Pro-Homosexual Arguments Against Sodom

It has been argued by Christian proponents of the Homosexual movement that the sin for which Sodom (& Gomorrah) was destroyed was not the sin of homosexual immorality, but rather the sin of greed. This argument in itself presupposes an argument against homosexuality, that because of the homosexual nature of the inhabitants of Sodom, God saw fit to destroy it.

I reject the first argument, and therefore the response by the pro-Homosexual movement. My view is that it was not only homosexuality that destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, but rather a host of sins, including homosexuality, greed among them. I firmly believe that sin does not exist in a vacuum, but rather where there is one sin, you are very likely to find many sins. Which came first, greed, then sexual immorality (of all types, I'm sure)? Probably. The point is, it's preposterous to try to claim that when the cities were destroyed it could not have had anything to do with homosexual behavior.

At the very least, we must conclude that it was possibly the reason, and perhaps continue to look for guidance on the matter, perhaps from other Leviticul sources. It is also dangerous to think that there was only one sin for which the cities were destroyed, and that somehow by avoiding that one sin we too can avoid destruction.

Render Under to Ceasar

“Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's, and unto God what is God’s.” – Jesus Christ

This verse seems to be used constantly to berate Christians into not only paying their taxes but to also try and make them feel good about paying their taxes, since it was Jesus who said it. There are so many things wrong with both of those assertions, it’s hard to know where to begin.

Let’s start with the case of one Christian arguing to another Christian that they should not mind higher taxes, or progressive taxes, according to this verse. Specifically, they are arguing that we should vote for a political candidate who plans to do just that. They actually want the higher taxes on rich people, and the rich people should not mind, because we should “render unto Caesar.”

The first thing we should consider here, is who is who in this little mini-parable. It seems that the first Christian wants to be Caesar, or at least support the rise of a Caesar, to whom we all should then be obligated to give money to. I didn’t read anything in the parable or its context to suggest that Caesar was a good guy in all of this, that it was a good thing for him to be collecting taxes. Caesar (pick one) was the guy who burned Christians at his parties as human candles, to save even more of the taxes he collected for more important things, like exotic lions to eat more Christians at the Circus Maximus.

Jesus wasn’t saying we should vote for Caesar so we can pay him taxes, he was saying that when the evil, murdering, thuggish, tyrant Romans came looking for their blood money, you should pay them what they want instead of stabbing them in the eye and crying ‘Revolution!’ Why? Ah, now the important part.

Render unto God what is God’s. That’s the real crux of this verse. That’s where the Jews who were trying to trip up Jesus got tripped up themselves. They were arguing to keep, deservedly so, the fruits of their labors from Caesar. But Jesus said to give to God what is God’s. What is God’s? Everything. Which Christians can say that some part of their lives is their own and not God’s? Specifically though, I think he was talking about our hearts. That is, don’t worry about your money, it’s not important compared to the spiritual connection with God, and the state of your heart. It’s nothing squared, so let Caesar have his bits of metal that will rust, that will fade and disappear. I’m the Son of the God of the Universe, I don’t need “taxes,” I want your heart and soul, bought and paid for with my blood.

I don’t even think Jesus was saying “revolution” was out of the question, but that’s another topic for another day. The important thing was that the Jews were consumed with the occupation of their lands by the Romans, when they should have been consumed with the renewing of their hearts and minds through communion with the Most High God.

In summary, this verse says nothing to me about the actual morality of taxation. For a discussion of the morality of taxation, see “The Morality of Taxation.”