Dear Readers,
My friend, Jerry Sheppard, and I have been conversing for several months with a Jewish homosexual named Alex Haiken, who erroneously considers himself to be a Christian. Apparently Alex failed to read where Jesus says "I am the light of the world; he who follows Me shall not walk in the darkness, but shall have the light of life" (John 8:12) and where it testifies that "If we say that we have fellowship with Him and yet walk in the darkness, we [are liars] and do not practice the truth" (1 John 1:6) and where it states that "Everyone who names the name of the Lord must depart from wickedness" (2 Timothy 2:19). Alex constantly and consistently laces his writings with error, misinformation, inferences, presumptions, assumptions, conclusions drawn on assumptions, pretext, front-loading, and eisegetical interpretations based on his feelings and opinions.
Alex fails to "Study to show [himself] approved, a workman that needs not be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth" (2 Timothy 2:15). Instead, Alex relies on the unscholarly works of such homosexual/homosexual advocating authors such as John Boswell, Jack Rogers, Dale Martin, and Justin R. Cannon (to name a few). These men have absolutely no credibility whatsoever, and, like Alex, their works have been exposed to be filled with sloppy and dishonest scholarship, blatant plagiarism, copy errors, selective citations, truncated quotations of text, and creative editing. Alex delights in ripping verses and passages from their context and habitually neglects to apply the rules of hermeneutics (the science and art of biblical interpretation) and engage in honest, responsible, sound biblical exegesis. Alex talks a good game concerning exegesis, plagiarizing the definitions from authors who have spoken on the subject without giving them due credit, but constantly fails to actually practice responsible exegesis. We are now going to engage in honest, responsible, sound biblical exegesis in determining what Genesis 19 is dealing with.
Alex has even attempted to argue that the Hebrew word for "men" in Genesis 19:4 is inclusive of women, an argument he obviously received from Justin R. Cannon: "If you look at the original Hebrew text, and even early Greek translations, the word translated into English as 'men' can be inclusive of the women as well."1 Therefore, he urges, the men and women of the city wanted to "gang rape" the two angels. However, this is false. The first flaw in his argument is with the Hebrew word אנושׁ (enowsh). It is not inclusive of women. It is a masculine noun meaning man. The plural of this word often serves for the plural of אישׁ (iysh), which "does not indicate humankind but the male gender in particular."2 The second flaw in his argument is that the word used for the "men" of the city is also the same word used when demanding Lot to bring out the "men" (v.5). If it is inclusive of women, when Lot offered his daughters, why did they not take advantage of them? The third flaw in his argument is with the Greek word ανηρ in the Septuagint. It is not inclusive of women. This is a masculine noun meaning man or husband. As you can see, Alex is lying through his teeth yet again, trying to forge support for his perverse behaviour.
The Bible informs us that even after they were all struck with blindness, the men of the city still continued to grope for the door, wearing themselves out; exhausting themselves. Why? When you are blind, you cannot participate in gang rape because you cannot see who it is you might be raping, and these men were after Lot's guests. However, if you are blind, you can still engage in sexual activity. Any sane person in their right mind immediately struck with blindness would stop what they were doing because the realization that they were now blind would have kicked in. God goes so far as to inform us that even after they were blinded, these men did not stop. Homosexuals today bear the same character, attacking churches and doing things to its members that no rational human being would ever do to another human being. Homosexuality makes people irrational in their thoughts and in their behaviour.
What is even more interesting about the Genesis 19 passage in the Septuagint is the usage of the word σοδομιται in verse 4. Alex insists that there is no Greek word for "sodomites", yet, here it is; and it is plural masculine. The Greek word for Sodom is Σοδομα. Σοδομιται refers to the inhabitants of Sodom, i.e., the Sodomites. This is precisely what the word meant in biblical times. The primarily sexual meaning of the word sodomia for Christians did not evolve before the 6th century A.D. Roman Emperor Justinian I, in his novels no. 77 (dating 538) and no. 141 (dating 559) amended to his Corpus iuris civilis, declared that Sodom's sin had been specifically same-sex activities and desire for them. Nevertheless, despite this word not taking on its primarily sexual meaning until later, Christians earlier than Justinian are also seen to denounce same-sex relations. Philo of Alexandria (20 B.C. - 50 A.D.) and Methodius of Olympus (260-312 A.D.) attributed homosexual relations to Sodom, as did St. Augustine and many others. Thus, "sodomites" refers to homosexuals. Here are some quotes:
Now, Alex Haiken is keen on turning to Ezekiel 16:49 in order to attempt to tell us what the sins of Sodom supposedly were: "Behold, this was the guilt of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had arrogance, abundant food and careless ease, but she did not help the poor and needy." This is where Alex stops because of his pretext, "an effort or strategy intended to conceal something." Alex stops here with his quotation because he is dishonest and willfully deceitful. He is the son of his father, the devil, and so his tactics should not be surprising in the least. When Satan was tempting Jesus, he stopped his quotation of Scripture short of the verse that spoke of his own destruction. Alex does the same thing. If we continue with our quotation of Scripture, Ezekiel 16:50 reads, "Thus they were haughty and committed abominations before Me. Therefore I removed them when I saw it." The Hebrew word translated "abominations" here is to'ebah (תועבה), the very same term used to describe homosexual activities/relationships in the holiness code (Leviticus 20:13). To'ebah properly refers to something morally disgusting.
Alex Haiken attempts to twist and malign Ezekiel 16:49 in order to garner support for his homosexual behaviour. He hopes to conceal the truth of what the Bible really says were the sins of Sodom. However, the Bible spells it out for us on a number of occasions. Isaiah 3:9 informs us of how Sodom made shameless proclamation of their sin (the same shameless proclamation that homosexuals demonstrate today): "The expression of their faces bears witness against them, and they display their sin like Sodom; they do not even conceal it. Woe to them! For they have brought evil on themselves." 2 Peter 2:6-8 also inform us as to the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah: "and if He condemned the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to destruction by reducing them to ashes, having made them an example to those who would live ungodly thereafter; and if He rescued righteous Lot, oppressed by the sensual conduct of unprincipled men (for by what he saw and heard that righteous man, while living among them, felt his righteous soul tormented day after day with their lawless deeds)" Likewise, so also does Jude 7: "Just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities around them, since they in the same way as these indulged in gross immorality and went after strange flesh, are exhibited as an example, in undergoing the punishment of eternal fire."
As you can see, the Bible does indeed tell us what the sins of Sodom really were. In fact, the whole of history backs up this factual understanding of the passage. Alex Haiken, on the other hand, attempts to willfully deceive those who would give any credence to his venomous lies.
It does not matter whether it is homosexual gang rape, homosexual prostitution, pederasty; whether there is a significant age difference or the ages are relatively the same; whether it is a boy kept for homosexual relations with a man or it is a "committed, faithful and loving monogamous partnership;" or whatever other brush one wants to attempt to paint the picture with, homosexuality is still homosexuality. Homosexuality is a moral perversion and bankruptcy of human nature and sexuality that is condemned by God because it is unnatural and goes against His created order and what is to be expected. All nature, biology, science, and logic prove that homosexuality is an unnatural perversion of both human and sexual nature. There is no issue regarding homosexuals who want to marry because such a union does not constitute marriage and it never will. A marriage constitutes one man and one woman. Period.
My friend, Jerry Sheppard, and I have been conversing for several months with a Jewish homosexual named Alex Haiken, who erroneously considers himself to be a Christian. Apparently Alex failed to read where Jesus says "I am the light of the world; he who follows Me shall not walk in the darkness, but shall have the light of life" (John 8:12) and where it testifies that "If we say that we have fellowship with Him and yet walk in the darkness, we [are liars] and do not practice the truth" (1 John 1:6) and where it states that "Everyone who names the name of the Lord must depart from wickedness" (2 Timothy 2:19). Alex constantly and consistently laces his writings with error, misinformation, inferences, presumptions, assumptions, conclusions drawn on assumptions, pretext, front-loading, and eisegetical interpretations based on his feelings and opinions.
Alex fails to "Study to show [himself] approved, a workman that needs not be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth" (2 Timothy 2:15). Instead, Alex relies on the unscholarly works of such homosexual/homosexual advocating authors such as John Boswell, Jack Rogers, Dale Martin, and Justin R. Cannon (to name a few). These men have absolutely no credibility whatsoever, and, like Alex, their works have been exposed to be filled with sloppy and dishonest scholarship, blatant plagiarism, copy errors, selective citations, truncated quotations of text, and creative editing. Alex delights in ripping verses and passages from their context and habitually neglects to apply the rules of hermeneutics (the science and art of biblical interpretation) and engage in honest, responsible, sound biblical exegesis. Alex talks a good game concerning exegesis, plagiarizing the definitions from authors who have spoken on the subject without giving them due credit, but constantly fails to actually practice responsible exegesis. We are now going to engage in honest, responsible, sound biblical exegesis in determining what Genesis 19 is dealing with.
"Before they lay down, the men of the city, the men of Sodom, surrounded the house, both young (נצר) and old (זקן), all the people from every quarter; and they called to Lot and said to him, 'Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us that we may have relations with them.' But Lot went out to them at the doorway, and shut the door behind him, and said, 'Please, my brothers, do not act wickedly. Now behold, I have two daughters who have not had relations with man; please let me bring them out to you, and do to them whatever you like; only do nothing to these men, inasmuch as they have come under the shelter of my roof.' But they said, 'Stand aside.' Furthermore, they said, 'This one came in as an alien, and already he is acting like a judge; now we will treat you worse than them.' So they pressed hard against Lot and came near to break the door." (Genesis 19:4-9)From the underlined words we can see how every argument Alex makes is completely and utterly dismantled and destroyed. Regarding the theory that pederasty is in view, the phrase "both young and old" rips it to shreds. Both young men and old men wanted to have sexual relations with the men (not boys) being sheltered by Lot. These men are told "do not act so wickedly," to which they accuse Lot of being their judge. A little logic and common sense goes a long way. If hospitality and friendliness were in view here, how would anyone rightly call it wickedness, and why would the people accuse that person of being their judge? Furthermore, why would God destroy a city or nation for wanting to be hospitable and friendly? This theory is asinine and ludicrous. Their actions are described as being foolish and vile. The fact that women were offered to these men and they declined, wanting the men instead, demonstrates powerfully the reality that they wanted to have sexual relations with the men. Individuals who try and tell you otherwise are bankrupt morally, mentally, spiritually, and intellectually.
Alex has even attempted to argue that the Hebrew word for "men" in Genesis 19:4 is inclusive of women, an argument he obviously received from Justin R. Cannon: "If you look at the original Hebrew text, and even early Greek translations, the word translated into English as 'men' can be inclusive of the women as well."1 Therefore, he urges, the men and women of the city wanted to "gang rape" the two angels. However, this is false. The first flaw in his argument is with the Hebrew word אנושׁ (enowsh). It is not inclusive of women. It is a masculine noun meaning man. The plural of this word often serves for the plural of אישׁ (iysh), which "does not indicate humankind but the male gender in particular."2 The second flaw in his argument is that the word used for the "men" of the city is also the same word used when demanding Lot to bring out the "men" (v.5). If it is inclusive of women, when Lot offered his daughters, why did they not take advantage of them? The third flaw in his argument is with the Greek word ανηρ in the Septuagint. It is not inclusive of women. This is a masculine noun meaning man or husband. As you can see, Alex is lying through his teeth yet again, trying to forge support for his perverse behaviour.
The Bible informs us that even after they were all struck with blindness, the men of the city still continued to grope for the door, wearing themselves out; exhausting themselves. Why? When you are blind, you cannot participate in gang rape because you cannot see who it is you might be raping, and these men were after Lot's guests. However, if you are blind, you can still engage in sexual activity. Any sane person in their right mind immediately struck with blindness would stop what they were doing because the realization that they were now blind would have kicked in. God goes so far as to inform us that even after they were blinded, these men did not stop. Homosexuals today bear the same character, attacking churches and doing things to its members that no rational human being would ever do to another human being. Homosexuality makes people irrational in their thoughts and in their behaviour.
What is even more interesting about the Genesis 19 passage in the Septuagint is the usage of the word σοδομιται in verse 4. Alex insists that there is no Greek word for "sodomites", yet, here it is; and it is plural masculine. The Greek word for Sodom is Σοδομα. Σοδομιται refers to the inhabitants of Sodom, i.e., the Sodomites. This is precisely what the word meant in biblical times. The primarily sexual meaning of the word sodomia for Christians did not evolve before the 6th century A.D. Roman Emperor Justinian I, in his novels no. 77 (dating 538) and no. 141 (dating 559) amended to his Corpus iuris civilis, declared that Sodom's sin had been specifically same-sex activities and desire for them. Nevertheless, despite this word not taking on its primarily sexual meaning until later, Christians earlier than Justinian are also seen to denounce same-sex relations. Philo of Alexandria (20 B.C. - 50 A.D.) and Methodius of Olympus (260-312 A.D.) attributed homosexual relations to Sodom, as did St. Augustine and many others. Thus, "sodomites" refers to homosexuals. Here are some quotes:
"The land of the Sodomites, a part of Canaan afterwards called Palestinian Syria, was brimful of innumerable iniquities, particularly such as arise from gluttony and lewdness, and multiplied and enlarged every other possible pleasure with so formidable a menace that it had at last been condemned by the Judge of All…Incapable of bearing such satiety, plunging like cattle, they threw off from their necks the law of nature and applied themselves to…forbidden forms of intercourse. Not only in their mad lust for women did they violate the marriages of their neighbors, but also men mounted males without respect for the sex nature which the active partner shares with the passive; and so when they tried to beget children they were discovered to be incapable of any but a sterile seed. Yet the discovery availed them not, so much stronger was the force of the lust which mastered them. Then, as little by little they accustomed those who were by nature men to submit to play the part of women, they saddled them with the formidable curse of a female disease. For not only did they emasculate their bodies by luxury and voluptuousness but they worked a further degeneration in their souls and, as far as in them lay, were corrupting the whole of mankind." —Philo (Emphasis mine.)Even the Qu'ran, written around 632 A.D., clearly understood the sin of the Sodomites in Genesis 19 to be that of homosexuality. Surah 7:80-81 reads: "We also (sent) Lut: he said to his people: Do ye commit lewdness such as no people in creation (ever) committed before you? For ye practise your lusts on men in preference to women: ye are indeed a people transgressing beyond bounds." Surah 26:165-166 reads: "Of all the creatures in the world, will ye approach males, and leave those whom Allah has created for you to be your mates? Nay, ye are a people transgressing (all limits)!" Surah 29:28-29 reads: "And (remember) Lut: behold, he said to his people: 'Ye do commit lewdness, such as no people in Creation (ever) committed before you. Do ye indeed approach men, and cut off the highway?—and practise wickedness (even) in your councils?' But his people gave no answer but this: they said: 'Bring us the Wrath of Allah if thou tellest the truth.'" Surah 11:77-79 reveals their understanding of Genesis 19: "When Our Messengers came to Lut, he was grieved on their account and felt himself powerless (to protect) them. He said: 'This is a distressful day.' And his people came rushing towards him, and they had been long in the habit of practising abominations. He said: 'O my people! here are my daughters: they are purer for you (if ye marry)! Now fear Allah, and cover me not with disgrace about my guests! Is there not among you a single right-minded man?' They said: 'Well dost thou know we have no need of thy daughters: indeed thou knowest quite well what we want!'"
"As for adultery, Moses forbade it entirely, as esteeming it a happy thing that men should be wise in the affairs of wedlock; and that it was profitable both to cities and families that children should be known to be genuine. He also abhorred men’s lying with their mothers, as one of the greatest crimes; and the like for lying with the father’s wife, and with aunts, and sisters, and sons’ wives, as all instances of abominable wickedness. He also forbade a man to lie with his wife when she was defiled by her natural purgation: and not to come near brute beasts; nor to approve of the lying with a male, which was to hunt after unlawful pleasures on account of beauty. To those who were guilty of such insolent behavior, he ordained death for their punishment." —Flavius Josephus (Emphasis mine.)
"But we do not say so of that mixture that is contrary to nature, or of any unlawful practice; for such are enmity to God. For the sin of Sodom is contrary to nature, as is also that with brute beasts. But adultery and fornication are against the law; the one whereof is impiety, the other injustice, and, in a word, no other than a great sin. But neither sort of them is without its punishment in its own proper nature. For the practicers of one sort attempt the dissolution of the world, and endeavor to make the natural course of things to change for one that is unnatural; but those of the second son — the adulterers — are unjust by corrupting others’ marriages, and dividing into two what God hath made one, rendering the children suspected, and exposing the true husband to the snares of others. And fornication is the destruction of one’s own flesh, not being made use of for the procreation of children, but entirely for the sake of pleasure, which is a mark of incontinency, and not a sign of virtue. All these things are forbidden by the laws; for thus say the oracles: Thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind. For such a one is accursed, and ye shall stone them with stones: they have wrought abomination." —Methodius (Emphasis mine.)
"They who have committed sodomy with men or brutes, murderers, wizards, adulterers, and idolaters, have been thought worthy of the same punishment; therefore observe the same method with these which you do with others. We ought not to make any doubt of receiving those who have repented thirty years for the uncleanness which they committed through ignorance; for their ignorance pleads their pardon, and their willingness in confessing it; therefore command them to be forthwith received, especially if they have tears to prevail on your tenderness, and have [since their lapse] led such a life as to deserve your compassion." —St. Basil (Emphasis mine.)
"Can it ever, at any time or place, be unrighteous for a man to love God with all his heart, with all his soul, and with all his mind; and his neighbor as himself? Similarly, offenses against nature are everywhere and at all times to be held in detestation and should be punished. Such offenses, for example, were those of the Sodomites; and, even if all nations should commit them, they would all be judged guilty of the same crime by the divine law, which has not made men so that they should ever abuse one another in that way. For the fellowship that should be between God and us is violated whenever that nature of which he is the author is polluted by perverted lust." —St. Augustine (Emphasis mine.)
Now, Alex Haiken is keen on turning to Ezekiel 16:49 in order to attempt to tell us what the sins of Sodom supposedly were: "Behold, this was the guilt of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had arrogance, abundant food and careless ease, but she did not help the poor and needy." This is where Alex stops because of his pretext, "an effort or strategy intended to conceal something." Alex stops here with his quotation because he is dishonest and willfully deceitful. He is the son of his father, the devil, and so his tactics should not be surprising in the least. When Satan was tempting Jesus, he stopped his quotation of Scripture short of the verse that spoke of his own destruction. Alex does the same thing. If we continue with our quotation of Scripture, Ezekiel 16:50 reads, "Thus they were haughty and committed abominations before Me. Therefore I removed them when I saw it." The Hebrew word translated "abominations" here is to'ebah (תועבה), the very same term used to describe homosexual activities/relationships in the holiness code (Leviticus 20:13). To'ebah properly refers to something morally disgusting.
Alex Haiken attempts to twist and malign Ezekiel 16:49 in order to garner support for his homosexual behaviour. He hopes to conceal the truth of what the Bible really says were the sins of Sodom. However, the Bible spells it out for us on a number of occasions. Isaiah 3:9 informs us of how Sodom made shameless proclamation of their sin (the same shameless proclamation that homosexuals demonstrate today): "The expression of their faces bears witness against them, and they display their sin like Sodom; they do not even conceal it. Woe to them! For they have brought evil on themselves." 2 Peter 2:6-8 also inform us as to the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah: "and if He condemned the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to destruction by reducing them to ashes, having made them an example to those who would live ungodly thereafter; and if He rescued righteous Lot, oppressed by the sensual conduct of unprincipled men (for by what he saw and heard that righteous man, while living among them, felt his righteous soul tormented day after day with their lawless deeds)" Likewise, so also does Jude 7: "Just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities around them, since they in the same way as these indulged in gross immorality and went after strange flesh, are exhibited as an example, in undergoing the punishment of eternal fire."
As you can see, the Bible does indeed tell us what the sins of Sodom really were. In fact, the whole of history backs up this factual understanding of the passage. Alex Haiken, on the other hand, attempts to willfully deceive those who would give any credence to his venomous lies.
It does not matter whether it is homosexual gang rape, homosexual prostitution, pederasty; whether there is a significant age difference or the ages are relatively the same; whether it is a boy kept for homosexual relations with a man or it is a "committed, faithful and loving monogamous partnership;" or whatever other brush one wants to attempt to paint the picture with, homosexuality is still homosexuality. Homosexuality is a moral perversion and bankruptcy of human nature and sexuality that is condemned by God because it is unnatural and goes against His created order and what is to be expected. All nature, biology, science, and logic prove that homosexuality is an unnatural perversion of both human and sexual nature. There is no issue regarding homosexuals who want to marry because such a union does not constitute marriage and it never will. A marriage constitutes one man and one woman. Period.
1 Justin R. Cannon, The Bible, Christianity, and Homosexuality, 12.
2 Warren Baker, Eugene Carpenter, The Complete Word Study Dictionary Old Testament, 46 (see 75-76).