Waiting Lot

When the visiting angels arrived in Sodom, Lot was waiting for them. In Gen. 19:1, Scripture states that the angels arrived on foot at the entry gate of Sodom. Scripture says they walked, and so we believe they did exactly that. Normal travel time from Mamre to Sodom would have been nearly two days by foot, and notice how Lot was sitting at the entry gate of Sodom “at even”. The term at even means a time late in the sunlight hours of a given day when the sun was setting evenly with the horizon. In modern vernacular, many in the world loosely consider a several hour period each day as evening time. Scripture portrays this even period more specifically as sunset. Lot’s position at the gate and the time of day are important considerations.

The very fact that Lot was sitting at the gate lends support to the argument that Abraham’s message likely made it to Lot ahead of the visiting angels. Indeed, why would Lot be sitting at the outskirts of Sodom near its entry gate at such an hour? Many commentaries indicate how it was customary for inhabitants to gather near the outer gates of a city during regular daytime business hours. However, they often neglect to mention that Lot’s waiting there at dusk would have been after nearly everyone else had gone home for the day. While the entry gate to most cities may have been busy during its daytime business hours, it makes little sense for people to gather at the outskirts during the evening and nighttime hours. Families gathered together for their late meal by sunset/evening and began to rest each night at that time. Sunset provided a normal period of time for family and relaxation. Furthermore, the outer entry gate to most communities normally stood far removed from the residential areas for security purposes. Thus, hanging out at the gate of the city far away from family, home, and the supper table does not make much sense unless Lot was waiting at this gate for a specific purpose. He was waiting for special visitors!

Stepping backwards for a moment, remember that Abraham’s experience with his supernatural visitors (Gen. 18:1-2) was sudden as he never saw them walking up to his camp. Causing great surprise, they appeared suddenly, and Abraham hurriedly tried to prepare a feast for them. After reading both accounts closely, a distinct difference between Lot and Abraham’s reaction stands out (Gen. 18:1-7; 19:1-3). In no way did Lot hurry or act surprised. Waiting for these visitors, Lot merely rose to meet them as they came into view. How did he recognize them? Had the message Lot received from Abraham indicate what these visitors would be wearing? Somehow he knew these were the visitors he was expecting. In addition, he knew they were special supernatural visitors. Lot respectfully bowed down with his face to the ground indicating a higher respect and honor than any mere nomadic traveling visitors were due. Lot was eager to invite them into his house but never shows any indication of haste or surprise. His respectful and calm reaction validates the argument that Lot knew they were coming.

In Scripture, Lot’s banquet for these visitors was already prepared and waiting. Abraham had to first run and find a calf. Then he ran to get a servant to dress it speedily. In contrast, Lot made them a feast, but no mention of haste occurs. The word choice in Scripture also supports that Lot had been expecting them. The word for “made” in Gen. 19:3 is also translated as “served” in the Old Testament. Served may have been the more accurate word, as Scripture does not indicate at all how Lot may have cooked a feast after their arrival. The word “feast” here in the Hebrew means a special meal, not some regular meal that would be eaten every other normal day. Indeed, there is another word commonly used for regular meals in Hewbrew, but this is not the same word for feast. The word choice implies that Lot had already prepared a special feast for these visitors with meat and all the trimmings fit for special guests of the highest caliber. His actions are that of a subordinate to high-ranking visitors of the greatest honor. As with Abraham, the angels ate and shared their news. Were they tired? Can angelic beings while in our dimension get tired as we do when they walk for nearly 2 days? Do they get hungry when in this dimentsion for any extended period of time? Did they stay at anyone else’s house along their journey and eat there as well? Scripture says that men have entertained angels unknowingly (Heb. 13:2).

Lot’s neighbors must have been aware that something extraordinary was happening. They certainly would have noticed his servants preparing a feast with calf meat being roasted. A thick slab of beefsteak grilling over a bed of hot coals wouldn’t have easily been ignored. The aroma alone would have sparked interest in the community. Was this a special time for a banquet they would have inquired? Special interest would have quickly spread amongst the surrounding community like wildfire. Maybe Lot’s wife passed word along to local allies that special supernatural visitors were to be attending their home that evening? Maybe Abaraham’s messengers let it slip in town that special visitors were due to arrive? One way or another, the community of Sodom knew something special was happening on this night. The cities of the plain had entertained and been visited by supernatural visitors previously. However, there was a big difference. Lot’s guests were sent from the Lord, while previous supernatural intruders into their community were demonic.

As the evening’s feast and conversation wound down, most would have been thinking about their soft, cozy bed. A special feast of flesh, wine, bread, and other foods after a long day would tend to invite rest and relaxation. Imagine angels being tired and wanting rest! As they neared their slumber, a commotion began to take shape outside Lot’s home. Men’s voices were heard shouting. Lot wondered what was happening. All of the inhabitants of Sodom had surrounded Lot’s house (Gen. 19:4). Yes, every man, woman, and child were present outside his home. Lot knew immediately what they wanted. What could it be they all so vehemently wanted? The traditional explanation is that the surrounding community was consenting to an old fashioned homosexual gang rape! Is this correct? Could it actually be possible, especially with literally all of the inhabitants outside the house that night? We believe fornication was on the community’s mind all right, but it was most assuredly not homosexual in nature.

Many scholars have erred greatly by attempting to represent Sodom as a culture which had grown so evil that it didn’t flinch at homosexual gang rape. We say modern scholars, because long ago all believers understood as we do. Modern day scholars, preachers, and teachers expect everyone to believe mothers were taking their young children out to witness the gang rape of grown men (Gen. 19:4-5). This doesn’t make any sense. In addition, absolutely no record of this culture practicing such behavior exists. In general, homosexuality may have been known to some degree as it has been known throughout history in many cultures; however, there is no historical support for commuity wide acceptance of homosexual gang rape.

Scripture is very short on citing any common practice of homosexuality, let alone homosexual gang rape, ever being performed as widely as the clergy would have us believe in this setting. History, however, does tell us somewhat about ancient homosexuality. For instance, similar to the infamous fertility cult, some evidence of male prostitution in pagan temples of worship with different groups of people and cultures did historically occur. Yet, some accounts of male prostitutes are reported to have actually been castrated eunuchs who were made up to appear as women while performing their cultic ritual. This would hardly compare to anything remotely close to what our modern world calls homosexuality. In addition, some mention in world history of males in war accosting their enemy prisoners with forced rape as a token of humiliation is recorded. Our research reveals only the most isolated accounts of this type of battlefield rape, which was exclusive to Greco/Roman homosexual warriors, occurred. To retroactively apply these acts of war to a dissimilar culture nearly 2,000 years removed is not sound reasoning. There is no link whatsoever. Furthermore, virtually all scholars readily admit to the widespread practice of the fertility cult by nearly all known ancient cultures. This being the case, it undermines the position of the Biblical scholar, who wants to promote some undocumented belief of a widespread homosexual community in ancient times, because homosexuality produces no profit of physical offspring that the fertility cult relied upon for survival. However, had homosexuality been as prevalent as many would want us to believe, then it would seem that God would be quick to more readily address this practice clearly and early on in His word. According to God’s command, living a gay lifestyle is wrong, but His word from Scripture does not indicate that homosexuality brought down the world before the Flood or at Sodom either. The belief that homosexuality played a major role in deteriorating these cultures is pure fiction perpetuated and created by many who are preoccupied and focused on gay sex. The sin at Sodom that night was most assuredly not homosexual in nature. Perverted sex was intended that night, but not homosexual sex.