In 2008, voters in California were given the opportunity to vote on Proposition 8, a piece of legislation that would “eliminate the rights of same same-sex couples to marry.” The proposition ultimately passed, leading to a massive outcry and the eventual overturning of the amendment to the state’s constitution. But after the dust had settled, the question still remained: How had the conservative Proposition 8 managed to pass in stereotypically liberal California? The answer: evangelical Christians. 

In America today, it is common for the evangelical church to be associated with a strong opposition to homosexuality, especially when compared with other non-Christian groups. Legislation pertaining to issues such as same-sex marriage and discrimination against LGBTQ+ individuals have been (and still are) largely opposed by conservative, Christian members of government despite the national support which they have amassed in the last two decades. 

When asked why they are against these issues, anti-LGBTQ+ Christian groups will often point to verses in the Bible, particularly the destruction of the city of Sodom. This passage has given rise to the word “sodomy”, a phrase which has been used by Christians for centuries to condemn homosexuality. However, research conducted within the past decade has revealed that the destruction of Sodom may not intended to punish homosexuality at all, and instead a simple misinterpretation may be to blame for the mass condemnation found across many sects of Christianity. 

Sodom: A Biblical Warning

The story of the city of Sodom is a tragic yet important tale in understanding the origins of the Christian condemnation of homosexuality. In one part of the story, two angels descend from heaven to the crime-ridden city of Sodom and enter the home of Lot’s uncle. After the people of Sodom find out the angels are being harbored in the home, they demand that Lot and his uncle present them to the crowd so that “we [the townspeople] can have sex with them”. As a result of the transgressions of the people of Sodom, God destroys the city and all of its inhabitants. 

This passage at first glance appears to be a clear indication that homosexuality is the reason that God destroyed the city of Sodom, but upon closer inspection it becomes clear that this may not actually be the case. 

Mistranslation and Misinterpretation

One of the most important pieces of evidence that is used to support the theory that the city of Sodom was destroyed because of the inhabitants’ homosexuality is the Hebrew phrase “וְנֵדְעָ֖ה”. When translated to English, this phrase roughly approximates to “that we may know”. In some versions of the Bible, this phrase is even translated as “that we may have sex”. It is apparent that there is not sufficient context in the story of Sodom to prove the meaning of this phrase, so Christians will often turn to another example of the phrase being used to prove their point. 

In Judges 19, the phrase is used in a strikingly similar situation to that of Sodom. In the chapter, a man travels to the city of Gibeah and is offered shelter by a citizen of the city. That night, the people of the city come to the house and demand that the citizen give up the man to the mob so that “we may know him”. The citizen refuses, and instead gives the man’s concubine to the mob. The mob then proceeds to rape and beat the concubine that night, seeming to indicate that “knowing” is equivalent to having sex in the Bible.  

However, many scholars argue that the act of “knowing” is not sexual in nature at all, and instead is used to infer that the people of the city want to inflict violence on the foreigner(s) in their cities. Modern Hebrew uses of the word have no sexual or violent connotations at all, so the Bible is one of the only places we can look to for context. The people of Gibeah chose to perform this violence in a sexual manner, but it is unclear if the people of Sodom would have chosen to do the same. Even if the Sodomites had chosen to sexually assault the angels the passage still would not prove God frowns on homosexuality, because the sin of Sodom is not that of homosexuality, rather it is that of practicing mob violence (and even rape) against strangers.

Ultimately, the interpretation of the sin of Sodom is left to the reader. However, incorrectly translating the Hebrew phrase and not providing the necessary context has resulted in one of the largest religions in the world perpetuating the condemnation of homosexuality despite the fact that the specific passage detailing the destruction of Sodom does not do so at all. 

It is impossible to know whether this particular misinterpretation was intentional or not, but many people throughout history have purposefully misinterpreted the Bible in order to push their own agenda. In Ryan Moffatt’s post “Michelangelo Did Not Simply Misread the Bible”, Moffatt analyzes how Michelangelo may have purposefully misconstrued certain biblical scenes in painting the Sistine Chapel. He provides an entertaining account of the history of the scenes Michelangelo altered while consistently maintaining an analytical eye, which leads to a highly interesting read.

Written by Cade Smith, Class of 2024