Why did God destroy Sodom? Inhospitality or homosexuality, 'round and 'round we go. Are we there yet?

But there is another, better solution to the sin of Sodom, and one more consistent with all the facts. One which should satisfy both sides.

I believe the central question is: what was the mob so angry about? If we knew that, we would know the motive for the attempted assault, and what sort of men the Sodomites were. And I propose that this question has never been adequately explained by either side.

The first important clue, as already mentioned, is in how all the men of Sodom, both young and old came out to be a part of the assaulting party. It doesn't say only the homosexuals came out, and so unless we assume that all of the men of Sodom were homosexuals (and realistically, when has that ever happened anywhere? - we have to deal with real probabilities, not fantasies), we cannot reasonably say that homosexual passion was the motive for the assault. Besides, this was an angry mob, not a horny mob. If the primary motive was sex and the mob was homosexual, they would not have tried to violently break down the door - they would have been knocking on the door loaded down with housewarming gifts.

Also, Lot knew the men of Sodom, whether or not they were homosexual rapists, and he tried to appease their anger by offering them his daughters. Unless we assume this was an empty gesture on Lot's part, and he was mocking a homosexual mob on the verge of tearing him apart, we must conclude the besieging Sodomites were ostensibly heterosexual.

But what were they so angry about, so that the entire city would turn out? Along with all their other sins, the Sodomites were no-doubt inhospitable. But this still doesn't in itself explain their very extreme reaction at the appearance of two strangers, who were more Lot's guests at this point, than strangers strictly speaking. Lot himself had come to town as a stranger when he first separated from Abraham, yet there is no indication that Lot had been raped or assaulted. Sodom no doubt depended on trade and commerce for its survival, and they couldn't afford to take such extreme measures against every stranger who came into town.

And besides, if I don't want strangers coming into my house, I lock the front door - I don't leave it wide open, and then wait until they've barricaded themselves in the bathroom. There was not a single protest when the angels first walked into town, and nothing to suggest that strangers per se were so violently unwelcome. But there was something about these two particular strangers that quickly got around Sodom, and enraged the Sodomite men. Are we getting there?

Lot apparently recognized them as angels, whereas the men of Sodom did not. Lot bowed his face down to the ground and called them "my Lords", whereas the Sodomite men did not say, 'send the angels out', but rather "the men who came to you tonight - send them out." Obviously, there was something different about the angels' physical appearance, something which Lot knew might enrage the men of Sodom, because he strongly insisted that they not spend the night in the town square, as was their original intention. So what was it about the appearance of the angels that allowed Lot to recognize them, and yet would so violently enrage the men of Sodom? Well.... what is it about the physical appearance of any man today, that might violently enrage other men?

According to Christian tradition (Mat. 22:30), angels are neither male or female. Is that how these angels looked? Or just the way that God, in testing the hearts of the Sodomites, made them up to look like? Apparently they were dressed as men, and most often the Bible refers to angels in the masculine, but not exclusively so, (Zeck 5:9). Perhaps their clothes were too exotic, their complexion too fair, or their walk too effeminate. Perhaps, being two angels, they were seen innocently holding hands in public. After all, what is it that sets off gangs of gay bashers today?

When the mob demanded that Job send out the men so that they could have sex with them, wasn't this simply their way of saying, "send the faggots out"? If there was not even a word for homosexuals in their language, how else would they refer to them, and convey their accusations??

This also helps explain why even Lot's own sons-in-law were in the mob, and why later they thought Lot was joking when he went out and told them the angels were going to destroy the city, (those queers? gee, we're shaking in our sandals.)

The Bible is mysteriously silent about gay bashing, but can we doubt that it existed? That a very deadly form of gay bashing was endemic? Knowing, as we know to be the case, that in all societies currently studied, homosexuals consistently comprise about ten percent of the population - what did the Sodomites do with their homosexuals? There is no indication that Sodom was any less extremely patriarchal than many other middle-eastern antique societies, or later Hebrew society. And we all know by heart at this point, how the law of Moses dealt with homosexuals - discovered homosexuals were routinely put to death........and by the very same sort of angry, civic-improvement mobs that besieged the angels at Sodom.

Estimates are that today one million hate-motivated physical assaults take place each year against gays and lesbians. In one survey, ninety four percent of out-of-the-closet gays and lesbians report having been assaulted or harassed in hate-related incidents, usually more than once. In San Francisco, at least three percent of the victims of this sort of violence turn out to be heterosexuals who are mistaken for homosexuals (and how many more were simply too embarrassed to even report it?) On the other hand, when was the last time you ever heard of homosexual gangs assaulting strangers? Blaming homosexuals for the destruction of Sodom is simply another case of the perpetrators blaming their victims, and for the same sort of hatred and violence we still see going on today, all around us, every day.

Was the incident at Sodom the first recorded account of gay bashing? The Sodom story has filtered down through a cover-up involving a hundred generations of homophobic scribes, but the truth still shines through in the details. (And this also explains why the Bible finds it so difficult to clearly name the sin of Sodom.) It may seem a large a jump to suppose the sin of Sodom was homophobia rather than homosexuality, but not really. Not at all. The worst homophobes are just like those blinded and confused men at the front of the Sodom mob - psychologists now tell us how they are usually latent homosexuals themselves. (We know this, don't we guys?) They lead the mob precisely because they are more afraid than anybody of becoming the object of the mob's wrath.

So I propose that we settle on this as the most elegant solution to the puzzle of Sodom. Not only because it fits all the facts most perfectly, and it fits in with our own understanding of human nature most intimately. But because this way, some can continue to claim that the leaders of the mob were (latent) homosexual rapists, and the rest can point out how their sin was (a homophobic brand of) inhospitality, and now both sides can be right......... and go home.

Epilog: Homophobia can legitimately be considered as an exteme form of inhospitality. Gays and lesbians forced into the closet are exactly like unwelcome strangers in their own country, their own communities, even in their own families. Coming out is precisely like walking into a strange town - you just never know what sort of reception you'll get, or from whom.

The story of Sodom is also a metaphor for the condition of our own homophobic society. Because if we continue to declare wars, murder each other, plunder and rape the environment, all just to prove to ourselves, in effect, what manly men we really are.... everything will surely blow up in our face one day, just like it did at Sodom. And perhaps in the same way God blinded the Sodomites until their destruction the next day, He has so far blinded us to the real import of this story, unless we repent.