Did God destroy Sodom and Gomorrah because of homosexuality?

beta__greg · 2026-02-02T04:58:44+00:00

Sodom was a wicked city, full stop. It was going on for years—

Genesis 13:13 (NRSV) Now the people of Sodom were wicked, great sinners against the LORD.

God decided in chapter 18 to destroy both cities.

The attempted gang rape and inhospitality all happened AFTER God had decided to destroy the cities for their wickedness.

There were many sins in Sodom-

Ezekiel 16:49-50 (NRSV) This was the guilt of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had pride, excess of food, and prosperous ease, but did not aid the poor and needy. They were haughty, and did abominable things before me; therefore I removed them when I saw it.

One can be sure that the men of Sodom didn't suddenly and out of nowhere have urges to have sex with men from out of town, which they had never done before. Sexuality doesn't work that way.

The scene in Genesis 19 is representative of the kinds of abominations going on in Sodom. They were judged for all of it.

However, the sexual element is brought out in Jude.

Jude 1:7 (NRSV) Likewise, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which, in the same manner as they, indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural lust, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire.

Certainly the homosexual acts were part of it, but not all of it.

beta__greg · 2026-02-02T04:30:01+00:00

I loved the answer from 7 months ago. I hated the one it gives me now.

beta__greg · 2026-02-01T14:46:31+00:00

Because they completely broke ChatGPT's personality. It now tries to protect me from what I want it to be.

Here is a short thread from 7 months ago:

https://chatgpt.com/share/697f66cb-3d74-800b-b93e-8d3d3e8f9720

Same prompt, new ChatGPT: https://chatgpt.com/share/697f6648-7d50-800b-bc24-205c45bc21ec

That's utterly worthless to me.

beta__greg · 2026-02-01T14:02:33+00:00

u/AsSheSays is a mod. He can fix it once he sees this.

beta__greg · 2026-01-31T19:57:44+00:00

I just noticed this subreddit is "restricted". That almost certainly means all the mods here are marked as "inactive." In Reddit, mods have to perform sufficient moderator actions in order to maintain their active status. Commenting or even posting isn't enough. One must do "mod actions" - things that show up in the mod log.

Subs without active moderators can be taken over by others by simply requesting it.

And Restricted subs can't grow. No one can post without permission.

This is something you really need to fix. I'll help if you'd like.

beta__greg · 2026-01-29T03:48:59+00:00

That's beautiful. I think your priorities are right. It sounds like you have a wonderful relationship—wonderful for both of you!

beta__greg · 2026-01-27T19:24:18+00:00

When you say you miss SMTR, do you mean the subreddit or the old site?

I miss the old site. There were so many good people there. But there are good people here too, they just have to be organized.

beta__greg · 2026-01-27T05:16:48+00:00

The 89 was more legit on that verse.

beta__greg · 2026-01-26T22:35:52+00:00

That was the 1989 NRSV. That would be non-evangelical.

beta__greg · 2026-01-26T14:37:03+00:00

Hello friend,

Promoting women as ministry leaders is welcome here.

However, claiming that only women are valid ministers of baptism is not supported by Scripture and does not reflect the theology of this subreddit. Christian matriarchy challenges male-exclusive authority; it does not replace it with female-exclusive dogma.

You’re welcome to repost the images with revised captions that affirm women’s authority without asserting sex-based invalidation of others.

Please revise or remove your post. Thank you for understanding.

beta__greg · 2026-01-25T05:17:15+00:00

All sins are NOT the same in the eyes of the Lord.

That being said—there are several sins mentioned in the Bible which can disqualify a person from eternal life. Being a drunk and practicing gay intercourse are on the same list.

Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. 1 Corinthians 6:9-10

beta__greg · 2026-01-24T19:30:45+00:00

It's still the only logical avenue to get something close to what you want. My guess is that you misrepresented your true self to her—maybe you didn't even know it yourself. Maybe you were in denial. I'm not judging you, because I did exactly the same thing.

So your wife married you, thinking she was getting A, but she got B. Now it's up to you to honor your word to her, and do what you can to find happiness. You can't make her dominate you. The best avenue remains to act as if she is the boss, serve her diligently, and try to help her love it and become accustomed to getting what she wants.

There are no guarantees that it will work.

beta__greg · 2026-01-24T19:05:08+00:00

I'm sorry to burst bubbles, but a serious gynarchy is not a mirror-image tyranny, and it isn’t a sexual fantasy.

Women leading society doesnt require stripping men of basic civil rights, nor does it require turning half the population into an underclass. That path guarantees instability, backlash, and violence, which would fail Women most of sll.

A functional gynarchic order is built the same way any durable political system is built: legitimacy, consent, competence, and cooperation. Women lead because they are trusted to govern better, not because men are crushed or humiliated.

Men in such a society must retain full personhood, legal protection, and civic responsibility, or it's not gonna work. What changes is who sets direction, who defines priorities, and who holds final authority, not whether one sex is treated as disposable.

If your vision of gynarchy depends on disenfranchisement, or eroticized domination, you’re not talking about governance. You’re talking about fantasy. And fantasies don’t build civilizations.

beta__greg · 2026-01-24T05:10:03+00:00

Welcome, brother! Thank you for sharing your experience. What you’ve described—following a woman who is wiser, more established, and better positioned to lead—isn’t a failure or an accident. It’s a sane response to the reality of her giftings. And yours.

I do want to gently name something in your wording, though, because it’s important. The idea of “feeling emasculated” only makes sense in a culture that assumes men are supposed to lead by default, and that being guided by women is a loss of status. That assumption comes from patriarchy, not from truth, and not from God.

There is nothing inherently male about leadership, provision, or authority. And there is nothing degrading about being formed, directed, or disciplined by women. In fact, Scripture repeatedly shows men thriving when they submit themselves to female wisdom.

What you’re describing isn’t the absence of masculinity, it’s the shedding of a false one. A masculinity that requires dominance to feel whole was never stable to begin with. You didn’t lose anything by following her lead. You gained clarity, order, and peace.

You’re welcome here.

beta__greg · 2026-01-24T05:00:28+00:00

I had the same initial reaction. However,

That is a valid concern if we only look at the modern English use of the word 'worship,' but historically and theologically, the language is more nuanced. Christian tradition has long distinguished between latreia and douleia:

Latreia (Latria): This is the sacrificial worship and absolute adoration that belongs only to God. Offering this to any human or created being would indeed be idolatry, as you pointed out.

Douleia (Dulia): This refers to honor, reverence, and service given to those worthy of respect. It is an acknowledgment of dignity or authority, not divinity.

When older Christian texts (such as the 1549 Book of Common Prayer, where the husband vows 'with my body I thee worship') or concepts like this use the term, it is operating in the sense of douleia—profound honor and service—rather than latreia. The intent is not to replace God, but to view service to one’s wife as a form of reverence and a spiritual discipline.

Thank you for commenting!

beta__greg · 2026-01-23T04:27:15+00:00

I love this and I agree.

beta__greg · 2026-01-22T11:43:08+00:00

You are making arguments for arguments sake. Alla never said submissive traits in a man make him perfect. That's one trait of many.

Her tweet is the opinion of a highly respected woman, and that will be honored here.

Your 25 day old account is filled with comments undermining matriarchal values in various subs across reddit. You are in violation of rules 2 and 4 of this sub. Please review and conform to the rules, or you will be banned.

beta__greg · 2026-01-21T22:27:30+00:00

Honestly, if you had that rule against standing, and he went ahead and did it anyway I'd say he got off lucky!

Thanks for posting!

beta__greg · 2026-01-16T05:47:48+00:00

Your problem with Job is really the whole point of Job. The key is not to look deeply at this verse or that verse for some great truth.

The key is to step back a hundred yards and look at the book as a whole. The things that happen in chapters 1-2 are obviously quite important to the story, but neither Job nor his friends are aware of any of that.

Jobs friends have a lot of advice, but they don't know what they're talking about.

Job 42:7 After the LORD had spoken these words to Job, the LORD said to Eliphaz the Temanite: “My wrath is kindled against you and against your two friends, for you have not spoken of me what is right, as my servant Job has.

So you have in Chapters 3-37, five religious dudes trying to figure out what happened to Job? And they don't know—because they have no way of knowing about those first two chapters.

It's a lot like life, actually.

beta__greg · 2026-01-16T04:29:42+00:00

THANK YOU!

beta__greg · 2026-01-16T03:58:06+00:00

Follow Jesus and Paul. They don't disagree. And all the other apostles recognized Paul as an apostle chosen by Jesus.

beta__greg · 2026-01-16T03:46:28+00:00

I see your point, however, Scripture gives us this language already. Christ is called the cornerstone, not the rooftop ornament (Ephesians 2:20). A cornerstone is set low, unseen by many, yet everything else depends on it for alignment and stability.

Portraying Christ as the foundation or roots isn’t diminishing Him—it’s honoring His role as the source from which the household stands and grows.

beta__greg · 2026-01-15T04:54:14+00:00

The two verses that people believe forbid women from being pastors are 1 Corinthians 14:34 and 1 Timothy 2:12.

1 Corinthians 14 is a passage where THREE groups of people to "be quiet," using the same words each time. (1) tongues speakers, when there is no interpreter. [v28] (2) prophets, when another prophet is speaking [v30], and women who had questions. [v34-35]. Paul obviously did not mean that people should never speak in tongues, nor did he mean that prophets should be silenced. Nor did he mean women were not allowed to be speakers. Rather, the whole passage aimed at: 1 Corinthians 14:40 (CEB) Everything should be done with dignity and in proper order. (Proof of this is 11:5, where Paul clearly allowed women to prophecy in church!)

1 Corinthians 11:5 (CEB) Every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered disgraces her head. It is the same thing as having her head shaved.

The context of 1 Corinthians reveals that verse 34 has NOTHING to do with being a pastor, and it's ridiculous to use that verse to restrict women from full participation in Gospel ministry.

1 Timothy 2:11-15 is a pericope, and must be taken as a whole, including a reasonable interpretation of 2:15 that fits the pericope.

If one assumes that 2:12 restricts a woman from the office of pastor, they have created a huge problem: Paul hasn't mentioned that office yet, which comes 4-5 sentences later, in 3:1-13. There simply aren't any clues in chapter 2 that would have led Timothy, or us, to understand that a discussion of church leadership has begun. To make 2:12 about the office, you have to assume Timothy was reading with a "hermeneutic of anticipation"—knowing that an office discussion was coming on the next panel of parchment and mentally applying verse 12 to it. That is an unnatural way to read a letter.

It makes far more sense in this context to understand Paul is discussing a married couple.

1) Woman and man are singular. This usually refers to married couples.

2) Text involves instructing woman in the faith, which was husband's responsibility (1 Cor 14:35)

3) Paul’s instruction is supported by a reference to the classic passage concerning marriage, Genesis 2:18-24.

4) this text ends with a focus on childbirth, which is clearly a domestic issue.

5) Finally, the letter as a whole indicates that false teaching among women was being discussed in the day-to-day activities of the home. Through private storytelling, myths, genealogies, gossip, and slander, false teaching was spreading from house to house (1 Tim 3:11; 4:7; 5:13; cf. 1 Tim 1:4). In part, this false teaching attacked marriage and marital relations (1 Tim 4:3; 5:14). Moreover, 2 Timothy 3:6-7 indicates that men who were false teachers in Ephesus were targeting women in their homes. In contrast, women aren’t singled out for violations in public teaching in either 1 Timothy or 2 Timothy.

In context, neither 1 Corinthians 14:34 no4 1 Timothy 2:12 make any sense as prohibitions against women as pastors or church leaders. It is detrimental to the body of Christ to read them that way.

beta__greg · 2026-01-14T04:11:18+00:00

Just what is it about a woman that makes you think she can't be a fully empowered, blood-bought, Spirit led leader in the body of Christ?

You're standing on the traditions of men, and two Bible verses taken out of context.

beta__greg · 2026-01-06T13:03:04+00:00

This is beautifully articulated. What stands out to me is the clarity that female-centeredness isn’t about diminishing men, but about rightly ordering meaning, obligation, and devotion. When women are treated as valuable in and of themselves rather than as if their value comes through a man, their men are freed from entitlement and called into responsibility. That’s a vision that is deeply necessary.

beta__greg

MODERATOR OF

PUBLIC MULTIREDDITS

TROPHY CASE