There was a liberal douche on IMDb's Religion board who said the sin of Sodomy was not homosexuality, but inhospitality to strangers. Lol. Call a spade a spade.
It wasn't the sodomy in general. But they wanted to fuck that pretty angel.
Well, Lot did offer his daughters. So heterosexuality seemed okay with him.
Bizarre story though to say the least. I'm also wondering if the Hebrew word was actually "rape" or if the men wanted sort of a meet and greet with consensual sex. Lol.
I was thinking about that story and about how it reflected on ancient Canaanite society. What a wonderful world where groups of men would gather outside your house and ask for your pretty guests to come out so they could fuck them!
Well it is usually characterized that the men of Sodom wanted to rape the angels.
Regardless of laws about consent and rape, it's an important distinction to make whether the men were demanding the angels be brought out so the Sodomites could do what they wanted with them, or if they were trying to win their affection and be suitors.
Still, the story begins as one about finding ten righteous men, and then we have a story about homosexual lust. Homosexuality is equated with unrighteousness. And sorry, as a queer man I am quite satisfied that our love is so dangerous that two cities were destroyed over it. In fact I'm quite proud of it. I consider myself to be a Sodomite.
"Consent" was neither here nor there, because sex outside of marriage was illegal anyway, and what's the point of legislating how crime is supposed to be committed?
'Sex outside of marriage' is more the focus of the New Testament, and has to be read back into the Jewish Testament. It's as much a mistake to read it into the narrative of Genesis 19 as it is to read 'sexual intercourse' into it. The sexual assaults depicted as being perpetrated against perceived enemies as a form of humiliation was not an expression of desire, or of sex. Remember, rape is about power, not sex, and the observation was never more true than of the kind of assault depicted here. Such perpetrators are usually 'straight.'
The crime was either that of extramarital coitus, and/or sodomy, in addition to property damage if the victim was female
Even so, however, even though sodomy is not a Biblical word, it very much is a Biblical concept, as is clearly implied in Leviticus
This would, necessarily, mean anal penetration. Which was nowhere condemned between man and woman, at least not explicitly, but for a man to be penetrated was to take a woman's role in the most defining act of the sexes.
There were laws against this sort of thing all over the ancient world, and it has been the case for eons that a special kind of disgust was reserved for a man who would be feminised in such a way.
did u just yada yada sodomy ?