The consensus of academics and theologians and the teaching of the Holy Catholic Church is that the people of Sodom were homosexuals and as a result were punished with fire and brimstone. Other references in the Bible to the actions of Sodom are also said to align with the same thing.
However, the same alignments can also be drawn if one classifies the actions of the people as exo-cannibals.
Exo-cannibals will only eat people from another geographic region. Locals are off-limits. Cannibalism is typically practised to fill oneself with the nature, spirit, knowledge and ‘being’ of the victim.
In Genesis when the men in the city surround the house of Lot, they know there are strangers inside from another region, and given Sodom had a reputation it is likely this didn’t happen often. This explains the number at the door and the popularity of the strangers. They wanted to “know” the strangers in the original Hebrew, yada, which means “personal and intimate relationship”. Yada and rape cannot co-exist. Yada and slow eating to savour every moment and morcel can. That is they wanted to cannibalise them in pursuit of the beliefs associated with the practice. Lot offered his daughters instead. Of course, they were local to the area and couldn’t be on the menu.
Ezekiel writes: “Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. They were haughty and did detestable things before me…”
Note the word “overfed”? Also note that the city and the population is referred to in the feminine which is strange considering we are taught that it was practically a gay male ghetto. However, when we consider that the Jewish line/heritage passes through the female generations mother to daughter to daughter through heterosexual procreation, this must imply that the Sodom population for the most part were heterosexual. Homosexual males doubly cannot pass on the line because they don’t reproduce and they are male. “Daughter” is a completely inappropriate term in this context for a male homosexual.
Of course the combination of women and sin immediately makes us think of Eve. She sinned by eating what she shouldn’t. So the population of Sodom are guilty of the same sin.
The Hebrew word translated “detestable” refers to something that is a taboo… The Church taught this to the peoples of MesoAmerica. Cannibalism is taboo in the eyes of the Church…
Jude says, “Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to lust, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.” The lust here is blood-lust. The phrase “going after strange flesh” is the perfect definition for exo-cannibalism, where strange means of a stranger, a foreigner.
The sodomites were renown for their “lack of hospitality”. Hospitality infers sharing a meal. Therefore the opposite of that is to be part of the meal. Further, as soon as a stranger ate local produce like bread or honey, it was believed they had been contaminated and therefore were let-alone, off limits. This is why Lot walked freely through the city. Otherwise he would have been a nervous wreck and not the forthright character he is, anticipating gay rape and potentially murder every day of his life. (That is what Tradition logically infers.)
In summary, the word exo-cannibal is better suited to describe the population of Sodom than homosexual which is not very water-tight in a number of references. Can anyone demonstrate where homosexual is the only option and one has to reject exo-cannibal? :shrug: