What About Freedom of Religion? ------------------- Feedback Box:

But wouldn't courts throw out any law prohibiting "discrimination against sexual orientation", since it forces Christian employers and landlords to publicly endorse sodomy, by hiring people who continually promote it by their very demeanor and language?

They haven't yet! After all, these are the same courts which don't think "wanted posters", requesting information leading to the legitimate prosecution of abortionists, qualify as "free speech" any more.

It is true that much sodomite theology has been published, and a few Christian leaders are buying it. But before we as a society can agree that anti-sodomite theology no longer deserves First Amendment Protection, we as a society should determine that traditional theology not only has reasonable-sounding critics, but that it has so little merit, that it is no longer worthy of protection.

Has traditional theology (which calls sodomy "sin") been disproved to that extent? Let's look at some of the theological facts:

Ezekiel 22:1 Moreover the word of the LORD came unto me, saying, 2 Now, thou son of man, wilt thou judge, wilt thou judge the bloody city? yea, thou shalt shew her all her abominations. Leviticus 19:17 Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thine heart: thou shalt in any wise rebuke thy neighbour, and not suffer sin upon him. 18 Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the LORD.

When you tolerate sodomy, [God's word for homosexuality, named after the city He destroyed with fire from Heaven] this photo shows what you tolerate. These photos are a hint of why it was merciful for God to annihilate the Canaanites so no more children would be born into that Hell. Leviticus 18:24 Defile not ye yourselves in any of these things: [incest, baby killing, homosexuality, sex with animals] for in all these the nations are defiled which I cast out before you:

God's Position on Sodomite Civil Rights

(Please don't let the name "Sodomite" offend you, because it is God's term. Don't let anything God says offend you! I don't use it to offend anybody, to insult anybody, or to express hatred for anybody. I use it only because God uses it. God is the standard of Love. How could anybody express more love, than to repeat God's Words? If you think your life and your words can set a better standard of Love than God can, are you ready to let the world scrutinize, as it does God, what you have to offer?)

God's use of the term "sodomy" associates the practice of homosexuality with the final abomination committed by the men of Sodom before God rained down fire and brimstone upon the city from Heaven. Here is the story:

Genesis 19:4 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: 5 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. 6 And Lot went out at the door unto them, and shut the door after him, 7 And said, I pray you, brethren, do not so wickedly. 8 Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as is good in your eyes: only unto these men do nothing; for therefore came they under the shadow of my roof. 9 And they said, Stand back. And they said again, This one fellow came in to sojourn, and he will needs be a judge: now will we deal worse with thee, than with them. And they pressed sore upon the man, even Lot, and came near to break the door. 10 But the men put forth their hand, and pulled Lot into the house to them, and shut to the door. 11 And they smote the men that were at the door of the house with blindness, both small and great: so that they wearied themselves to find the door. 12 And the men said unto Lot, Hast thou here any besides? son in law, and thy sons, and thy daughters, and whatsoever thou hast in the city, bring them out of this place: 13 For we will destroy this place, because the cry of them is waxen great before the face of the LORD; and the LORD hath sent us to destroy it. 14 And Lot went out, and spake unto his sons in law, which married his daughters, and said, Up, get you out of this place; for the LORD will destroy this city. But he seemed as one that mocked unto his sons in law....

24 Then the LORD rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the LORD out of heaven; 25 And he overthrew those cities, and all the plain, and all the inhabitants of the cities, and that which grew upon the ground.

Sodomites say the sin you just read about was not homosexuality! They say verse 4, in saying "all the people" surrounded the house, must mean women and children were there too, all of them wanting sex with the angels! The sin which upset God, therefore, was not homosexual sex, it being no more present than heterosexual sex or, uh, would you call it "reverse pedophilia"? But rather the sin of Sodom was simply violent sex in general.

The linguistic problem with this is that the verse says twice that these "people" were "the men of the city, even the men of Sodom". And there is nothing in the definition of the Hebrew for "people" which necessarily includes women or children. And verse 11 says "the men" were punished.

But even if the sodomite interpretation were linguistically possible, how would it be physically possible? How could a mob of women rape an unwilling man? Uh, if you have an answer to that, I'm not sure I want to know. Surely violent sex was the intent of the sodomites, and specifically sodomy, since that was the only kind of sex that can be forced upon men. Whether Scripture says so or not, some women may have been present, just like today, where liberal women, heterosexuals as well as lesbians, join the chorus of those who tolerate it.

If God hates sexual sin more when it is violent, why does He never say so anywhere in the Bible? The penalty for sex outside marriage is death, whether it is violent or nonviolent. God's only distinction is that if a woman is forced, she is not punished. (Deuteronomy 22:25; v. 28-29 provides "shotgun weddings" as an alternative to execution for adultery.)

Another Sodomite stab at Sodom's sin being anything else besides homosexuality is that it is "inhospitality". God speaks frequently of kindness to strangers.

Deuteronomy 10:19 Love ye therefore the stranger: for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.

Lot was "hospitable" to the two angels posing as strangers, while the "people" of Sodom wanted to rape them, which was "inhospitable", in the Understatement of the Millennium of sodomites today! So what really peeved God was not the rape, but the inhospitality! Sodomites offer this "defense" in all seriousness!

(Actually "stranger" in the KJV means a foreigner, or someone of another color. It doesn't means someone you don't know anything about, although Lot certainly was blessed by sheltering two "men" he didn't know anything about, and we are offered the same blessing, Hebrews 13:2.)

Yet another Sodomite attempt to deflect criticism away from the "people" of Sodom is to say they "just wanted to get acquainted with" the angels! After all, their words to Lot were only "bring them out unto us, that we may know them." And "know" (KJV) only refers to sex in 10 of the 900 times it (the Hebrew word "Yadha") appears in Scripture.

This theory obliterates the previous theory, that the real essence of sodomy is inhospitality; and it obliterates the first theory, that what really angered God was the violence of the sex. And yet all three of these theories appear, side by side, without embarrassment, in books of "theology" by sodomites today! This third theory also defies God's claim that there was any sin in Sodom worthy of judgment!

Oh well, let's take the trouble to test its soundness anyway. Lot answered them, "I pray you, brethren, do not so wickedly." Is that how to answer a request to get acquainted?

If they simply wanted to get acquainted, why did Lot offer, as a substitute, his two daughters with whom they were already acquainted? And why did Lot think it would persuade them to mention that his daughters were virgins?

Oh, I forgot. "I have two daughters which have not known man", v. 8, doesn't mean they never had sex; it just means they had never gotten acquainted with anyone. I guess if that's what Lot meant, by saying they had "not known man", they must not have ever been acquainted with Lot, either. Hmmm. But then how did Lot know about them?

The "people" of Sodom were so full of the spirit of fellowship, so full of the desire to "get acquainted with" the angels, that they turned into a violent mob, pressing Lot against the door and nearly breaking down the door, v. 9!

Sodomites look at the story of Sodom and say "We aren't like they were! Our sexual relationships are permanent and loving; not lustful, unloving, and uncommitted." They say Paul only meant to condemn the latter, not the former.

1 Timothy 1:9 ...the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless... for them that defile themselves with mankind [Greek: arsenokoites "one who lies with a male as with a female, sodomite, homosexual"]....

1 Corinthians 6:9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor....nor abusers of themselves with mankind, [Greek: arsenokoites "one who lies with a male as with a female, sodomite, homosexual] 10 ...shall inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.

Sodomites say the Greek word "arsenokoites" makes the same distinction, between "permanent and loving" sex and "lustful unloving and uncommitted" sex. But that distinction is not found in Greek lexicons. It doesn't matter, according to the Lexicon definitions, whether same-sex sex is loving, hateful, permanent, one-time, lustful, or Platonic. Those who persist in it "shall not inherit the kingdom of God", but those who permit themselves to be washed of it, and who put that behavior in the past, shall be accepted in God's Church, and be "justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God".

The distinction is not found in Jesus' teaching. Jesus confirmed that a sexual relationship that has not been sanctified and legitimized through marriage ought never be confused for marriage, no matter how "loving" or "permanent" it is. He said this to the Woman of Samaria, who was "living with", as we call it today, a man, in a relatively "permanent" relationship.

John 4:15 The woman saith unto him, Sir, give me this water, that I thirst not, neither come hither to draw. 16 Jesus saith unto her, Go, call thy husband, and come hither. 17 The woman answered and said, I have no husband. Jesus said unto her, Thou hast well said, I have no husband: 18 For thou hast had five husbands; and he whom thou now hast is not thy husband: in that saidst thou truly.

Though Jesus gazed honestly upon the woman's sin, He loved her, He broke all convention to reach her, and He loved leading her out of sin as if it were a feast so satisfying that He had no time to think of physical food! (v. 32-34)

Sodomites say Jesus did not specifically condemn sodomy, as if other references throughout the Bible are not authoritative enough for them. Actually Jesus said many things not recorded in Scripture, John 21:25. Although Scripture does not record whatever He might have said specifically about sodomy, rape, or many other crimes, He affirmed all the laws of Moses.

Matthew 5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. 18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. 19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

There is controversy today about how much of the Old Testament should still be obeyed by Christians. Some say we should still obey the laws not specifically replaced by the New Testament; others say we should obey only the laws specifically repeated in the New Testament.

But in the case of Sodomy, the New Testament agrees with the Old, almost word for word. Remember that "arsenokoites" means "one who lies with a male as with a female, sodomite, homosexual". The Old Testament says:

Leviticus 20:13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

The Old Testament supports the Lexicon definitions of "arsenokoites", and Jesus acknowledges no distinction between "committed" adultery or "one night" adultery. Against this, what do Sodomites offer to back up their distinction? Nothing, that I know of, except their feeling that there ought to be a distinction.

Sodomites suggest another distinction we should make is between adultery for pay (prostitution) or without pay (slang: "trash", or "giving yourself away").

They find support for this distinction in the Old Testament Hebrew word for "sodomite", which is "male temple prostitute".

Deuteronomy 23:17 There shall be no whore of the daughters of Israel, nor a sodomite [male temple prostitute] of the sons of Israel.

2 Kings 22:3 And the king...made a covenant before the LORD, to walk after the LORD, and to keep his commandments and his testimonies and his statutes with all their heart and all their soul, to perform the words of this covenant that were written in this book. And all the people stood to the covenant.... 7 And he brake down the houses of the sodomites, [male temple prostitute] that were by the house of the LORD, where the women wove hangings for the grove. ....25 And like unto him was there no king before him, that turned to the LORD with all his heart, and with all his soul, and with all his might, according to all the law of Moses; neither after him arose there any like him.

(Also 1 Kings 22:46, 15:12)

1 Kings 14:22 And Judah did evil in the sight of the LORD, and they provoked him to jealousy with their sins which they had committed, above all that their fathers had done. 23 For they also built them high places, and images, and groves, on every high hill, and under every green tree. 24 And there were also sodomites [male temple prostitutes] in the land: and they did according to all the abominations of the nations which the LORD cast out before the children of Israel.

In other words, sodomites reason, the definition of the New Testament "arsenokoites" ought to be narrowed down to sex for pay, in the light of these "more specific" Old Testament passages. This argument ignores Leviticus 20:13, which is not at all restricted to sex just for pay, and whose words are almost copied in the Lexicon definitions of "arsenokoites".

Then why does God single out male temple prostitutes for an indication of the depths to which Israel had fallen, and not all homosexuality? Probably because a little bit of homosexuality exists in the most righteous society, until it is discovered and punished, but that isn't an indicator of the spiritual health of the entire society. But when society tolerates public, flagrant, temple prostitution, or in today's case, Civil Rights for sodomites, then the entire society has fallen that far; the entire society endorses it; and the entire society is judged.

That's why, when God speaks of indicators of how far Israel has fallen, God mentions speaks of temple prostitution; but when God compares the abomination of temple prostitution with the abomination of secret, private, or even "loving, permanent" sodomy, there is no difference.

This principle helps explain why prostitution is prosecuted to this day, though under God's laws it is no worse a crime than adultery. (Proverbs 7 depicts the prostitute's lure, but it is unclear whether she is paid; Moses' laws against adultery do not mention payment. It wasn't a defense against stoning to plead "Hey, I didn't get paid! I did it for love!")

50 years ago, even Iowa law criminalized both alike. As a practical matter, prostitution was always prosecuted more vigorously because it was easier to prove. Meanwhile adultery became more difficult to prosecute as it became more popular, because you need 12 out of 12 jurors who are willing to regard it as a crime. This is the lesson of John 8:11, where Jesus did not condemn the woman caught in adultery. Jesus cared about sin, and told the woman to stop. But by law, two witnesses were necessary to condemn her, and Jesus added the principle that the witnesses must themselves be free of whatever crime they condemn in another.

It is consistent with that difference that we, today, prosecute street and hotel prostitution, but not adultery committed "behind closed doors". We are in no position, as a society, to criminalize adultery, until we, as a society, can "get our own house in order". But we have not yet fallen so low that we are ready to tolerate brazen, shameless, public endorsement of it, which is what legalization of prostitution would be.

The Bible acknowledges that public endorsement of sin is even worse than private commission of the same sin:

Romans 1:32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

That is the distinction we face today, through Civil Rights protection for "sexual orientation". As a practical matter, sodomites can already rent and work. It is only sodomites who openly advertise their sexual practices who are helped by Civil Rights protection. But sodomites want greater endorsement by society than prostitutes! Sodomites want not only to be free from arrest when they publicly flaunt their sexual choices, but they want to force their employers and landlords to keep them on while they behave like that! Prostitutes have never dreamed of that much license!

Isaiah 3:9 The shew of their countenance doth witness against them; and they declare their sin as Sodom, they hide it not. Woe unto their soul! for they have rewarded evil unto themselves.

Sodomites say the next verse identifies other sins besides sodomy as the sin of Sodom, and a "man lying with a man" isn't even listed! Therefore, they say, "sodomy" doesn't refer to same-sex sex at all!

Ezekiel 16:49 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. 50 And they were haughty, and committed abomination before me: therefore I took them away as I saw good.

None of the sins specified in this list are elsewhere identified as "abominations". But Leviticus 20:13 clearly identifies homosexuality as an "abomination", and of all the other "abominations" identified by Moses, homosexuality is the only one which Genesis 19 tells us was practiced in Sodom.

Notice that while six sins in Sodom are listed, the "abomination" is listed last. This is consistent with the pattern in Romans 1, where sodomy is the final depth to which those sink who reject God. Notice that both in this verse and in Romans 1, sodomy is not portrayed as the only sin worthy of judgment, but as the culmination of a life of sin. In other words, it is the last final abyss into which a sinner is likely to plunge, after having already become guilty of many others. (I don't mistake a generality for an absolute pattern, and neither does God. I only point out the general pattern which God observes.)

In their "arrogance, abundance of food, and careless ease" there was selfishness, as sodomites today point out. Indulgence in sexual perversion, as well as indifference to the needy, proceed from the same sinful selfish disregard of others.

In other words, sodomy is so obvious, provable, and distinguishable from other behavior that even a human court has enough intelligence to discern it and prosecute it. Not so everyday selfishness. Everyday selfishness is indeed more pervasive, and indeed more basic to fallen human nature, than sodomy. Thus sodomites are right to say it is not only homosexuals who are guilty of the Sin of Sodom.

But surely of all manifestations of selfishness, the prize for greatness goes to those who so blind themselves to the Holy Image of God (Genesis 9:6) in the heart and soul before them, that they see only the physical body and use it for a sex toy!

Both perverse sexual self indulgence, and adulterous self-indulgence along with "careless ease", are damnable. It is just that sodomy is more definitive and indicative of the sin already flourishing within the Godless.

It is with this mind that we call sodomy sin. We boldly call it what it is and we decry it unequivocally as high handed sinning; but we must remain sober in our recognition that the more subtle sin of "careless ease" might be ours. Let us therefore preach with reverence and humility, joined with holy boldness.

Another verse which identifies the sin of Sodom:

Jude 7 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. 8 Likewise also these filthy dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities.

Romans 1 is very specific not only about what manner of sex is perverted, but the spiritual condition that leads to such perversion. To apply it today, it begins with acceptance of the Theory of Evolution, despite all scientific evidence to the contrary.

Romans 1:19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. 20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: 21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, 23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. 24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: 25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. 26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: 27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. 28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; 29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, 30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, 31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: 32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

Here are abominations with which sodomy keeps company, and here are God's judgments upon any land which tolerates them. (V. 21, "Molech" was the brass idol under whose arms a fire was lit. When they were red hot, children were thrown into them: that was their technological equivalent of abortion.)

Leviticus 18:20 Moreover thou shalt not lie carnally with thy neighbour's wife, to defile thyself with her. 21 And thou shalt not let any of thy seed pass through the fire to Molech, neither shalt thou profane the name of thy God: I am the LORD. 22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination. 23 Neither shalt thou lie with any beast to defile thyself therewith: neither shall any woman stand before a beast to lie down thereto: it is confusion. 24 Defile not ye yourselves in any of these things: for in all these the nations are defiled which I cast out before you: 25 And the land is defiled: therefore I do visit the iniquity thereof upon it, and the land itself vomiteth out her inhabitants. 26 Ye shall therefore keep my statutes and my judgments, and shall not commit any of these abominations; neither any of your own nation, nor any stranger that sojourneth among you: 27 (For all these abominations have the men of the land done, which were before you, and the land is defiled;) 28 That the land spue not you out also, when ye defile it, as it spued out the nations that were before you. 29 For whosoever shall commit any of these abominations, even the souls that commit them shall be cut off from among their people. 30 Therefore shall ye keep mine ordinance, that ye commit not any one of these abominable customs, which were committed before you, and that ye defile not yourselves therein: I am the LORD your God.

It is not sodomites alone who wince at such Scriptures as these, but all who are entangled in any sexual sin! Yes, it is true: sodomy is no worse in God's sight than adultery! If we fear or love God, we will repent of all sin! Meanwhile, we who follow Jesus will stand against Civil Rights protection for sodomy, adultery, robbery, murder, or any other crime. It is shameful enough that we promote all these things in our movies: let us not stoop all the way down, until we promote them in our courts!

Many have disobeyed God's Commandments simply because they haven't heard them. Or they have read them, but they have been confused by sodomite theology. God has compassion on the confused, but God also offers the hope of growing up, putting this behind you, and being restored to full fellowship with God:

Acts 17:30 And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent: 31 Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead.

Conclusion:

Remember that this study began in self defense: if the sodomite theologians are right, then Christians have no case against sodomite "civil rights" whatsoever, and sermons against sodomy are all, absolutely wrong. But even if traditional theology is wrong, it is something else again to say it is so wrong, so worthless, that it isn't worth protecting under the First Amendment which used to guarantee Freedom of Religious Expression.

The conclusion of this study is that traditional theology is not only worth First Amendment protection, it is not only not THAT wrong, but it is not wrong at all: it is so right, that it is time for all people (not just sodomites) to repent.

Let us repent as a people, and return righteousness to the land. Let us who have been sinners become saints. Let us who have been prodigals return Home to our Father, and let us drink in His Love as He comes running out to us, restoring to us a Ring of Authority, and throwing a celebration all over Heaven out of joy at seeing us back! (Luke 15)

Feedback Box Got feedback? Send it, along with name or url of the article, and a little of the text on either side of where your comment belongs, so I know what you are responding to, and I'll post your response. I might even place it right smack dab in the article! (If you don't want your email posted, SAY SO!)