What Was the Sin of Sodom and Gomorrah?

A clue is that people cried out in distress

It is probably not exactly what you think


I have wanted to dig into the story of Sodom and Gomorrah for a while now, ever since someone suggested to me that the story isn’t what I think it is. Everyone knows the reference to Sodom and Gomorrah, right? God smote those villages with fire and brimstone because of homosexuality.

That’s what I was taught. At least, that is what I always believed, but I have learned there may be more to the story. The truth is right where we should expect to find it: in the Bible. If you are intrigued as I was, then read on.

First, let’s review the story in Genesis 13. Abram and Lot flourished, and their clans and flocks grew in size in the land God promised Abram. There was tension among their entourages, though, so they decided to separate and spread out. (Gen. 13:5-9)

“Lot looked around and saw that the whole plain of the Jordan toward Zoar was well watered, like the garden of the Lord, like the land of Egypt.” (Gen. 13:10) Lot, therefore, chose move to Sodom and Gomorrah in the plain of Jordon, while Abram remained in Canaan.

Although the land was like a well watered garden, “the people of Sodom were wicked and were sinning greatly against the Lord.” (Gen. 13:13) Thus, we shouldn’t be surprised when that sin catches up to the people of Sodom and Gomorrah.

Before we move on, though, we should acknowledge that Sodom and Gomorrah was a lush, fertile place. It was inhabited with “wicked” people, yet Lot moved there anyway because it was a desirable place to live. Perhaps, the allure of the things of this world and the temptation to associate with people who have accumulated wealth, position, and influence was great, in spite of any misgivings Lot may have had.


This may provide some explanation for why Lot’s wife looked back in defiance of the angel’s warning. She may have regretted leaving.


She may have wanted to return to the abundance and comfort that drew them there, and that desire to hold on to abundance and comfort may have been her undoing.

We should also understand the backstory in Genesis 18 before we get to the story of Sodom and Gomorrah in the next chapter. Before some angles visited Sodom, they visited Abram. Abram saw the three “angels of the Lord” from his tent. He went out to meet them, bowed in respect, and insisted they come to his tent to be refreshed. Abram and Sarai spared no expense to show them hospitality, and the angels returned the favor by affirming God’s promise to the elderly couple: promising that Sarai would bear a child within a year. (Gen. 18:1-15)

Before the angels left, the angels told Abram the reason they came: to investigate Sodom and Gomorrah because “the outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah [was] so great and their sin so grievous.” (Gen. 18:20) This “outcry” that reached the LORD is the first clue to what was going on there. (Gen. 18:21)

The Hebrew word that is translated “outcry” in this verse is za’aq. It mean a shriek, cry for help, cry of distress, lamentation. Thus, something was going on in Sodom and Gomorrah that was causing people to cry out in distress.

The word, outcry, in Genesis 18 should bring Exodus 2:23 to mind where God heard the Israelites cry out. In both cases, in Egypt and in Sodom & Gomorrah, God responds to an outcry of the people living there.

They same word, za’aq, is used in both passages. God responded to the Hebrews cry for deliverance by sending Moses, and God miraculously rescued them from the land of Egypt. In Genesis 18, God similarly responded to a cry for deliverance by sending His angels.

The parallel nature of these stories is important to recognize. The people cried out in distress, and God responded. Parallel stories and themes run throughout the Bible, and we should pay attention to the when they appear, because they usually mean something.


We know why the people cried out in Egypt – because Pharaoh enslaved and mistreated them. The Bible is relatively silent, however, on the circumstances in Sodom and Gomorrah.


If we pay close attention, though, we can find some clues!

In Genesis 19. Lot repeats the pattern of Abram’s hospitality: Lot saw two angels at the city gate, and he went out to meet them, like Abram did. Lot greeted them with respect the same way Abram did, and Lot insisted they come to his home where he prepared a feast for them, just as Abram did. (Gen. 19:1-3) These stories appear one after the other in the biblical narrative, and the parallel symmetry signals that we should pay attention.

Abram and Sarai, by the way, are known for generous hospitality. The generous hospitality of Abram is legendary in Jewish and even Muslim lore. Generous hospitality was a key distinctive of God’s man of faith.

Lot, who was Abram’s kin, demonstrated the same kind of generous hospitality, but the story takes a bad turn. Everything seems great until the men of Sodom surround Lot’s house and demand that Lot bring the angels out to them, “So that we can have sex with them.” (Gen. 19-4-5) When Lot refused, they turned on Lot, This is what they said:

“This fellow [Lot] came here as a foreigner, and now he wants to play the judge! We’ll treat you worse than them.”

genesis 19:9

Most of us, I think, assume the sin of Sodom was primarily sexual in nature. The story certainly seems to suggest that if we miss the clues to what was really going on. The symmetry of the parallel stories leading up to the story of Sodom and Gomorrah suggest that something else is going on. The people crying out in distress, like the Jews in Egypt is another clue, and what the townspeople say to Lot is still another clue.

The clues are in the context and more specifically in the contrast between the way Abram and Lot treated the foreigners/angels and the way the townspeople in Sodom & Gomorrah treat them. Abram and Lot go out of their way to greet the angels, bow to them in respect, make them feel welcome, and show them generous hospitality. The men of Sodom react the opposite way: they respond with hostility. They are angry that the foreigner in their midst (Lot) invited foreign guests into his home, and they they came to punish and humiliate those guests by violating them sexually.

I never noticed these clues in the text before. They cast a different light on the story. It seems that the story is less about men wanting to have sex with the foreigners than it is about brutish inhospitality.


This was a lynch mob. They came to run the foreign guests out of town and to demonstrate their extreme displeasure with Lot for inviting them in to his home. The men wanted to humiliate, violate, and punish Lot’s foreign guests in the worst possible way, and they wanted Lot to understand why: because Lot was a foreigner, and these men were foreigners, who were not welcome in their town.


As side note, I would not likely have noticed all this but for the book I am reading by James K. Hoffmeier, The Immigration Crisis: Immigrants, Aliens, and the Bible. He cites to the Sodom and Gomorrah story as an example of the way people in the Old Testament control their borders and their cities. (See also Judges 19-21 in which a similar scene plays out in Gibeah where the sons of Benjamin treat the Levites passing through in exactly the same way.)

This was the last straw for God. The angels returned the favor Lot showed them by protecting him and his family and by warning them to get out of town quick. As soon as Lot and his family were out of town, “the Lord rained down burning sulfur on Sodom and Gomorrah….” and reduced it to smoke and ash (Gen. 19:10-28)

Aside from some other details that do not seem directly relevant at the moment, that is the story of Sodom & Gomorrah. Most of the references to Sodom & Gomorrah in the rest of the Bible are used as warnings without much commentary, except for three passages. These passages tell the rest of the story.

Continue reading “What Was the Sin of Sodom and Gomorrah?”

What is the Attitude Christians Should Have on Immigration?

A Christian’s attitude on immigration should be informed by the Bible


In 2014, during the Syrian refugee crisis, I watched the flood of humanity escaping from the ruthless butchery that occurred during that time in that region of the world. I recall the controversy in the various countries to which this seemingly unending stream of people fled in desperation and anger. Some countries like Germany opened the floodgates; other countries like Hungary closed their borders.

I empathized with people who didn’t want their countries overrun by foreign refugees. I watched the mass of displaced foreigners overwhelming the roads and rails in Europe, and I read stories of mobs of young Arab men taking out their anger on the countries they entered and women they encountered there.


I saw mothers and fathers with desperation in their eyes and fearful children in tow. The image of a lifeless little boy washed up on a sandy Mediterranean beach still haunts me.


Syria was home to the oldest population of Christians on earth, and Christians were caught in a sectarian and political power struggle between largely Muslim factions fighting for and against Democracy. Both Christians and Muslims fled from the conflagration between the deadly governmental crackdown against the popular rebel uprising, and the ruthlessly uncompromising, opportunistic butchers of ISIS who joined in the fight.

Though many of the refugees were Christians caught in the cross fire, and the though the rebels fought for Democracy, President Obama resolutely refused to open American borers to more than a handful of Syrian refugees. As the flood of humanity streamed into Turkey and Europe, we stood aloof.

I was torn. The throngs of young and angry Muslim men mixed with desperate parents and fearful children pulled me in different directions, and I didn’t know how to respond.

I had recently done an apologetic study of Christianity vs. Islam, and my concern about the angry, displaced Muslims was keen. President Obama and the Democratic majority acted as if the moral fabric of the universe would rend in two if we verbalized what everyone knew and thought: that angry young men indoctrinated by radical Islam are dangerous.

Yet, the faces of those parents and children and the haunting visage of the 3-year old Alan Kurdi lying lifeless and washed up on a Mediterranean shoreline begged for a compassionate response.

I realized in that conflict of opposing strains of response to the Syrian crisis that I really had no idea how a Christian should look at these things. I realized that I didn’t know what, if anything, a robust reading of Scripture might suggest.

So, I did what I should have done a long time before that. I did a deep dive into what the Bible has to say about immigrants.

For anyone who does not honor or respect or believe in the Bible, this won’t mean much to you. For me, it was important to know whether the Bible addressed the subject and, if so, what the Bible has to say about it.

Continue reading “What is the Attitude Christians Should Have on Immigration?”

What Is Due Process, and Why Does It Matter for Christians?

Any first year law student knows the importance of due process as the basic structure of American law


The news waves are buzzing with reports of summary deportations with a mixed reaction of angst and anger on the on hand and zeal on the other hand. Social media is overtaken by the reports and the opposite reactions in a vortex of swirling vitriol.

I am as guilty as the next person of the desire to post knee-jerk reactions, I realize we need cooler heads to prevail if we are going to find a positive way forward as a nation.

The same swirling vortex of reaction is evident in the Church, even in the evangelical church, which is my “tribe”, and the same need for cooler heads to prevail exists. We also need biblical grounding and direction if we are going to maintain any sense of unity in Christ.

The latest news involves the visit to the White of El Salvadoran President, Nayib Bukele. The staged meeting of the two presidents comes in the wake of the mass deportation on March 15, 2025, of hundreds of men to a notorious Salvadoran prison known for its harsh and inhumane treatment of prisoners.

The deportations happened so fast that an emergency motion filed in court and an emergency order blocking the deportation came too late as the plane rushed off the runway just as the order was handed down. The White House maintained that every one of the several hundred men were violent criminals, though about half of them had no criminal records, and none of them received even a cursory hearing.

On April 10, 2025, the matter made its way up to the US Supreme Court in lightning fast fashion (for the court system), and the Court weighed in. (See Kristi Noem, Secretary, Department of Homeland Security, et al. v. Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, et al.) The appeal was prosecuted by the government to overturn the trial court injunction to block the deportation.

Homeland Security insisted to the trial judge that the plane had already left the runway when the order was issued. According to the Supreme Court, however, “The United States acknowledges that Abrego Garcia was subject to a withholding order forbidding his removal to El Salvador, and that the removal to El Salvador was therefore illegal,” suggesting that the order was in place before the plane took off.

The court found further that “[t]he United States represents that the removal to El Salvador was the result of an ‘administrative error.’” Thus, Homeland Security admits they made a mistake in deporting him. One of the reasons for “due process, which I will get into, is to avoid such mistakes.

Nevertheless, Homeland Security justifies the action taken by claiming that Abrego Garcia “has been found to be a member of the gang MS–13, a designated foreign terrorist organization, and that his return to the United States would pose a threat to the public.” They maintain they have done nothing wrong.

The subject of this post is due process, so I will ignore some of the other elements of this case, such as the Supreme Court’s affirmation of the order to facilitate the return of Abrego Garcia, the fact that the decision was 9-0, and Donald Trump’s insistence this was a victory for him (perhaps because he got away with it with no repercussions – yet).

While the Supreme Court remanded the matter back to the trial court for clarification, the Court did weigh in on the substance of the issues in various ways. The Supreme Court said:

  • “The order properly requires the Government to “facilitate” Abrego Garcia’s release from custody in El Salvador and to ensure that his case is handled as it would have been had he not been improperly sent to El Salvador.”
  • “To this day, the Government has cited no basis in law for Abrego Garcia’s warrantless arrest, his removal to El Salvador, or his confinement in a Salvadoran prison. Nor could it.”
  • The government is bound by a 2019 order effectively granting Abrego Garcia legal refugee status in the United States.
  • “Instead of hastening to correct its egregious error, the Government dismissed it as an ‘oversight.’”
  • The government’s request to be able to allow them to leave Abrego Garcia in El Salvador is based on “no reason recognized by the law.”
  • “The only argument the Government offers in support of its request, that United States courts cannot grant relief once a deportee crosses the border, is plainly wrong.”
  • “[T]he Government must comply with its obligation to provide Abrego Garcia with ‘due process of law,’ including notice and an opportunity to be heard, in any future proceedings.”
  • “Federal law governing detention and removal of immigrants continues, of course, to be binding as well. See 8 U. S. C. §1226(a) (requiring a warrant before a noncitizen ‘may be arrested and detained pending a decision” on removal)….”
  • “In the proceedings on remand, the District Court should continue to ensure that the Government lives up to its obligations to follow the law.”

These are direct quotes from the Supreme Court ruling. As you should be able to discern easily, this is not a victory for the Trump Administration, and it is not a vindication of what they have done (and continue to do) in detaining, arresting, imprisoning and deporting people without due process.

Continue reading “What Is Due Process, and Why Does It Matter for Christians?”

How Should We Judge Our Neighbors?

Who we judge and how we judge are keys to how we will be judged.


Many things are said about judging, and confusion persists about whether Christians are to judge or not to judge. I wrestled through the seeming conundrum a number of years ago and came up with 8 Important Points About Judging and Judgment. I didn’t realize, then, how these principles tie into the way we should look at immigration.

In very brief summary, Jesus said, “Judge not, that you be not judged” (Matt. 7:1), and followed immediately with the statement, “For in the way you judge, you will be judged; and by your standard of measure, it will be measured to you.” (Mt. 7:2) He was not telling us not to judge; he was telling us to be careful how we judge. This is critical.

The statements in Matthew 7 cited above are the set up for the short parable of the person with a log in his eye trying to take the speck of his brother’s eye. The parable ends with Jesus telling us first to take the log out of our own eyes; then we can see accurately to help take the speck out of our brother’s eye.

Paul riffs on this theme Jesus preached when he said, “If we would judge ourselves, we would not be judged.” (1 Cor. 11:31 NKJV) Paul also picks up on something I missed for years in the log and speck parable. In that parable, Jesus is talking about “judging” our brother (by helping take the speck out of his eye, after I have taken the log out of mine).

Who we judge is just as critical as how we judge. When I first discovered this, I was surprised. I and most Christians I know had it all wrong. Paul says:

 “What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside?”

1 corinthians 5:12

Jesus only talked about judging our brothers, and Paul makes it clear this means people in the church. We have no business judging people outside the church. “God will judge those outside.” (1 Cor. 5:13) (This is why we need to preach the gospel to them!)

One take away from this is that any time we feel compelled to judge someone else, we should always first examine ourselves. We should always be careful how we judge, because we how we judge others is how we will each be judged. We should never judge people outside the church – because Jesus came not to condemn, and neither should we; he came to save them.

Notice these themes that Jesus preached:

  • We will be shown mercy as we show mercy to others (Matt. 5:7)
  • We will be forgiven as we forgive others (Matt. 6:15); and
  • We will be judged as we judge others (Matt. 7:2);

Consistent with what Jesus preached, the themes of judgment and mercy are tied together by James:

 “{J]udgment without mercy will be shown to anyone who has not been merciful. Mercy triumphs over judgment.”  (James 2:13)

When James adds that “mercy triumphs over judgment,” he is highlighting a standard that is based on God’s character. God desires mercy and not sacrifice (Hosea 6:6); God desires mercy, which is why Jesus came to call sinners to himself (Matt. 9:13); and God desires us to be merciful as He is merciful. (Luke 6:36)


So many people view God as an angry God who is full of wrath and judgment. Nothing could be further from the truth. “The Lord is merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love.” (Psalm 103:8) “The steadfast love of the Lord never ceases; his mercies never come to an end.” (Lamentations 3:22)


God is just because he is merciful! Biblical justice is characterized by mercy. Thus, justice without mercy is not biblical justice:

“Therefore the Lord waits to be gracious to you; therefore he will rise up to show mercy to you. For the Lord is a God of justice; blessed are all those who wait for him.” 

Isaiah 30:18

But what does this have to do with judging neighbors? Why did James ask the rhetorical question: “Who are you to judge your neighbors?” This question ripples back to the question, “Who is my neighbor?” The context in which God told us to love our neighbors is a good place to start with answers to these questions.

Continue reading “How Should We Judge Our Neighbors?”

A Christian Lawyer’s Thoughts on Rights, Law & Justice: the Orientation of a Believer

Biblical justice for the common person is more about what you do than about how you are treated


We live in a world punctuated with individual rights and laws that allow redress for nearly every possible wrong that might be conceived under the sun. American litigiousness is notorious, perhaps, because of this expansive construct of individual rights.  

Laws are intended to set parameters on human activity according to a basic set of societal values that are calculated to promote human flourishing. When we feel we have been unjustly or unfairly treated, we have the authority granted by our laws to assert our rights to obtain justice.

We roll our eyes at the frivolous lawsuits held up for the amazement and ridicule of a curious public, but many real injustices and real wrongs still occur in our modern world. People are still people, and we don’t always do right be each other.

Actual malicious intention is exhibited in the never ending scams perpetrated on elders and other unsuspecting victims. They get more and more sophisticated as time goes by. These scams target the most vulnerable people in our community, and these scammers intentionally rob people of millions (maybe even billions) of dollars every year.

People also do wrong against others less intentionally. Either through negligence (not caring enough to protect others from our actions or failures to act) or through protecting ourselves to the detriment of others. Injustices and wrongs are a part of every day life, unfortunately.

The legal systems of civilized societies exist to provide recourse in a controlled way that preserves order and achieves some measure of justice, however slowly those wheels turn. The alternative is the wild west where justice happens as quickly as a finger on a trigger or the time it takes to tie a noose. Such “justice” is often little more than a power wielded by the strong over the weak.

We are sometimes conflicted by these things, especially in the circumstances of egregious injustice. Hitler is the ultimate example. We want justice to be swift and unforgiving. We are willing to forgo the protocols intended to safeguard our system of justice when we feel the ends justify the means.

We would never want to be on the other side of that equation, though, especially if we didn’t do it! Beyond that, I like to say that no person really wants justice when we stand before God, because God’s strict justice would be unrelenting and unforgiving. It allows for no mercy, when what we really want (and need) from God is His mercy!

Fortunately, we have a God who is merciful and slow to anger. (Exodus 34:6) He is “compassionate and gracious … and abounding in mercy.” (Psalm 103-8) God desires to be merciful to us rather than to demand our sacrifice (Hosea 6:6), and He desire us “to act justly and to love mercy”. (Micah 6:8)

When we think of justice, we might immediately think of criminal justice and the punishment for committing crimes. We might immediately think of God’s justice and punishment for unrepentant sinners.

Biblical justice, however, focuses more on doing right by people (acting justly), and it is intimately connected to loving mercy. In the biblical system of justice, judgment without mercy is meted out only to the one who has shown no mercy (James 2:13), and that should change the way we view justice.

Continue reading “A Christian Lawyer’s Thoughts on Rights, Law & Justice: the Orientation of a Believer”