The Crisis at the Border Reveals the Real Sodomites

[William769]

There are a ton of Christians sodomizing each other who don’t even know it. You’d think sodomy is something you would remember. I know I certainly would. Getting sodomized is never pleasant, and a lot of times it comes from someone who claims to be a Christian.

No, I’m not talking about anal sex. Sodomy is about inhospitality.

The term sodomy is inaccurately used to describe anal sex, both by progressives and right-wing pundits. The term came from the biblical story of Sodom and Gomorrah, a city that was described to be so sinful and evil that it was destroyed by God. Traditional interpretations have presumed the sin of Sodom was same-sex sex due to the story of Lot and his daughters.

Genesis 19:4-8 says, “Before they had gone to bed, all the men from every part of the city of Sodom — both young and old — surrounded the house. They called to Lot, 'Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us so that we can have sex with them.' Lot went outside to meet them and shut the door behind him and said, 'No, my friends. Don’t do this wicked thing. Look, I have two daughters who have never slept with a man. Let me bring them out to you, and you can do what you like with them.'”

http://www.advocate.com/commentary/2014/07/15/op-ed-crisis-border-reveals-real-sodomites

As a result of the publicity surrounding this dire situation, sodomites have come out in full force. One of the proud sodomites is the Internet-famous Hobby Lobby supporter, Holly, who sent out some pretty sodomizing tweets about the 52,000 children who have been left with little to no aid.

[delrem]

1. I don't understand why you trot out this "bible" nonsense.

It is nonsense from the first page.

Why do you think it has relevance to anything, to say the least some (supposedly current) "crisis on the border"? What kind of weird tale are you trying to spin?

[William769]

2. Seriously?

You don't see the relevance? Allrighty then.

[Behind the Aegis]

3. An interesting piece.

Basically this article hits two birds with one stone.

[Gravitycollapse]

4. I like the idea of playing with language, but I don't think this works well.

It is certainly a worthy expedition to understand what was actually biblically meant when referring to sodomites. But there's hundreds of years of history demonstrating the social and legal definition which is really pretty specific. It's also not simply anal sex. Sodomy historically was any sexual act which was not PVI and can differ according to social standards.

It doesn't make a lot of sense to write a paper on a socio-political issue while completely denying the immense socio-political history behind sodomy laws. In fact, I think this is rather reckless piece.

[kickysnana]

5. So because a story meant to warn and teach has been subverted we should continue to

subvert the meaning? Why did God destroy Sodom? It was because all the people except the family of Lot treated each other worse than garbage.

So I read the story at age 11 before I knew about Sodomy in the sexual sense. As I have many times before when I learned of that meaning I went back and reread to see if I misinterpreted and I didn't.

[William769]

6. ...

[Gravitycollapse]

7. I disagree. I think God destroyed Sodom for a lot of reasons including homosexuality.

Unfortunately, I think the modern, liberal interpretation of the ethical reasons behind the destruction of Sodom is incorrect.

[MineralMan]

8. Actually, IT IS WRITTEN that God destroyed Sodom.

There is no evidence of that happening, actually, and no evidence that the Old Testament deity even exists. Something was written down by someone. There is no proof that any of it is actually factual.

It's an important distinction.

[Gravitycollapse]

9. It's not an important distinction in this conversation...

The conversation is on why God destroyed Sodom in the Bible, not about whether what happened in the book ever actually happened in real life.

We are discussing the interpretation of the events of the Bible. That is it. It is not a discussion on the fictional nature of the narrative. Just as I would discuss events in a novel I read, and would extrapolate meaning from different interpretations, that is what I am doing here.

[MineralMan]

10. It's important because, if it actually never happened,

then it's just the morality of that period being expressed as though it was some message from a deity. Much harm has been done due to that. That's my point.

[Gravitycollapse]

11. Do you often point out obvious things to knowing participants?

I'm just wondering if I was discussing a calculus problem and trying to explain the anti-derivative of 4x^(5), would you interject all of a sudden with "I just want to let you all know that you're dealing with dimensionless quantities?"

You realize you've contributed literally nothing to this conversation that wasn't clearly already known.

So, are you done? Can we move on now?

[ret5hd]

12. You quite distinctly said...

that YOU believe God destroyed Soddom for homosexuality. That is almost an exact quote. Prove me wrong.

[Gravitycollapse]

13. Prove you wrong for what? I'm discussing the biblical narrative. What do you want me to prove?

That I don't believe all of this actually literally happened?

If I was discussing the events of some novel, do I have to state plainly that none of the events happened in real life? Such a fact is implicit to the discussion. I am interpreting a fictional account.

As I've said to the other poster, are you done now? Can we move on?

[ret5hd]

14. "I think God destroyed Sodom for a lot of reasons including homosexuality"

Your words, not mine.

[Gravitycollapse]

15. Yes, from an interpretation of the Biblical account, I believe that to be true in the narrative.

Are you finished with your silly inquisition? Have you fully realized how pointless your protest has been this entire time?

[ret5hd]

16. No. Absolutely I do not. Do you accept your statement or not? (nt)

[Gravitycollapse]

20. See, reading comprehension is key to understanding context...

Apparently you were too busy trying to prove to me that I'm a Christian to notice that I literally said the Bible is a fictional narrative.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025246082#post13

I am interpreting a fictional account.

[ret5hd]

17. I am absolutely unequivicallly asking you...

if you believe god god destroyed Sodom, at least in part because of homosexuality.

Don't lie...God is watching you.

[Gravitycollapse]

18. Within the context of the Biblical narrative, God destroyed Sodom...

for several reasons which included homosexuality.

That isn't to say that the narrative itself reflects real life events. Similarly, discussing the actions of Krishna in the Bhagavad Gita does not mean I think Krishna or Vishnu existed or exists.

[ret5hd]

19. You misssed the absolutely unequivacally part...

In essence, it's a yes or no question.

[Gravitycollapse]

21. Because all language is relational, it is contextually based.

Therefore whether or not the answer is yes or no depends on the question being asked. If you are asking me if I believe God destroyed Sodom because of homosexuality within the narrative of the Bible, my answer is yes. If you are asking me if I literally believe that God exists and actually destroyed Sodom with burning sulfur in real life, you must be out of your mind because that very obviously never happened.

The Bible is fiction. I feel like, ironically, it is you who is having the hardest time understanding that.