The Rise of Modern Sodom? Biblical Morality, Sexual Ethics, and the Question of Judgment

Originally written in the aftermath of the 2015 U.S. Supreme Court decision on same-sex marriage.

Archive note: This essay reflects my traditional Christian understanding of marriage, sexuality, Scripture, and moral authority. Some of the arguments and language in the original version have been revised for greater biblical accuracy, fairness, and clarity.

In 2015, the United States Supreme Court ruled in Obergefell v. Hodges that same-sex couples possess a constitutional right to marry.

For many supporters, the decision represented equality, dignity, and freedom.

For many traditional Christians, however, it raised another question:

Can civil law redefine something that Christians believe God has already defined?

That question remains worth discussing.

But before Christians invoke Sodom, judgment, or biblical morality, we should be careful that we are representing Scripture accurately rather than merely using biblical language to strengthen something we already want to say.

The One Lawgiver

James 4:12 says:

“There is one lawgiver, who is able to save and to destroy: who art thou that judgest another?”

This establishes an important distinction.

Human courts possess legitimate authority over civil law. Governments determine legal rights, contracts, benefits, and public policy within their jurisdictions.

But a court ruling does not determine Christian theology.

Likewise, a church does not determine constitutional law merely by quoting Scripture.

The U.S. Supreme Court's 2015 decision answered a constitutional question under American law. It did not claim authority to determine what Christians must believe about marriage before God.

Indeed, Justice Anthony Kennedy's majority opinion expressly acknowledged that many people oppose same-sex marriage because of “decent and honorable religious or philosophical premises.”

Christians therefore do not have to pretend that a civil ruling settles a theological question.

At the same time, disagreement with that ruling does not give Christians permission to despise the people whose marriages the law recognizes.

There is a difference between moral conviction and personal contempt.

What Was the Sin of Sodom?

This is where my original article was too absolute.

I wrote that the sin for which God destroyed Sodom was homosexuality.

The biblical record is more complicated.

Genesis 13:13 already describes the people of Sodom as “wicked and sinners before the LORD exceedingly.” In Genesis 18, God speaks of the city's grievous sin before the events involving Lot's visitors even occur.

Then Genesis 19 describes a mob surrounding Lot's house and demanding access to his male guests.

The demand is clearly sexual. Lot's response confirms that something profoundly wicked is intended.

But it is also an attempted act of collective sexual violence.

That matters.

The story is not describing two consenting adults seeking a lifelong relationship. It portrays a violent mob attempting to sexually abuse strangers.

Other biblical passages broaden the indictment even further.

Ezekiel 16:49–50 condemns Sodom for pride, abundance, idleness, failure to help the poor and needy, and committing abominations before God.

Jude 7 emphasizes sexual immorality and the pursuit of “strange flesh.”

Second Peter 2 presents Sodom and Gomorrah as examples of ungodliness and lawlessness.

Taken together, Scripture portrays Sodom not as a city guilty of only one particular sin, but as a society characterized by deep corruption—sexual violence, injustice, pride, moral lawlessness, neglect of others, and rebellion against God.

That actually makes the biblical warning stronger.

Sodom should not become merely a weapon Christians use whenever homosexuality is discussed.

Its warning reaches much further.

Does That Mean the Bible Has Nothing to Say About Same-Sex Sexual Relationships?

No.

Rejecting an oversimplified interpretation of Sodom does not require abandoning traditional Christian sexual ethics.

The Christian argument concerning marriage does not depend upon Genesis 19 alone.

Genesis 2:24 presents marriage through the union of man and woman:

“Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.”

Jesus Himself returns to this creation account in Matthew 19:4–6 when discussing marriage.

Traditional Christian teaching has therefore understood marriage as a covenantal sexual union between a man and a woman.

Romans 1:26–27 is also among the passages traditionally understood as rejecting same-sex sexual relations.

Christians disagree today about the interpretation and application of these passages. Some churches have adopted affirming interpretations of same-sex relationships, while Catholic, Orthodox, Evangelical, and many other Christian traditions continue to maintain the historic male-female understanding of marriage.

I remain within the latter position.

But that conviction needs to be stated accurately:

I am making a theological claim about sexual conduct and marriage—not declaring that LGBT people possess less human dignity than anyone else.

Those are entirely different statements.

“Judge Not”

One of the most common responses to Christian moral teaching is Jesus' statement:

“Judge not, that ye be not judged.”

Christians themselves sometimes misuse the verse in the opposite direction.

Jesus was not teaching that human beings must abandon every distinction between right and wrong. Throughout the New Testament, Christians are repeatedly called to discern good from evil.

But Jesus strongly condemns hypocritical judgment.

That should restrain Christians considerably.

A Christian may believe an action is sinful without claiming God's authority to determine another person's eternal destiny.

We are not the final Judge.

That is precisely why James says there is one Lawgiver.

And Romans 3:23 reminds Christians:

“For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God.”

Biblical morality therefore gives Christians no basis for self-righteousness.

If homosexuality is discussed endlessly while adultery, fornication, pornography, lust, exploitation, greed, dishonesty, pride, cruelty, and corruption are tolerated among Christians, then something has gone seriously wrong with our moral witness.

The Gospel does not divide humanity into respectable heterosexual sinners and uniquely condemned homosexual sinners.

It places all humanity in need of grace.

Freedom Is Not the Same as Moral Approval

Modern discussions of sexuality frequently revolve around freedom, equality, happiness, and personal autonomy.

Those are serious human concerns.

Christianity, however, asks an additional question:

Is everything we freely desire therefore morally good?

The biblical answer is no.

That principle applies far beyond sexuality.

A married man may sincerely desire another woman. Desire does not make adultery right.

A person may desire wealth intensely. Desire does not justify dishonesty.

Someone may find revenge emotionally satisfying. Satisfaction does not turn vengeance into virtue.

Christian morality therefore refuses to make personal desire the final authority.

From a Christian perspective, freedom does not mean merely possessing the ability to choose. Freedom also involves becoming rightly ordered toward truth and goodness.

That is why Jesus says:

“And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.”

What About “Modern Sodom”?

I would use that phrase much more carefully today.

Calling modern society “Sodom” merely because same-sex marriage exists reduces a much larger biblical indictment to one issue.

If we seriously want to ask whether our generation resembles Sodom, we must also ask:

What about societies overflowing with wealth while people remain desperately poor?

What about corruption?

What about sexual exploitation?

What about violence?

What about pornography and adultery?

What about human trafficking?

What about indifference toward people in need?

What about pride, injustice, abuse of power, and the normalization of cruelty?

Ezekiel's description of Sodom should make any society uncomfortable—not merely LGBT people.

The warning points toward human rebellion as a whole.

A Sign of Coming Judgment?

Jesus Himself referred to Sodom when speaking about judgment:

“Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded… Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed.”
— Luke 17:28–30

Notice what Jesus emphasizes.

People were carrying on with ordinary life—eating, drinking, buying, selling, planting, and building—without recognizing the seriousness of the moment.

The warning is therefore much bigger than sexual morality.

It concerns humanity living as though God will never call anyone to account.

That is the biblical issue Christians should emphasize.

Judgment is not something we should gleefully pronounce upon groups we dislike.

It is a warning that should first produce humility and repentance in ourselves.

In Defense of Biblical Morality

I continue to believe in objective moral truth.

I continue to believe that Scripture has authority over Christian faith and conduct.

And I continue to hold the traditional Christian understanding of marriage as the union of a man and a woman.

But defending those convictions does not require exaggerating Scripture, insulting unbelievers, ridiculing LGBT people, or reducing an entire group of human beings to a political or theological issue.

First Peter 3:15 instructs Christians to defend their hope with meekness.

Jesus commanded us to love our neighbors.

And the Gospel reminds us that the Christian standing before God is himself a recipient of grace.

So yes, Christians should be willing to disagree with their culture.

We should question moral assumptions rather than accept them merely because they have become popular, legal, or socially celebrated.

But we should also question ourselves.

Are we interpreting Scripture carefully?

Are we applying morality consistently?

Are we speaking truthfully?

Are we defending conviction without hatred?

And does our conduct give anyone a reason to believe the Gospel we claim to defend?

Biblical morality needs neither cruelty nor distortion to survive.

Truth should be defended truthfully. Conviction should be expressed with humility. And judgment ultimately belongs to God.

— J.P. Abecilla