redditards
(media.scored.co)
New here?
Create an account to submit posts, participate in discussions and chat with people.
You are viewing a single comment's thread. View all
Toast message
> [1 Timothy 1:9-11] We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine that conforms to the gospel concerning the glory of the blessed God, which he entrusted to me. (NIV)
The Quran also contains verses in which homosexuality is clearly condemned by Lot, the prophet and messenger of God. For example:
> [Quran 29:28-29] Lot said to his people, "You commit such an abomination, no one in the world has ever done it before you. You practice sex with the men, you commit highway robbery, and you allow all kinds of vice in your society." The only response from his people was to say, "Bring to us GOD's retribution, if you are truthful." (tr. Rashad Khalifa)
Somehow, degenerates have been able to completely twist all of this obvious problematization of homosexuality into something else. Let us focus on Lot's people. Here, for instance, Gore Vidal tried to twist the destruction of Sodom into a problematization of, a punishment for, its inhabitants' rapaciousness. He writes:
> ... Sodom was destroyed not because the inhabitants were homosexualists but because a number of local men wanted to gang rape a pair of male angels who were guests of the town. That was a violation of the most sacred of ancient taboos: the law of hospitality. Also, gang rape, whether homosexual or heterosexual, is seldom agreeable in the eyes of any deity.
This interpretation is revealed as forced when considered in light of these verses. These verses are not about rape. They are clearly and unambiguously about homosexuality. Ask yourself how a substantial 'number of local men' could openly gather together to 'gang rape a pair of male angels' if homosexuality wasn't completely normalized in Sodom. Firstly, there would not be enough 'local men' interested in such a thing for any substantial number of them to gather in one place, that is, outside Lot's house; secondly, even if there were enough homosexual 'local men', they would not be accustomed to the idea that they can just casually gather together to do such a thing in the first place. That is, it sounds like the 'local men' have prior experience in doing such things. When Lot offers his daughters to them in place of the male angels, in the hope that this will lead the two male angels to be spared, notice that the 'local men' are not interested in raping them. It is obvious then that they weren't interested in just raping anything, but only what appeared to them to be human males.
That Sodom was destroyed because of the rapaciousness rather than the homosexuality of its inhabitants thus strikes me as an untenable claim. This wasn't about messing with the two wrong angels or violating the 'law of hospitality'. Lot could not find any good people left in the city: this was something a long time coming. Our views are consonant with both the Biblical and Quranic accounts. Views such as those of the aforementioned Gore Vidal, by contrast, are consonant merely with the motivated reasoning of degenerates.