I will begin with a small confession, I didn’t have a outline to follow for this message, so I thought that I’d see what came up on the internet. Yahoo is the default search-engine on my silly computer, and I didn’t bother to move to any of the others. Into the search line I typed “sin of sodom” and up popped their first dozen suggestions. I skimmed through all twelve websites and didn’t find an outline which I thought that I could use. I didn’t proceed any farther than the first page. Some of them offered a bit of helpful information which I’ve incorporated into my thoughts. But half of them tried to turn me from my original plan. About half of the Yahoo references tried to tell me that the sin of Sodom was NOT homosexuality. That should not surprise us in this modern day of wickedness, but I have to admit that I was caught just a little bit off my guard.
I will try to be discreet this evening, but the subject is staring us in the face, demanding to be addressed.
To whom did Christ Jesus contrast the unresponsive cities of Galilee?
Christ first mentions Chorazin, Bethsaida and Capernaum. The Biblical guessers say that Chorazin may have been a reference to Cana, where Jesus worked his first miracle. Bethsaida is mentioned several times in the New Testament as the home of Peter, John amd their brothers. Capernaum was the hub of Jesus’ ministerial activities. And all three were blessed with the preaching of Christ and the miracles of Christ.
In contrast to these Hebrew communities the Lord mentions Tyre, Sidon and Sodom. Tyre and Sidon were two Phoenician cities along the Mediterranean which had become seats of Roman power. In Israel’s history, there had been some friendly relationships with these places, but it was off and on, depending on the kings of two nations. By Jesus’ day they represented the Hellenistic culture and Roman society, standing in sharp contrast to the theocracy which was supposed to rule Judea.
Laying aside Tyre and Sidon, think about all of the other cities of the world which Christ could have used to contrast the unrepentance but privileged cities of Galilee. The people to whom He was talking would certainly have grasped His meaning if He had mentioned Rome. Christ could have talked about Babylon or the capital cities of Moab, Egypt, and Edom. I personally think that if Jesus had referred to Ninevah, some really good messages could have developed. Ninevah was one of those heathen cities and out-and-out enemies of Israel, but which had in fact repented before God under the preaching of Jonah. I suppose that illustration might have spoiled Christ’s primary purpose in this paragraph. The Lord Jesus was trying to make a special point by contrasting the apparently religious cities of Galilee with some really onerous heathen communities. Out of all of the wicked cities in the world which were known to His hearers, the worst He could mention was Sodom. To the average mind in Jesus’ day, one of the worst cities in the world was Sodom – not Rome or Babylon.
And what was the sin which caused the Lord to spotlight Sodom?
What I learned from my brief visit to the internet is that the sin of Sodom was not homosexuality. Some people try to tell us that the sin of Sodom was either inhospitality or pride. Okay – there are 47 references to Sodom throughout the Bible. Those people with an pro-homosexual agenda, ignore the Genesis account of the sin of the city, and base their interpretation on Ezekiel 16 where Sodom is mentioned several times. Turn to Ezekiel 16:49-50 – “Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy. And they were haughty, and committed abomination before me: therefore I took them away as I saw good.” Ezekiel clearly tells us that the sins of Sodom included pride, wealth and indolence.
I have lived quite a few years in this world, but I admit that they have been somewhat sheltered years. I have not been exposed to… nor have I committed… all the sins that are available to wicked people today. Perhaps I’ve not sinned in same things as you, and you’ve probably not sinned in the same way as I have. But we could probably both testify to the fact that whatever sins we commit, they rarely stood alone. Usually, one sin was born of an earlier sin, and often it produces another sin. As a child I remember stealing from the local store, and when I was confronted of my crime, I lied. Sin followed sin. When our first parents were accused of her sin, they sinned again by casting the blame on others. A great many sinners grow proud of either their sin, or their ability to hide their sin. Sin is almost always added to sin – to sin – to sin. Without a doubt the people of Sodom were prosperous – and proud of their wealth. Why was it that Lot wanted to move toward Sodom? Because it was a prosperous community. What happens when people have all that they need and then some? They sometimes grow lazy. And what happens when people have more time on their hands than they have sense in their heads? From there, anything might happen, especially when the heart has not been converted. It was Chaucer who wrote about idle hands and minds being the Devil’s tools and workshop. Just because Ezekiel 16 doesn’t mention homosexuality, that doesn’t mean that wasn’t one of their sins. And if Israel was not at that point guilty of that particular sin, then it didn’t need to be brought up.
But wait a minute, what is the meaning of God’s words through Ezekiel – they “committed abomination…?” What is the meaning of the word “abomination?” I will grant that “abomination” is not a direct synonym for homosexual immorality. But at the same time, it definitely refers to something horrendous – beyond normal human wickedness. No one can say that it doesn’t refer to hideous immorality. And no one can honestly say that it refers merely to pride or inhospitality. I believe, without any hesitation, that this “abomination” mentioned by Ezekiel was homosexuality.
We will take a look at Genesis in a few minutes, but I’m hoping that you remember the history. Lot had moved his family to Sodom, while Abraham was still living out on the hills under the stars. After God and a couple of angels came to visit Abraham, they traveled to Sodom in order to get Lot to move out. It is believed by many that these angels asked for accommodations, but they were refused. When Lot invited them into his house a group of Sodomites inhospitably attacked the house and its residents. People with the agenda of denying the homosexual sins of Sodom, say that the city was destroyed because the residents were not kind and hospitable to visitors. Granted, they were unsociable and unfriendly, but that doesn’t deny their unseemly immorality.
But, says this argument, the Lord Jesus reaffirmed that interpretation in Matthew 10. Is that really so? Please turn to Matthew 10:11-15 and listen with a clear and unbiased mind. “And into whatsoever city or town ye shall enter, enquire who in it is worthy; and there abide till ye go thence. And when ye come into an house, salute it. And if the house be worthy, let your peace come upon it: but if it be not worthy, let your peace return to you. And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet. Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city.” Was Jesus saying that Sodom and Gomorrha lacked graciousness and friendliness? Not at all. He was saying in that chapter exactly what He was saying in chapter 11 – the judgment of Sodom will be less severe than for those cities where the Lord’s evangelists were not well-received.
Something completely lost by those liberals with the homosexual agenda is what precedes the visit to Sodom. The preincarnate Christ, along with two of his angels, visited Abraham in Mamre, talking about the upcoming birth of Isaac. And then the Lord revealed that He already had plans to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah. “And the LORD said, Because the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is great, and because their sin is very grievous; I will go down now, and see whether they have done altogether according to the cry of it….” In other words, the sin of Sodom was not something done against the angels when they arrived. It was not inhospitality; it was not mere pride. It was something horrendously evil – it was some sort of unspeakable immorality.
The sin of Sodom is plainly revealed in Genesis 19.
“And there came two angels to Sodom at even; and Lot sat in the gate of Sodom: and Lot seeing them rose up to meet them; and he bowed himself with his face toward the ground; And he said, Behold now, my lords, turn in, I pray you, into your servant’s house, and tarry all night, and wash your feet, and ye shall rise up early, and go on your ways. And they said, Nay; but we will abide in the street all night. And he pressed upon them greatly; and they turned in unto him, and entered into his house; and he made them a feast, and did bake unleavened bread, and they did eat. But before they lay down, the men of the city, even the men of Sodom, compassed the house round, both old and young, all the people from every quarter: And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we may know them.”
I see nothing in these words about simple inhospitality, unfriendliness or a desire to drive these visitors out of town. “That we may know them” is Biblical language referring to carnal intimacy. Genesis 18:20 calls the sin of Sodom “very grievous.” II Peter 2:6 says that God condemned and destroyed Sodom and Gomorrha “making them an ensample unto those that after should live ungodly.” In that light, their sin must have been far more odious than common pride or unfriendliness. Jude 7 describes the sin of Sodom as particularly wicked. “Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, 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.”
The sin of Sodom and Gomorrah was some kind of activity – a grave, ongoing, lawless, sensuous activity – which Lot saw and heard and which tormented him. It was an activity in which the inhabitants indulged in corrupt desires by going after strange flesh. They brought upon themselves a judgment which was basically unparalleled in history. Their sin could not possibly be something as mundane as pride or inhospitality. The sin of Sodom is what we call homosexuality. It is hard to consider a sin more horrendous than the sin of Sodomy.
Don’t let anyone try to minimize the sin of Sodom, making less than the dictionary definition of “sodomy.” The sin of Sodom was homosexuality.
I will close in the same basic way that I did this morning.
Despite the hideousness of the sin of sodomy, some sodomites may suffer less in God’s final judgment than many professing Christians. To hear the gospel, to have the truth taught and sins exposed – sins like that of homosexuality – but to live and die in rejection of the truth will be worse than not to hear the truth at all. To be raised in a society which praises sexual perversion, and thus never to hear that sodomy is a sin against God as well as a sin against nature, may mean less punishment than to know the truth and reject it. You may say that such a judgment is not fair. I reply that whatever you might think – it is Biblical.
Sodomites need to repent of their sin – they need to acknowledge their wickedness and flee from it. They need to turn to Christ for forgiveness and deliverance. But so do all those sinners who are not Sodomites. And so do all those church members who have not yet been born again.