Dear Jerri, #7

Dear Jerri, 

Last week we looked at Mark 10:2-12, a Scripture that is often invoked to address same-sex relationships, but which requires us to ignore the fact that divorce and remarriage is actually the topic there. Of course, the Pharisee’s mistake in Mark 10 is that they were trying to trick Jesus with a question about divorce using a Scripture which addresses remarriage to a first spouse after divorcing a second spouse. There is some comfort in knowing that we didn’t invent the practice of taking Scriptures out of their proper context in order to build a case for our opinion. Ah well. 

For today, look at these two Greek words and tell me if they look similar: 

                        Σόδομα                       {][}                  ἀρσενοκοίταις            

No, of course they are not similar at all. And if one were familiar with the Greek alphabet, it would be easy to see that the first word is “Sodom.” Like most proper names in the Greek texts of the New Testament, it gets transliterated into English. The second word, while obviously looking nothing like the first, has been translated for many years into English as “sodomite.” “Sodomite,” along with “sodomy,” are words in English that refer to same-sex sexual activity, intended to relate in some way to the story of Sodom and Gomorrah, the twin cities that were destroyed by fire in Genesis 19. We will look at what the second word actually means later, but for now let’s hold onto this: A reader of an English language Bible might read “sodomite” (as a translation of ἀρσενοκοίταις) and naturally infer that the biblical writer – who was writing in Greek, not English – was also using a word that points to the story of Sodom and Gomorrah. And that would not be true. 

This is the kind of situation where the biblical translators reveal their prejudices. That is not a criticism, because I do not believe anyone is able to translate without also interpreting, so everyone brings prejudices into the act of translating. By and large, most Bible translations have been carefully and conscientiously worked over again and again, with teams of translators challenging one another, to where we can read our Bibles with a lot of confidence. And each one of them is a far better Bible scholar than I. But, each one of them is human, each one of them has brought theological and social prejudices to their work, and there are moments when the effects can be rather strong. 

My point is that we have several generations of Bible reading folk for whom the word “sodomite” is a biblical word, with connotations that are informed by current social use, specifically referring to illicit same-sex sexually activity such as “sodomy laws.” The biblical question is: Is the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah about illicit same-sex sexual activity? Most people would look at that question and answer, “Yes, of course.” Others would answer, “Not necessarily.” And who are those who would say, “Not necessarily?” One might think it is clever liberal-minded folk who don’t read the Bible as the Word of God. However, the best answer is, “Other biblical writers.” 

Take Ezekiel, for example. He refers to Sodom quite often, usually criticizing Israel by referring to Sodom as her “older sister.” Here’s how Ezekiel 16:49 describes the horrific sin of Sodom, which caused her to be overthrown forever: “This was the guilt of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had pride, excess of food, and prosperous ease, but did not aid the poor and needy.” Just imagine what “sodomy laws” would look like if we followed Ezekiel’s lead on defining the guilt of Sodom. Imagine who would fit the term, “sodomite” if greed, excess, and disdain for the poor were our working definition of that term. Ezekiel would refer to the entire industry of the so-called “prosperity gospel” as a manufactory of sodomy! 

Or take Jeremiah 23:14, which refers to Sodom in critiquing Israel’s prophets: “They commit adultery and walk in lies; they strengthen the hands of evildoers, so that no one turns from wickedness; all of them have become like Sodom to me, and its inhabitants like Gomorrah.” For Jeremiah, Sodom and Gomorrah are a type for all manner of evil activity, but not specifically “illicit same-sex sexual activity,” which is how our language imagines them. Elsewhere in Jeremiah, and in Isaiah, Amos, and Zephaniah, the story of Sodom and Gomorrah is about permanent and total destruction, as opposed to Israel’s exile, which was for a limited time and from which there remained a “remnant” who were saved. The point is, our language has rendered Sodom, sodomy, and sodomite as terms referring to illicit same-sex sexual activity, while the biblical witness as a whole sees the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah in a variety of ways. In none of the prophets’ uses could one derive the definition of “sodomy” that our language has rendered. None. 

And yet, for generations of English-speaking bible translators and readers, Sodom represents illicit same-sex sexual activity. It is deeply imprinted in our minds and the story of Sodom and Gomorrah is simply assumed to be the defining story about how God sees homosexual activity. This tendency is particularly strong among churches that presume to call themselves “Bible believing churches.” And it’s wrong. 

Next week, we’ll look at how the story of Sodom and Gomorrah is understood in the intertestamental period, and how that influenced its use in the gospels.