Can't say how many times I've heard asserted lately that the sin of Sodom was inhospitality, not homosexuality. A lot, though.
I'm reading Jude, and came across this.
God punishes sin: unfaithful Israel after their redemption from Egypt (Jude 5 and Numbers 14:29), the angels who procreated with women (Jude 6 and Gen 6:1-4), and Sodom who gave "themselves over to sexual immorality and [went] after strange [hetero] flesh" (Jude 7 and Gen 19:24).
The last 2 - angels and Sodom - are paralleled in that they both "did not keep their proper domain, but left their own abode" (vs 6). This is written of the angels only, but the immediate next example of Sodom fits right in to the principle.
[Tongue in cheek]
But you know narrow-minded Jude, contending for the faith, and all that fundamentalist hogwash... What an embarrassment, right?
[Tongue out of cheek]
Anyway, these are "set forth as an example" (vs 7), and I don't think God means as dialogue partners...
Did a quick check on other Scripture referring to Sodom and found this on its sins:
- Ezekiel 16:49-50 - though rich, she didn't help the poor, and they "committed abomination."
- Lam 4 and Matt 11 - Jeremiah and Jesus both say that Israel's condemnation will be worse than Sodom's.
I have no problem wholeheartedly affirming both of these, but when many deny homosexuality to be a sin in the first place, we need to begin on a different front. Namely, the initial goal is to speak the language of Scripture and refer to it as abomination without embarrassment. But doing so doesn't help dialogue, either...
Funny how we keep bumping up against the Bible while trying to get along in a denomination.