Like the Taboo Table I made for Female Ejaculation, the following table allows one to quickly look up what each major religion has to say about Sodomy.

Taboo wise the Monotheistic religions of Judaism, Christianity and Islam all have a pretty harsh view of Sodomy.  Being put to death is the most common proscribed punishment.  This should be hardly surprising since Monotheism got most of its homophobic inspiration from the same source (the Old Testament).  The Eastern Religions on the other hand tend to be much more tolerant of Sodomy than the Monotheistic religions do.  There is very little if any proscription of Sodomy.  In the case of Hinduism where there is quite a bit intolerance towards Sodomy, centuries of control by Monotheistic rulers (the Mughals and then the British) helped to shape the puritan attitudes that now prevail in India.

]]> http://www.thebacchanalian.com/2010/05/taboo-or-not-taboo-religious-views-on-sodomy/feed/ 1 http://www.thebacchanalian.com/2010/03/check-out-part-2-of-my-podcast-with-dr-dick/ http://www.thebacchanalian.com/2010/03/check-out-part-2-of-my-podcast-with-dr-dick/#comments Thu, 04 Mar 2010 00:31:07 +0000 Mark Zedler http://www.thebacchanalian.com/?p=2504

Hello everyone, the second part of my podcast with Dr. Dick has just been posted!  In this podcast I continue to explore the Sin of Sodomy as well as elaborate on some of the fascinating details of Female Ejaculation.  During our discussion we cover the following:

• How same sex sexual expression was integrated into the social fabric of the ancient world.
• How the social stigma become attached to same sex sexual expression.
• Philo of Alexandria reinterprets the Sodom and Gomorrah story.
• The repressive theology of John Chrysostom.
• The power of the dominant culture to dictate social norms.
• Elaborate on my passion for Female Ejaculation.
• Discuss weather female ejaculation causes performance anxiety.
• Explain how information about squirting was lost and suppressed.

You can catch Part 2 of this podcast at any of the following links:

• Sex Advice with an Edge
• Carnal Nation
• Dr. Dick’s Sex Advice

I invite you to go over and check it out.  And while you are at it check out some of Dr. Dick’s other podcasts.  There is some pretty amazing content there that I’m sure you will all enjoy.

Hello everyone.  Dr. Dick over at Dr. Dick’s Sex Advice recently interviewed me for his Sex Wisdom podcast series.  In my interview with Dr. Dick I help him to demythologize some of our culture’s sexual taboos.  During our discussion we cover the following topics:

• Being a sex historian
• Exploring the origins of sexual taboos and myths
• The history of the Bacchanalia — its zenith, persecution and downfall
• What this story tells us about what happens
• The resurgence of sacred sexuality
• The Sin of Sodom
• Comparing ancient Hebrew and early Christian interpretations.

This is a two part podcast with Dr. Dick and you can catch Part I of my interview at any of the following links:

• Sex Advice with an Edge
• Carnal Nation

I invite you to go over and check it out.  And while you are at it check out some of Dr. Dick’s other podcasts.  There is some pretty amazing content there that I’m sure you will all enjoy.

In my last post of the Sin of Sodomy Series I explored the idea that the original meaning of the Bible’s Sodom and Gomorrah narrative had nothing to do with homosexual sin. Based on a thorough review of pre-Christian era Hebrew texts and commentary it is pretty clear that the commonly accepted sin of the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah were greed and inhospitality.  So then how did the story of Sodom and Gomorrah get sodomized?

To answer that question we need to go back to the start of the Christian era (100 BCE to 100 CE).  During this time, the Palestinian Jews and Jews of the Dispora were confronted by casual hedonistic paganism of the Greco-Roman world.  Horrified by the immorality that was spreading throughout their society, the Jewish world suffered a purity crisis.

In an effort to restore their ideal of orthodox moral purity, Jewish scholars began reinterpreting many Biblical stories with sexual prohibitions were none had existed before.  Concepts like homosexuality, which were only briefly mentioned in the Old Testament, would now take on paramount importance.

The philosophical and spiritual leader of this purity movement was Philo of Alexandria (20 BCE – 50 CE).  Philo was a Jewish philosopher born in Alexandria, who used allegory to harmonize Jewish scriptures with Greek Philosophy.  Philo`s teachings were enthusiastically embraced by early Christians, who incorporated his ideas into the philosophical foundations of Christianity.  It has even been suggested that Philo was the founder of Christianity by virtue of his fusion of ideas present in Jewish scripture and those of Greek mystery religions.  This mishmash of ideas would eventually bear much resemblance to the shape that Christianity eventually would take.

But before we get too far ahead of ourselves here let us examine the reinterpretation that Philo made to the Sodom and Gomorrah story.   As we have already seen, his predecessors saw greed and inhospitality as the city’s chief sin.  However, the austere Philo focuses his criticism on what he sees as the city’s self indulgent enjoyment of food and sex.   Philo’ reinterpretation of the Sodom and Gomorrah story provides us with the version of events that we are familiar with today:

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 neighbours, but also men mounted males without respect for the sex nature which the active partner shares with the passive.

In Philo’s vivid imagination, he leaves no doubt that the chief sin of the Sodomites was homosexual sin.  If the cause of Sodom’s destruction was homosexual sin then it goes to follow that any community that tolerated said sin would be risking the wrath of God.  This would be the viewpoint that would later be embraced wholeheartedly by Christianity.  In the centuries that followed this belief would form the foundation of a homosexual hysteria that would be used to justify all sorts of brutality towards them.

It has been a while since I last wrote a post for The Sin of Sodomy series, so I think it about time that I add another entry.  So without any further ado let me talk about all those greedy Sodomites.

In my introductory post: The History of Sex – The Sin of Sodomy, I introduced the idea that before the Christian era, Jewish scholars had not equated the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah with homosexual sin.   In this post will explore this idea in much more depth and demonstrate the original meaning of this story indeed had nothing to do with homosexual sin.

To start, let us review the story of Sodom and Gomorrah as described in the book of Genesis and retold in Judges.  The story goes as thus:  Lot, the son of Abraham’s brother Haran, had settled in the City of Sodom.  Sodom was located on a fertile plane, an area that Lot and found to be a great place for his shepherds to operate.   However, when God became displeased with the wickedness of the region’s inhabitants, he decided he would destroy the entire area, including the city of Sodom.   God sends two angels to meet with Lot at the Sodom city gates.   Lot welcomes the two angels into his house where they tell him that they were sent by God to warn him about the impeding destruction of the city.

Soon after the angels arrived at Lot’s house, a crowd of Sodomites surrounded his house demanding that Lot send the strangers out into the crowd so that they might “know” them.   Sensing the evil intention of the crown, Lot refused to comply with the request.  Instead, Lot offered the crowd his two virgin daughters, but the crown was not interested.  The following morning, Lot fled Sodom with the two angels and his family.  As Lot was leaving the city, God unleashed his wrath and completely destroyed the evil cities of the plain.

As they were leaving the city, Lot’s wife wanted to get one more glimpse of their former home.  The act of her looking back displeased God so greatly that he decided to kill her on the spot by turning her into a pillar of salt.

One of the difficulties in determining what the sins of Sodom and Gomorrah were was that they were not spelled out in the Sodom and Gomorrah story.  Most Christians who read the narrative assume that to “know” must mean to “engage in coitus”.  However, the Hebrew word for “know”, Yadha has a double meaning: “to know” as well as to “engage in coitus”.

Of the 943 times Yadha is used in the Old Testament, 933 times it is used to mean “to know” and only 10 times it is used in the sexual sense.  Furthermore, in all 10 instances where Yadha is used in a sexual sense, it is used to refer to heterosexual sex.  The Old Testament never used the word Yadha to refer to homosexual acts; instead the word Shakhabh was used to describe this act.  Given the word usage for Yadha and Shakhabh, it is virtually impossible that Yadha was ever used in a homosexual sense.

If the sins of Sodom and Gomorrah were not homosexual in nature, then what were they?  To find the answer we must remove the layers of Christian homophobia and prejudice that have been wrapped around the story of Sodom and Gomorrah for centuries.  A good way to get a clear picture of what the original intent of the Sodom and Gomorrah story is to read what the ancient Jewish scholars said about the doomed cities.

The Old Testament says very little about what the sins of Sodom were, but what it does say is very revealing.  Only one Old Testament prophet, Ezekiel, specified what the sins of Sodom were.  During his ministry in Babylon, he provided a list of Sodom’s misdeeds:

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. Therefore I did away with them as you have seen

— (Ezek 16:49-50)

Did you notice that Ezekiel makes no mention of sexual sins?  He only describes Sodom’s lack of generosity.  Ezekiel described Sodom as a wealthy city whose inhabitants were so selfish and greedy that they were completely indifferent towards the suffering on the less fortunate around them.  Ezekiel’s silence about the supposed sexual sins of Sodom speaks volumes about the importance they played in the original narrative, which is none!

Let us examine some other Jewish writings which are very useful in determining the original intent of the story.  The Babylonian Talmud, compiled around the year 500 CE, provides some fascinating insight into the story.  The city of Sodom is described as a very wealthy city whose residents are so greedy that they refuse to share any of their good fortune:

The men of Sodom waxed haughty only on account of the good which the Holy One, blessed be He, had lavished upon them…They said: Since there cometh forth bread out of (our) earth, and it hath the dust of gold, why should we suffer wayfarers, who come to us only to deplete our wealth. Come, let us abolish the practice of travelling in our land…

— Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 109a

Notice once again that the primary sin of Sodom was considered to be their lack of generosity.  There is no mention of sexual sin whatsoever.  Throughout the Jewish commentary on Sodom, the most common criticism of the city is greed and their seeming lack of generosity.

Another place where we can look for clues on what the Hebrews thought about Sodom is through the reading of non religious Jewish literature.  This writing provides us with the expression “in the manner of Sodom” which refers not to any sexual sins but rather to a person who refused to help another in need.

If we turn our attention to the New Testament, we can find more evidence to support the idea that the sin of Sodom was not sexual.  During his ministry, Jesus commanded his twelve apostles to proclaim the gospel throughout Palestine. Jesus carefully instructed his apostles to take little from the locals and rely on the hospitality offered to them.  However, Jesus warned:

If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, shake the dust off your feet when you leave that home or town.  I tell you the truth, it will be more bearable for Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town.

— Matthew 10:14-15

Since the New Testament gospels proclaim Jesus as the Son of God, you would figure that he should know better than anyone else what the sins of Sodom were.  Jesus condemns Sodom’s inhospitality and never mentions any homosexual sins.

While, the crimes of Sodom and Gomorrah may be been very grave in the sight of a vengeful God, neither the ancient Hebrews or the Biblical authors cite homosexual sins as being among them.  Based on the early Hebrew tests and other biblical references, it is pretty clear that the sins of Sodom were not homosexual in nature but rather greed and inhospitality.

John McNeill, a former gay priest, gives an account in his book: The Church and the Homosexual, of how modern scholars have rediscovered the truth about the reasons behind Sodom and Gomorrah’s destruction.  The cities were destroyed for reasons of inhospitality and greed rather than for homosexual sins.   Furthermore, McNeill writes that the Sodom and Gomorrah narrative presents us:

With one of the supremely ironic paradoxes of history. For thousands of years in the Christian West the homosexual has been the victim of inhospitable treatment. Condemned by the Church, he has been the victim of persecution, torture, and even death. In the name of a mistaken understanding of the crime of Sodom and Gomorrah, the true crime of Sodom and Gomorrah has been and continues to be repeated every day.

The Sodom and Gomorrah story is one of those appalling tragedies of human history.  Over the past 1,500 years countless numbers people have been unjustly persecuted or even killed for committing homosexual acts in the mistaken belief that God had punished these cities for homosexual sins.  If the sins of Sodom were not homosexual in nature then how did they become so?  In my next post in the Sin of Sodomy series I will explore how the Sodom and Gomorrah story got sodomized.

Here’s another gem from one of my favorite religious bigots, Pat Robertson.   Take a look at this YouTube video clip where he suggests that nations that embrace the homosexual lifestyle will end up on the garbage heap of history.   If Pat Robertson ever bothered to check the historical record for himself, he would soon discover there is no truth to his claims.  But then again telling the truth was never one of Pat’s strong suits.

I did some historical research on the type of claims that Pat Robertson makes and it does not take very long to figure out that they are completely baseless.   If you are so inclined, you can read about my research in the following two posts:

The Wrath of God and the Sin of Sodomy – Part I

The Wrath of God and the Sin of Sodomy – Part II

The Sin of Sodomy Series

If you have not read The Wrath of God and the Sin of Sodomy – Part I, please go back and do so. None of the following analysis will make any sense without reading the introductory post. Pay particular attention to the Calamities per Century (C/C) number highlighted in red on the right-hand side of the data set. This will be the ratio I will be using to compare different historical eras. Without any further delay let’s get right into the analysis, I’ll start with the City of Rome below:

Rome

The C/C for Republican Rome was 5.1 versus 4.6 for Imperial Rome. That works out to one disaster every 20 to 22 years respectively. There is a slight decrease in the number of calamities for Imperial Rome. If we cast our mind back to the introduction, you will recall that Imperial Rome was described as Sin City. One would expect that if God was punishing sodomy, Imperial Rome would be a prime candidate. However, there is no evidence that God unleashed any additional wrath on Rome as there was a slight decrease in the number of disasters. This seems counter intuitive to the Sodomy Theory, but let’s continue.

Now, this is where things get interesting. If we look at the C/C number for the 1,600 years of Christian Rome, there is virtually no difference in the number of disasters as compared to Imperial Rome. It appears that the presence of the Vicar of Christ in Rome provided no additional benefit for the citizens of the city. Either, there was a lot of sodomy going on in Christian Rome or the Sodomy Theory is utter nonsense. But, let’s not draw any conclusions just yet.

If we are to look at the last C/C ratio for the modern era, we would see that modern Rome had only 1.8 disasters per century (which works out to one disaster every 56 years). That is a marked improvement in public safety over Republican, Imperial or Christian Rome. What is going on here? According to the Sodomy Theory, one would expect an increased number of disasters for a secular society that tolerates homosexuality. But, in Rome’s case the exact opposite happened. How is this possible? Maybe all our modern technological improvements have been foiling God’s plans for unleashing his wrath?

If you would look at the above information, you will notice that Rome experienced a lot of flooding. Every time the Tiber River swelled its banks, many Romans would get flooded out of their homes. This was a persistent problem for centuries. Nevertheless, this problem was solved once and for all in the late 1800’s when water control structures and concrete embankments were installed within City limits. Persistent problems, like fires or plagues, have been dramatically reduced with the implementation of pressurized water supply systems and modern public health care. The two calamities that did occur recently were the Spanish flu pandemic of 1918/19 and the battles for Rome in 1944. Other than these two events, Rome has been a relatively safe location to live despite the modern acceptance of homosexuality.

Moving onto Constantinople, let’s take a look at its C/C data below:

Constantinople

Christian Constantinople has a C/C ratio of 4.0. This is only marginally less than Christian Rome’s C/C ratio of 4.4. After more than a thousand years as the capital of the Christian Byzantine Empire, Constantinople finally fell to the Ottoman Turks in 1453. The Ottoman conquest ushered in nearly 500 years of Islamic rule. The C/C ratio of Muslim Constantinople is essentially unchanged at 3.9. Moving on to Modern Istanbul, we see the C/C ratio dropping to 2.2, essentially the same ratio as Modern Rome.

With the ancient world, we see the same trends with Constantinople that we saw with Rome. We are getting about one calamity every 25 years on average. Even with a change in religion the city did not see any change in the C/C ratio. Let’s take a closer look at Muslim Constantinople. While, the Ottomans were noted for their harems and self-indulgence, they did not suffer any increase in the number of calamities that their devout Christian predecessors.

Improvements in technology and medicine helped to increase public safety in Istanbul. This can be seen in the dramatic reduction in destructive fires. Fires used to be a persistent problem for the city often leaving whole neighbourhoods in ruins. The installation of a pressurized water distribution system virtually eliminated the problem. The two calamities that did occur in the 20th Century were the Spanish flu pandemic of 1918/19 and an earthquake in 1999.

For our last city let’s turn our attention to the Jerusalem:

Jerusalem

Jerusalem is unique in our analysis as it is not only a modern city with ancient roots, it is also the spiritual center for the three monotheistic religions of Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Due to its religious significance, Jerusalem has been attacked 52 times, besieged 23 times, captured 44 times and levelled to the ground twice.

I will start my analysis of Jerusalem in the year 630 BCE, during which time the city was the capital of the ancient Hebrew Kingdom of Judah. If you have read the Bible’s Old Testament, you will no doubt be familiar with the Jerusalem’s turbulent past. You may ask, why did I not select an earlier starting point; say like the Jerusalem of King David in 1,000 BCE.  The problem one encounters by looking beyond 630 BCE in the historical record, is that we are no longer dealing with the history of Jerusalem, but rather the legend of Jerusalem. This is why I chose 630 BCE as a convenient starting point.

Hebrew Jerusalem has a C/C ratio of 4.6, which works out to one calamity every 22 years. Hebrew Jerusalem’s C/C ratio is remarkably similar to Republican Rome’s. Jerusalem was a troublesome city for any regional power that had occupied the city. Jerusalem was always a hotbed for zealots and religious fanatics. The Roman Empire found Jerusalem particularly problematic with several revolts originating in the city.

At the end of the Bar Kokhba revolt in 135, the Romans deciding enough was enough, expelled all the Jews from Jerusalem and levelled the city to the ground. The Romans then rebuilt Jerusalem into a completely Pagan city. The exclusion of all the religious crazies from Jerusalem appears to have solved Rome’s problem with the bothersome city. Pagan Jerusalem became the most peaceful era in the city’s history resulting in a C/C ration of 0.0. It looks as if God became quite fond of all those Pagans living in his city.

Rest assured, the fun returned to Jerusalem in 330 when Constantine rebuilt the city as a center of Christian worship and veneration. For the following 300 years of Christian rule, the city had a C/C ratio of 3.3. Though Christian Jerusalem was not as safe as the Pagan version, it was a marginally more peaceful spot to live than either contemporary Rome or Constantinople.

The Islamic conquest of Jerusalem in 636, initiated over 400 years of Muslim rule. The C/C ratio of Islamic Jerusalem was 2.6, a slight improvement over Christian Jerusalem. By the standards of the Middle Ages, Christian or Islamic Jerusalem was a relatively peaceful location. However, all that relative peace and tranquility went out the window with the appearance of the Crusaders, who conquered Jerusalem in 1099. Crusader Jerusalem had a C/C ratio of 6.4. The arrival of the Crusaders and their religious nut cases from Western Europe made life for poor citizens of Jerusalem quite dangerous. .

Things returned to relative stability with the final recapture of Crusader Jerusalem by the Muslims in 1244. The second era of Muslim rule over Jerusalem lasted from 1244 till 1917 and had a C/C ratio of 2.4. This period of Muslim rule had about the same C/C ratio as the first one did.

The era of Modern Jerusalem was ushered in by the British conquest of the city in 1917. This eventually led to the founding of the modern state of Israel in 1948 with Jerusalem as its capital city.   Modern Jerusalem had a C/C ratio of 5.5, which is more than double than that of contemporary Rome or Istanbul. What accounts for the difference? While, Modern Jerusalem enjoyed the benefits of modern technology and medicine; the return of the religious crazies more than offset those gains with religious upheaval and war. Just turn on your TV, listen to a news report from the Middle East and you will know what I mean.

Looking at the C/C ratio of Jerusalem over the last 2,600 years, we can see no evidence of the Sodomy theory whatsoever. In fact, the history of Jerusalem defies the Sodomy theory in every way.  Just look at Pagan Jerusalem. It would seem that the presence of all the religious crazies in Jerusalem caused more problems for public safety and peace than a few homosexuals ever did.

If we are to look at the data sets for Rome, Constantinople or Jerusalem we can see zero evidence for the Sodomy theory. Christian threats of divine retribution for participating in homosexual activities have no basis in historical fact. Societies that tolerate homosexuality are at no greater risk of calamities and natural disasters than a pious religious society is. In fact, the data seems to suggest that discriminatory religious societies are more at risk for calamities than liberal ones.

The Sin of Sodomy Series

WARNING: The following is a Tongue and Cheek analysis of the Sin of Sodomy in action.

For many Christian’s, the sin of sodomy is considered one of the worst of all sins; a sin worthy of God’s most severe punishment. This belief is based on a centuries old interpretation of the story of Sodom and Gomorrah, where God supposedly destroyed those ill fated cities for committing homosexual sins.

As the belief in the wickedness of Sodom became entrenched within Christianity, Christians became increasingly fearful of God’s wrath. For centuries, Christian rulers enacted harsh laws against sodomy in an effort eradicate sodomy to once and for all. Christians believed that by eliminating sodomy, or at least restricting it as much as possible, God’s anger would be quenched thus preventing their own destruction. But is this belief based on any verifiable real world data? Or is this belief just religious nonsense cooked up by a bunch of holier-than-thou theologians? Does God actually punish evil sodomite cities and bless faithful Christian cities? If God actually destroyed sodomite cities, then it should be relatively easy to observe evidence of God’s wrath throughout the course of history. In theory, an upstanding Christian city should experience fewer catastrophes than an evil non-christian city.  For our purposes I will call this the Sodomy Theory.

To check the reliability of the Sodomy Theory, I examined the histories of three famous cities for patterns demonstrating God’s wrath. The cities I looked at were Rome, Constantinople (modern-day Istanbul) and Jerusalem. I searched the historical record of these cities looking for patterns that would indicate God punished sinful cities more than righteous cities. The histories of these cities span between 1,700 and 2,600 years, covering many transitions between different religious and political systems.

Methodology

Throughout history, these three cities they have been subject to numerous disasters and calamities. Fortunately, these disasters and calamities have been extremely well documented enabling me to do a complete analysis. To start, I organized each city’s historical record into eras based on logical transitions from one religious and/or political system into another. The following is a list of eras I have created for each city:

Rome

• 500BCE-27BCE – Pagan Republican Rome. This is the era where men were men, and the virtuous, self-reliant Roman citizen helped forge the empire. Historians of all ages look back on this time as an era of honour and moral virtue.
• 27BCE-300 – Pagan Imperial Rome. Sin City, need I say more? This is the stage where Imperial Rome got its reputation for sexual immorality and decadence. One might expect Imperial Rome to be the ideal candidate for God’s wrath.
• 300—1900 – Christian Rome. Rome became a Christian city in approximately 300AD. How does a city become Christian? It does so when a majority of its citizens profess the Christian faith. Early, Christianity was essentially an urban phenomenon that attracted middle/upper class city dwellers in droves. As we all know, Rome became the headquarters of the Roman Catholic Church and as such, I will classify the city as a Christian city for the following 1,600 years. Given Rome’s high standing within the Christian faith, one would expect the city to be more Christian and virtuous than the decadent version that preceded it.
• 1900-2009 – Modern Rome. With the emergence of the modern era, cities became a lot more secular and a lot less religious. Along with the rise of secularism is the increased tolerance of homosexuality. One might also think that the increase in homosexual behaviour among modern city dwellers may lead to an increase in punishment from God.

Constantinople

• 324–1453 – Christian Constantinople. Constantinople was founded by Constantine I to be the Roman Empire’s new capital. Constantinople was to be the new capital of a Christian Roman Empire that would usher in an era of Christian righteousness. Given Constantinople’s Christian beginnings one would expect it would curry God’s approval for years to come.
• 1453-1920 – Muslim Constantinople. Like all good things, they must come to an end. The city fell to the Ottoman Turks in 1453 and became the seat of the Ottoman Empire for nearly 500 years. The change in religion away from Christianity gives us an excellent opportunity to examine whether the city suffered an increase in disasters.
• 1920-2009 – Modern Istanbul. With the collapse of the Ottoman Empire following World War I, Constantinople was renamed Istanbul and remade into a modern city.

Jerusalem

• 630BCE-135AD – Hebrew Jerusalem. This is the Jerusalem of the Bible’s Old Testament that we all know and love and is chock-a-block full of God’s wrath and punishment. This era gives us a baseline to compare God’s punishment of the city (as described in the Bible) with that of succeeding generations that occupied the city.
• 135-330 – Pagan Jerusalem. At the end of the Bar Kokhba revolt in 135, Jerusalem was razed to the ground and all Jews were expelled. Jerusalem was remade into a pagan city and Jews were forbidden to enter.
• 330-636 – Christian Jerusalem. On Constantine’s orders, the city was rebuilt as a Christian center of worship and remained thus for the extent of Christian rule. Jews were still banned from entering the city.
• 636-1099 – Islamic Jerusalem. A new religion called Islam rose out of Arabia and swept across the Middle East vacuuming up almost everything in its path. During Islamic rule, Jews and Christians were permitted to live and travel to the city.
• 1099-1244 – Crusader Jerusalem. Crusades were sent from Western Europe to the Holy Land in an effort to restore Jerusalem to Christianity.
• 1244-1917 – Islamic Jerusalem. Eventually, the Crusades petered out and the Muslims were able to restore Jerusalem to Islamic rule.
• 1917-2009 – Modern/Israeli Jerusalem. The British conquest of Jerusalem in 1917 ended Islamic rule over the city. Jerusalem became the capital of modern day Israel in 1948.

Secondly, I have identified and counted the tragedies these cities have suffered.  I organized these tragedies into the following categories:

• Floods – Applicable only to Rome. Since Rome is located on the Tiber River, it is often subject to devastating floods at irregular intervals.
• Fires – These are devastating fires that destroy entire neighbourhoods. These fires could be started by earthquakes, sieges, battles or riots.
• Sieges/Battles/Riots – These three cities have often been subject to sieges and battles where the city has resisted or been captured by enemy forces. Sieges and battles can often cause considerable distress and destruction within the affected city. I also lumped riots together in this category since military force was often required to put down the revolt.
• Earthquakes – This applies to Constantinople and Jerusalem. These two cities were often subject to devastating earthquakes at irregular intervals.
• Plagues – Plagues were often the curse of the ancient and medieval world. They left devastation in their wake often wiping out entire cities.  Influenza epidemics will be counted here as well.

For each era, I summed the number of tragedies and then calculated the total number of calamities per century. This gives me a metric allowing me to make comparisons between the different historical eras. From this data, I did some analysis and drew a few conclusions. In Part II of the Wrath of God, I will present my results and provide some analysis of what all these numbers mean.

Whenever the names of Sodom and Gomorrah get bandied about, the story of God’s judgement against those doomed cities for the sin of sodomy usually comes to mind. No other story in the Bible is used more often to persecute homosexuals and promote homophobia, than the account of Sodom and Gomorrah. The story of Sodom and Gomorrah’s destruction has been used incessantly as a warning against anyone who tolerates or readily engages in homosexual behaviour.

Thomas Aquinas, the influential theologian and scholar of the Middle Ages, wrote that disasters of any kind could be possible as God punishes the “the wickedness of Sodom”. Earthquakes, fires, plagues, floods, volcanic eruptions, storms or even women falling into ditches could be interpreted as signs of God’s wrathful vengeance against sodomy. This view is so entrenched within Christianity that it is still repeated today. Whenever a national tragedy occurs in the United States, popular Christian Fundamentalists can be easily found loudly proclaiming the tragedy to be God’s retribution against America for allowing homosexual sin. For example, after Hurricane Katrina slammed into New Orleans in September 2005, televangelist John Hagee said that:

All hurricanes are acts of God, because God controls the heavens. I believe that New Orleans had a level of sin that was offensive to God, and they are — were recipients of the judgment of God for that. The newspaper carried the story in our local area that was not carried nationally that there was to be a homosexual parade there on the Monday that the Katrina came. And the promise of that parade was that it was going to reach a level of sexuality never demonstrated before in any of the other Gay Pride parades. So I believe that the judgment of God is a very real thing. I know that there are people who demur from that, but I believe that the Bible teaches that when you violate the law of God, that God brings punishment sometimes before the day of judgment. And I believe that the Hurricane Katrina was, in fact, the judgment of God against the city of New Orleans.

Then of course, there is everyone’s favourite bigot and religious nut case, Jerry Falwell, who said after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, that “I really believe that the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People For the American Way, all of them who have tried to secularize America. I point the finger in their face and say ‘you helped this happen.’

The views of Hagee and Falwell may not necessarily represent mainstream society; their belief in God’s judgement of homosexual sin is still a very potent force among many Christians. It is this belief that supports right wing bigotry and gives voice to their visceral opposition to any extension of civil rights to Gays and Lesbians. The disturbing irony about this whole situation is that the story of Sodom and Gomorrah had initially nothing to do with homosexuality.

Even though many Christian denominations teach that the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah was homosexual, this has no theological support. In Old Testament Judaism, you will find no references equating the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah with homosexual sin. Jesus certainly did not equate this story with homosexual sin.  A careful examination of the development of the story reveals that the sin of sodomy was invention of the early church fathers. If you would like to learn more on how this transformation occurred, please read on! I am going to be starting a series of posts discussing the evolution of the sin of sodomy. The following is a summary of the sinful topics:

Taboo or Not Taboo: Religious Views on Sodomy

The Wrath of God and the Sin of Sodomy – Part I

The Wrath of God and the Sin of Sodomy – Part II

Those Greedy and Inhospitable Sodomites!

Sodomizing Sodomy

Saint Augustine and other Church Fathers

The Homophobia of Saint John Chrysostum

Gay History According to Pat Robertson

Religion and Sex – Prager No. 1

Religion and Sex – Prager No. 2

Religion and Sex – Prager No. 3

Religion and Sex – Prager No. 4

I will be starting the first post in this series with a statistical analysis of God ’s wrath against sinful and righteous cities. I will be comparing various cities throughout history to see if God punished sinful cities any more than good Christian cities. I will elaborate on my methodology later on.  It will be consistent between sinful and non sinful cities. The results should be very interesting.