we find an interesting usage of a couple of different words. When the mob cries out "Where are the men who came in to you tonight?", the Hebrew word translated "men" is again enoshe which, literally translated, means "mortal". This indicates that the mob knew that Lot had visitors, but were unsure of what sex they were. The Hebrew word for "man" (utilized in this same passage in Genesis 19:8) is entirely different. One has to ask: Why would homosexuals want to have sex with two strangers if they were unsure of what sex they were? However if the sin was rape, and the rapists were indiscriminate, then the sex of the strangers would not matter.

Note that these women that Lot offered were virgins. Note also that the Sodomites were pagans. Virgin sacrifices to idols were a common practice in Sodom. Therefore, it can be concluded in another way that Lot was offering his daughters as virgin sacrifices to appease the mob in an effort to protect the visitors. By 50 AD, we find the first time that the sin of Sodom is associated with homosexual "acts" in general. In the Quaestiones et Solutiones in Genesin ("Questions and Answers on Genesis") IV.31-37, Philo interpreted the Genesis word yãdhà as "servile, lawless and unseemly pederasty."

Liberal Interpretation

A more recent view (one that has been part of the Jewish interpretation for centuries) advocated by liberal theologians and biblical scholars is that the events in Sodom have to do with Abraham's hospitality and the gifts of God bestowed on him for his gracious action. First we see hospitality and the way we should act, then inhospitality in that the people of Sodom seek to mistreat and rape the newcomers. The biblical text itself seems to suggest that the sin is based in part on inhospitality to some (if not a major) extent (although traditionally, the reason for the punishment has always been immorality):

Ezekiel 16:49-50: Now this was the sin of 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.

This idea is paralleled in the Gospels when Jesus compares an inhospitable reception to Sodom:

Matthew 10:14-15: If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, shake the dust off your feet when you leave that home or town. I tell you the truth, it will be more bearable for Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town.

This view of the biblical story reflects that of other ancient civilizations, such as Greece and Rome, where hospitality was a main feature in deciding the quality of a person. Also in these civilizations, men were held in a much higher regard than women (in Greece women being seen as little more than property, therefore, to demand not only a guest but a male guest to be violated against his will would be seen as more of a crime than to allow women to be used to save the guest.

Christian Views

Traditional theologians and bible scholars accept that the sins of Sodom were homosexuality and rape. However, these were not the only sins:

Jude 1:7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

Biblical scholars debate the proper English interpretation of this passage. Most scholars feel that "strange flesh" is a reference to homosexuality, while some feel that the "strange flesh" involved refers to bestiality. [2]

Christian Commentary

Henry, Matthew. "Commentary on Genesis 19". "Matthew Henry Complete Commentary on the Whole Bible". [3]. 1706.

Verses 4-11 Now it appeared, beyond contradiction, that the cry of Sodom was no louder than there was cause for. This night’s work was enough to fill the measure. For we find here,

I. That they were all wicked, v. 4. Wickedness had become universal, and they were unanimous in any vile design. Here were old and young, and all from every quarter, engaged in this riot; the old were not past it, and the young had soon come up to it. Either they had no magistrates to keep the peace, and protect the peaceable, or their magistrates were themselves aiding and abetting. Note, When the disease of sin has become epidemical, it is fatal to any place, Isa. 1:5-7.

II. That they had arrived at the highest pitch of wickedness; they were sinners before the Lord exceedingly (ch. 13:13); for,

It was the most unnatural and abominable wickedness that they were now set upon, a sin that still bears their name, and is called Sodomy. They were carried headlong by those vile affections (Rom. 1:26, 27), which are worse than brutish, and the eternal reproach of the human nature, and which cannot be thought of without horror by those that have the least spark of virtue and any remains of natural light and conscience. Note, Those that allow themselves in unnatural uncleanness are marked for the vengeance of eternal fire. See Jude 7.

They were not ashamed to own it, and to prosecute their design by force and arms. The practice would have been bad enough if it had been carried on by intrigue and wheedling; but they proclaimed war with virtue, and bade open defiance to it. Hence daring sinners are said to declare their sin as Sodom, Isa. 3:9. Note, Those that have become impudent in sin generally prove impenitent in sin; and it will be their ruin. Those have hard hearts indeed that sin with a high hand, Jer. 6:15.

When Lot interposed, with all the mildness imaginable, to check the rage and fury of their lust, they were most insolently rude and abusive to him. He ventured himself among them, v. 6. He spoke civilly to them, called them brethren (v. 7), and begged of them not to do so wickedly; and, being greatly disturbed at their vile attempt, he unadvisedly and unjustifiably offered to prostitute his two daughters to them, v. 8. It is true, of two evils we must choose the less; but of two sins we must choose neither, nor ever do evil that good may come of it. He reasoned with them, pleaded the laws of hospitality and the protection of his house which his guests were entitled to; but he might as well have offered reason to a roaring lion and a raging bear as to these head-strong sinners, who were governed only by lust and passion. Lot’s arguing with them does but exasperate them; and, to complete their wickedness, and fill up the measure of it, they fall foul upon him.

They ridicule him, charge him with the absurdity of pretending to be a magistrate, when he was not so much as a free-man of their city, v. 9. Note, It is common for a reprover to be unjustly upbraided as a usurper; and, while offering the kindness of a friend, to be charged with assuming the authority of a judge: as if a man might not speak reason without taking too much upon him.

Those that hate to be reformed hate those that reprove them, though with ever so much tenderness. Presumptuous sinners do by their consciences as the Sodomites did by Lot, baffle their checks, stifle their accusations, press hard upon them, till they have seared them and quite stopped their mouths, and so made themselves ripe for ruin.

III. That nothing less than the power of an angel could save a good man out of their wicked hands. It was now past dispute what Sodom’s character was and what course must be taken with it, and therefore the angels immediately give a specimen of what they further intended.

They rescue Lot, v. 10. Note, He that watereth shall be watered also himself. Lot was solicitous to protect them, and now they take effectual care for his safety, in return for his kindness. Note further, Angels are employed for the special preservation of those that expose themselves to danger by well-doing. The saints, at death, are pulled like Lot into a house of perfect safety, and the door shut for ever against those that pursue them.

They chastise the insolence of the Sodomites: They smote them with blindness, v. 11. This was designed,

Finger of God

It was to be an earnest of their utter ruin, the next day. When God, in a way of righteous judgment, blinds men, their condition is already desperate, Rom. 11:8, 9.

See Also: Jamieson, Robert, D.D. "Commentary on Genesis 19". "Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible". [4]. 1871.

Beza, Theodore. "Commentary on Genesis 19". "The 1599 Geneva Study Bible". [5]. 1600-1645.

Islamic View

Main article: Lut

Lut (Arabic: لوط ) was a prophet mentioned in the Qur'an and known as Lot in the Bible.

According to Islamic tradition, Lut lived in Ur and was a nephew of Ibrahim or Abraham. His story is often used as a reference by traditional Islamic scholars to show that homosexuality to be against God's law or Haraam. He was commanded by God to go to the land of Sodom and Gomorra to preach against homosexuality. In the Qur'an as in the Bible, Lut's message is ignored, Sodom and Gommorra is detroyed and his wife is left behind to be destroyed.

And Lut, when he said to his tribe: "Do you commit an obscenity not perpetrated before you by anyone in all the worlds? You come with lust to men instead of women. You are indeed a depraved tribe." The only answer of his tribe was to say: "Expel them from your city! They are people who keep themselves pure!" So We rescued him and his family-except for his wife. She was one of those who stayed behind. We rained down a rain upon them. See the final fate of the evildoers!

(Qur'an, 7:80-84)

The major difference between the story of Lut in the Qur'an and the story of Lot in the Bible is that the Biblical version includes stories of Lot's incestuous relationship with his daughters, which do not appear in Qur'an.

Skeptical View

Some modern biblical scholars argue that a sin was attached to the story of Sodom to justify the destruction of the cities, which may be based on an authentic account of a natural cataclysm, possibly an earthquake in the region. It is known that the towns are described as lying along a major fault, the Jordan Rift Valley, the northernmost extension of the Great Rift Valley of the Red Sea and East Africa. It is also possible that the sin of the inhabitants appearing in the original text was edited out and lost.

The historical existence of Sodom and Gomorrah is still in dispute by archaeologists, with most believing they never existed, some believing they are now under the Dead Sea, and others claiming that they have been found (under other names) in the region to the southeast of the Dead Sea.

One candidate for Sodom is a site known as Bab edh-Dhra. Bab edh-Dhra was an Early Bronze Age city located near the Dead Sea, and bitumen and petroleum deposits have been found in the area, which contain sulfur and natural gas (as such deposits normally do). The theory is that an earthquake opened a nearby pocket of natural gas. Natural gas, being lighter than air, drifted up. However, instead of dissipating harmlessly the gas reacted with the fires burning in the city (the smallest flame could have set off the natural gas). As a result, the city was devastated.

Those who believe that the city never existed assert that the name "Sodom" is a derivative of the word "scorched", implying that such a name could have been given only after the city's alleged destruction, not before. However, this name may have been descriptive of the arid unproductive plains near the Dead Sea.

In 1976 a claim was made that a cuneiform tablet had been found in the newly discovered library at Ebla, containing the names of all five of the Cities of the Plain (Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, Zeboim, and Bela), listed in just the same order that they are named in Genesis; but this claim was subsequently withdrawn.

Films

Some films have attempted to portray the Biblical tale of Sodom and Gomorrah, although many of them take liberties with the historical text.

Lot in Sodom (1933) - film that passed the censors because it depicted the wickeness of the sin.
Sodom and Gomorrah (1963) - film directed by Robert Aldrich that loosely depicts the destruction of the two cities for their decadence, and human cruelty.
Salò o le 120 giornate di Sodoma (1975) Italian film by Pier Paolo Pasolini.
Sodom and Gomorrah: The Movie - A 2005 a lowbudget New Fire Film Christian production about a married man who must grapple with his sinful homosexual desires [6].

References

Gagnon, Robert A.J. (2002), The Bible and Homosexual Practice: Texts and Hermeneutics, Abingdon Press, pages 71-91.

External links and sources

Wyatt Archaeological Research Ashen city-shaped remains in the vicinity of Masada, that stretch for miles, with deposits of sulphur in 'ball' shapes (i.e. brimstone), a type of sulphur found nowhere else on planet earth. Ron Wyatt's account of his supposed re-discovery of this ancient city.
Harvard University The 1975–1981 Excavations At The Town Site Of Bab edh-Dhra
University of Melbourne "Bab edh-Dhra is located on the South-East edge of the Dead Sea in Jordan, not far from Numeira (identified with Gomorroh)."
University of Notre Dame Expedition to the Dead Sea Plain. "One of the most important transitions in human history involved the establishment of the world's first cities approximately 5,000 years ago in the ancient Middle East. In the eastern Mediterranean region (Israel, Palestine, Syria, Lebanon, and Jordan), people built the first walled cities during a period archaeologists call the Early Bronze Age (EBA, c. 3500–2000 BCE). In the EBA on the southeastern Dead Sea Plain (Map 1), people began burying their dead in extensive cemeteries, creating a landscape of the dead. Interestingly, they soon built two walled towns next to the cemeteries that they had used for a few centuries. In these settlements, called Bab edh-Dhra' (pronounced "bob-ed-draw") and Numeira (pronounced "new-mere-a"), people established the way of life that we read about in the Bible. In fact, for the writers of the Bible, the desolate nature of this stretch of shore along the Dead Sea and the visible ruins of Bab edh-Dhra' and Numeira may have helped them to identify this area with the stories of the ill-fated sites of Sodom and Gomorrah."
Atlantic Baptist University Sodom and Gomorrah
Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance This site has an extensive coverage of both the liberal and conservative Christian views of the story of Sodom and Gomorra.
Sodom and Gomorrah at the Catholic Encyclopedia

@@ Line 126: / Line 126: @@
 The major difference between the story of Lut in the Qur'an and the story of Lot in the Bible is that the Biblical version includes stories of Lot's incestuous relationship with his daughters, which do not appear in Qur'an.
-== Rationalistic View ==
+== Skeptical View ==
 Some modern biblical scholars argue that a sin was attached to the story of Sodom to justify the destruction of the cities, which may be based on an authentic account of a natural cataclysm, possibly an [[earthquake]] in the region. It is known that the towns are described as lying along a major fault, the [[Jordan Rift Valley]], the northernmost extension of the [[Great_Rift_Valley|Great Rift Valley]] of the [[Red Sea]] and East [[Africa]]. It is also possible that the sin of the inhabitants appearing in the original text was edited out and lost.