Sodom and Gomorra were neither Judged by God as wicked nor destroyed because of homosexuality

"And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day. Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them IN LIKE MANNER, giving themselves over to fornication, and GOING ARTER STRANGE FLESH, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire." (Jude 6-7) In Genesis 6:1-6 the Sons of God, angels, left their first estate (original habitation in heaven) to marry women on earth. God punished them (1 Peter 3:18-20), for what they did was NOT NARTURAL. It is unnatural for an angel to have sex with a human. Jude is comparing what the people of Sodom and Gomorrah did to what the angels did at the beginning of verse 7, using the phrase "even as;" then in the midst of verse 7, "in like manner." What these people did was just as UNNATURAL as what the angels did; and so it says they went after STRANGE FLESH. Rape is wrong, but the mere rape of a woman by a man would not constitute him going after STRANGE FLESH. Homosexuality is condemned in Romans 1:26-27 as being AGAINST NATURE. Surely this practice would constitute going after strange flesh, and it was this for which Jude shows these cities were judged and destroyed. My opponent claims that rape was the crime for which these cities were judged and destroyed; but notice that Lot offers them his two virgin daughters to do with as they please. (Genesis 19:8) No doubt, Lot was offering them to rape his two daughters instead of the two men. It would be odd to think that Lot would be encouraging them to do the very thing for which they were about to be destroyed. In that case God should have destroyed Lot right along with them! Obviously, it was something more than just rape, more than even violent rape, but HOMOSEXUAL rape these people had in mind. But let's examine some of my opponent's verses. Genesis 19:4: "But before they lay down, the MEN of the city, even the MEN of Sodom, compassed the house round, both old and YOUNG, all the people from every quarter:" Pro claims women were there because it mentions "people," but no women are mentioned, only MEN; and men are indeed people. So Pro is merely ASSUMING women were there while I know for a fact that men were there cause the verse says so. Also, it was not customary in the Ancient Near East for women and YOUNG girls to accompany men to war or the scene of violent acts. Men usually left the women and young girls at home. But here, both old and YOUNG surrounded the house, we can conclude these were MEN and BOYS, not including little girls. Genesis 19:5: "5And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we may know them." Pro argues that the word "know" here is not being used in a sexual way, yet, he later admits the men came to RAPE the visitors under Lot's roof. But the demand in verse 5 came from the same PEOPLE in verse 4; are we to imagine that women and YOUNG GIRLS wanted to RAPE these two men? This is not impossible, but it sure is unusual to say the least! In fact, culturally, rape is perpetrated usually by males. This would have been homosexual rape, a very unnatural act! "But if they were there to simply inquire about the angels, instead of having sex with them, then what wickedness was Lot talking about in verse seven? Could the people of Sodom been intent on trying to aggressively know the Angels in an effort to kill them? Is it possible that the crazed mob was intending on killing Lot's guests, and Lot tried to bribe them against their intentions, by offering all the sex they could possibly have with his virgin daughters?" Notice how Pro previously argued that there was nothing in verse 5 to imply that the people wanted to have sex with Lot's guest, so where is the evidence they wanted to KILL them? At least we know that the Bible uses the word "know" at times to mean "sex." "And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son; and he called his name Jesus." (Matthew 1:25) "And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived." (Genesis 4:1) But where does "know" ever imply KILL? Unless Pro can show us the Biblical usage of "know" as a reference to murder, we can rule it out as an option! Also, Pro needs to explain to us how does one "AGRESSIVELY know" another person. How would becoming aggressive with them help them to literally know who these men were? How would KILLING them help them to know them? This interpretation needs further elaboration if we are to understand how you get to know a person by raping and/or killing them. When a stranger rapes a woman he just met, does raping her help him to know her? Obviously, the "knowing" in this case is a sexual, not an intellectual act! "And as mentioned above, all of the people surrounded Lot's home, which implies women and girls were also present. Did these women and girls also plan on having sex with the angels? If so, could anyone still honestly claim that it was homosexuality that caused God to destroy Sodom and Gomorra?" Yes, because even if women and little girls were trying to rape and kill the men (which Pro has not proved), the fact remains that the men and little boys also wanted to rape them; hence, ALL the men of the city were homosexual, guilty of buggery. "But can rape, even if between people of the same gender, be labeled as homosexuality? Not according to the definition of homosexuality." A person would have to be homosexual or at least bisexual (which still involves homosexual behavior) in order to rape someone of the same sex. Straight men rape women, gay men rape men. So the correct term would be homosexual rape, or buggery, in the case of Sodom. "And if the charge against the men of Sodom is attempted rape, then what are we to conclude but that it was the threat of sexual assault that caused God to realize that the cities were wicked, instead of the presence of homosexuality (as defined above), that was not even described in this story in the first place?" Jude 6-7 doesn't say this was a one time act; it may be that this was their practice. The men who wanted to sexually know Lot's guest were obviously attracted to the same gender before the men came to Lot's house. I don't believe homosexuality is the ONLY sin for which Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed, but it was definitely ONE OF the sins for which it was destroyed. Now, Pro doesn't believe homosexuality is a choice. But there has never been found any solid proof that there is a biological reason for being straight or gay. What's more, Leviticus 20:13 says that homosexuals should be put to death. Now, would God truly be just and loving were he to make a law putting men to death for that over which they have no control? Would God really be a God of justice for killing someone for how they were born? This would be just as unjust as a white man killing another man for being born black! I would like to ask Pro to tell us what is the biological difference between a strait person and a homosexual?