LGBT people have suffered from being metaphorically clobbered over the head with the Bible for a very long time, and sometimes the harassment erupted in deathly violence. There are 7 passages in the Bible that have provided so-called ammunition for homophobic people to shame us. They use these biblical texts to tell us that we are broken, less-than, perverted, degenerate, and abominations, etc. Over time, these passages have become known as the “clobber passages.” It is past time for these practices and habits to stop.
Seven biblical passages are used to beat LGBT people over the head
Last week, I promised to address these clobber passages for two reasons. The first is to encourage those who like to or feel called to clobber us to stop it. Those messages are extremely hurtful and can irreparably damage our self-esteem, sometimes even to the point of suicide. The spiritual harm we suffer is impossible to describe or quantify. Many of us have suffered damage and even PTSD from “conversion” therapy to “turn us straight.” To those who harass and try to “change” us, do you really want that on your conscience? Is the risk worth it?
The second reason is to provide our communities with information from scholars and practical theologians that will help us defend ourselves. We don’t have to just take it. You may even be able to stop the barrage by saying something as simple as, “You are entitled to your interpretation, and I’m entitled to mine, so please show me some respect. Stop talking, and we’ll agree to disagree.”
I’m offering this info in the form of:
” 
Talking Point Tidbits.” Wherever you see the PTM logo and “Talking Point Tidbits,” you’ll find useful tools for conversation with someone who believes same-sex love is sinful and is trying to convince you that being heterosexual is the only acceptable type of sexual orientation.
Sodom and Gomorrah, and Gibeah
The two most well-known anti-LGTB passages come from Genesis 19 and Leviticus 18. I’m beginning with the Genesis passage, the story of Sodom and Gomorrah. And to do this, I’ll contrast this passage with the chapter just before in Genesis 18. Why would I do this?
We look to other parts of the Bible while studying it for many reasons. We must consider what comes before and after a particular text. This practice involves understanding the “canonical context.” We need to ask:
- How do these stories relate to one another?
- How do these stories amplify our learning?
- How can we distinguish one passage from another?
- What are the historical considerations of a text?
Also, sometimes we do canonical work by making comparisons between a text in one part of the biblical canon (meaning the whole Bible) and another part. I’m referring to a comparison of Genesis 19 with Judges 19 to shed some light on the ancient custom of hospitality. Both passages are also from the Old Testament, and the stories have many common aspects. Contrasting the two texts often sheds light on each of them, as we’ll see. Remember that the Bible didn’t just fall out of the sky as a whole work one day.
The Bible, as we know it now, came to be over hundreds of years. Contributors worked at different times and places. Bible scholars believe the writer of the Gospel of Mark wrote it around 60 A.D. That’s 60 years after Christ’s death and resurrection. Experts estimate the Gospel of John’s writer finished it around 100-120 A.D.–that’s 60-80 years just for the gospels to develop and get added to the Bible. What questions does this knowledge raise for you about the gospels of the New Testament?
So, hang in there with me as we compare 3 texts, consider ancient practices in context, and explore the meaning of important terms.
[Talking Point Tidbit #1. Biblical texts do not wield a megaphone to shout at us until we accept the plain words on paper. It is our job to interpret the text, to dig into it, and to consider many aspects of its context.
- Who wrote it and when?
- When was one text written in comparison to another?
- What were the cultural norms at the time?
- How does the text speak to us today?]
Abraham’s proper example of ancient hospitality (Genesis 18)
We’ll start with Genesis 18 to highlight Abraham’s proper demonstration of hospitality to strangers. Pay attention to how respectful Abraham acted though unaware that these strangers were angels of God.
18 And the Lord appeared to [Abraham] him by the oaks of Mamre, as he sat at the door of his tent in the heat of the day. 2 He lifted up his eyes and looked, and behold, three men stood in front of him. When he saw them, he ran from the tent door to meet them, and bowed himself to the earth, 3 and said, “My lord, if I have found favor in your sight, do not pass by your servant. 4 Let a little water be brought, and wash your feet, and rest yourselves under the tree, 5 while I fetch a morsel of bread, that you may refresh yourselves, and after that you may pass on — since you have come to your servant.” So they said, “Do as you have said.” 6 And Abraham hastened into the tent to Sarah, and said, “Make ready quickly three measures[b] of fine meal, knead it, and make cakes.” 7 And Abraham ran to the herd, and took a calf, tender and good, and gave it to the servant, who hastened to prepare it. 8 Then he took curds, and milk, and the calf which he had prepared, and set it before them; and he stood by them under the tree while they ate. (All passages are taken from the Revised Standard Version (RSV) of the Bible, my emphasis in bold type.)
Hospitality in Abraham’s time meant that you had an obligation to protect your guests while under your roof, even to the point of dying in defense of them. The host must also provide food and shelter. Typically these ancient peoples ate a great deal of bread, curds, and milk from their herds. They did not eat meat often because it thinned their herds. But when a guest arrived, meat would very likely have been served. Abraham asked Sarah to prepare a fine meal, and he arranged for the meat portion. In other words, they “rolled out the red carpet” according to important and well-understood customs and requirements of hospitality.
[Talking Point Tidbit #2. Everyone in that ancient time experienced extreme heat. Note it was even too hot for Abraham to sit in his tent. Instead, he sat at the entrance trying to stay cooler. Traveling in that heat required rest, rehydration, and sustenance. The harsh environment contributed to these customs because out in the heat, it could be life or death for anyone. So, to travel and then to receive hospitality carried great social import. Your host gave you scarce water to have a drink and wash your hot and tired feet. You received food and a place of rest after a long, scorching day. The community protected itself through its reciprocal care of the traveling stranger. Hospitality was the cultural name of the game.]
Another noteworthy story occurs in Genesis 18 during the angels’ stay. At the end of chapter 18, Abraham and God discuss the notorious wickedness of Sodom, and God agreed to spare Sodom even if there were only as few as 10 good men left there. We’ll pick that thread back up in just a bit.
Two of the angels headed to Sodom, as we transition to the 19th chapter of Genesis. Why is this important? Because Abraham has shown us how to treat strangers according to the custom and practice of correct hospitality. After leaving Abraham and Sarah, the angels arrive at Sodom. We have now received a template for excellent ancient hospitality.
The Depravity of Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 19)
Note that Lot offered hospitality somewhat similar to his Uncle Abraham. City gates and entryways to tents and homes were very important places. That’s where men conducted business, trials were heard, and where the men of the city congregated. Portals have tremendous real and symbolic importance in the Bible.
19 The two angels came to Sodom in the evening; and Lot was sitting in the gate of Sodom. When Lot saw them, he rose to meet them, and bowed himself with his face to the earth, 2 and said, “My lords, turn aside, I pray you, to your servant’s house and spend the night, and wash your feet; then you may rise up early and go on your way.” They said, “No; we will spend the night in the street.” 3 But he urged them strongly; so they turned aside to him and entered his house; and he made them a feast, and baked unleavened bread, and they ate. 4 But before they lay down, the men of the city, the men of Sodom, both young and old, all the people to the last man, surrounded the house; 5 and they called to Lot, “Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us, that we may know them.” 6 Lot went out of the door to the men, shut the door after him, 7 and said, “I beg you, my brothers, do not act so wickedly. 8 Behold, I have two daughters who have not known man; let me bring them out to you, and do to them as you please; only do nothing to these men, for they have come under the shelter of my roof.” 9 But they said, “Stand back!” And they said, “This fellow came to sojourn, and he would play the judge! Now we will deal worse with you than with them.” Then they pressed hard against the man Lot, and drew near to break the door. 10 But the men put forth their hands and brought Lot into the house to them, and shut the door. 11 And they [the angels] struck with blindness the men who were at the door of the house, both small and great, so that they wearied themselves groping for the door. (My emphasis is in bold type.)
Lot’s hospitality, while genuine, does not meet the superior example offered by Abraham in the previous chapter.
- Lot rose to meet the strangers. Abraham ran to them. Lot shows less enthusiasm.
- Lot only served unleavened bread. Abraham and Sarah served “cakes of choice flour” and freshly prepared beef.
- Lot ate with the angels. Abraham stood by them rather than sharing the meal presumptively so the guests could have more to eat.
The vulnerability of strangers in biblical times
It’s possible the men of Sodom merely wanted to interrogate the foreigners. However, most scholars agree it is likely that the men of Sodom wanted to rape the angels. But, this kind of rape is not due to having a homosexual orientation. This is about asserting power.
[Talking Point Tidbit #3. In ancient societies, travelers were incredibly vulnerable; the arrival of strangers put village inhabitants on guard. They’d be concerned that the foreigners were spies on reconnaissance for an enemy army. In these warring societies, it was common for conquering soldiers to rape their male captives as a further show of force and male dominance. Most scholars believe that the men of Sodom sought to establish dominance over these foreigners via gang rape to protect their village.]
The mob also seems to be angry with Lot who has extended hospitality to the strangers/angels first. Lot was a resident alien in Sodom and not a full citizen. Culturally, this could reflect poorly on the men of Sodom because Lot acted first to extend hospitality. The men could have felt Lot “showed them up” by acting more hospitably, even though Lot was not a full member of their society. Perhaps they thought Lot was in league with these presumed enemies. Plenty of reasons existed for heightened tensions.
Instead of allowing the same-sex rape of the angels, Lot begs them, “Do not act so wickedly.” Then Lot tries to convince the men to take advantage of his 2 virgin daughters. The men take this suggestion as a criticism or judgment of their intentions rather than as an offer of an alternative resolution, scandalous though it is — the permitted gang-rape of his virgin daughters.
Lot further takes a great risk by stepping outside of his door to reason with this unruly crowd. The men reject Lot’s offer of “heterosexual rape,” and they become violent with Lot. The angels grab Lot to bring him back to safety and strike the men blind. Lot’s family escapes. Despite the threat of rape, no such sexual assault occurs even though Lot scandalously offers up his own virgin daughters to be gang-raped. God destroyed Sodom because there were no “good” men left. These facts tie Genesis 18 directly to this chapter, 19. This story offers a far less stellar example of ancient hospitality than Abraham’s and Sarah’s.
So, we have an excellent example of the importance of looking at what comes before and after a given story. Studying and understanding biblical context makes all the difference. Reading the story of Sodom and Gomorrah as a standalone causes us to miss vital information for fuller comprehension. Now we turn to a horrible story that teaches ua what hospitality absolutely is not.
Gibeah’s crime and the logical conclusions that follow (Judges 19)
Notice the similarities between the stories between Sodom and Gibeah, with a major disturbing difference.
22 As they were making their hearts merry, behold, the men of the city, base fellows, beset the house round about, beating on the door; and they said to the old man, the master of the house, “Bring out the man who came into your house, that we may know him.” 23 And the man, the master of the house, went out to them and said to them, “No, my brethren, do not act so wickedly; seeing that this man has come into my house, do not do this vile thing. 24 Behold, here are my virgin daughter and his concubine; let me bring them out now. Ravish them and do with them what seems good to you; but against this man do not do so vile a thing.” 25 But the men would not listen to him. So the man seized his concubine, and put her out to them; and they knew her, and abused her all night until the morning. And as the dawn began to break, they let her go. 26 And as morning appeared, the woman came and fell down at the door of the man’s house where her master was, till it was light. (My emphasis is in bold type.)
[Talking Point Tidbit #4. Ancient societies did not have an understanding of same-sex sexual orientation and relationships as we do in the 21st century. The concept of sexual orientation arose in the last 2 centuries. In 1973, the American Psychiatric Association removed homosexuality as a disorder from the then-current edition Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM-III), the primary handbook of psychiatric conditions. Same-sex marriage now has constitutional protection in the US as a result of our greater understanding of human sexuality. Experts view human sexual orientation as unchangeable; it is established in us at a young age usually, whether we are straight or gay. Comparing the attempt at homosexual rape in the Sodom story to our modern-day understanding of homosexuality and lesbianism is like comparing apples and celery.]
Conservative scholars argue that Sodom and Gomorrah’s cautionary tale conveys the “fact” that homosexuality is a sin. That is not logical since in Gibeah the rape of the female concubine occurred. Following their conclusion that Sodom condemns homosexuality, rightfully, then, they create an argument that Gibeah demonstrates that we must also condemn heterosexuality. If that seems like a leap in logic, it is. It’s just as much a leap in logic to “read into” the Sodom and Gomorrah story that its purpose is to condemn homosexuality.
- Plus, if all of the men really were homosexual in Gibeah, implausible though that is, why then would they rape a woman?
- Are anti-LGBT scholars also arguing that any of us can change our sexual orientation at the snap of a finger?
These stories teach us about the undeniable moral obligation of hospitality, one that puts the host in the unenviable position of defending guests with his life. This resulted in situations where the use of drastic measures to meet the moral code or hospitality while also protecting one’s own life. Where in Sodom, no gang-rape actually occurred, in Gibeah, the concubine was raped serially heterosexual-style. Which story recounts the greater sin?
How is the inhospitality of Sodom and Gibeah like inhospitality to LGBT people?
Moving from this most popular text used to clobber LGBT people, next week, we will examine the close runner-up to Sodom and Gomorrah, the passage from the Holiness Code found in Leviticus 18 and 20.
Until next time,
Blessings on your journey.+
