04 - The Destruction Of Sodom And The Sin Of Salaam 2011

“The Destruction of Sodom and the Sin of Balaam”

In chapter 2, Peter provides three Bible illustrations of apostasy—the fallen angels, the ancient world of Noah’s day, and the twin cities of Sodom and Gomorrah—and how God brought judgment on them.

Last time we looked at Peter’s description of God’s judgment on the first two—fallen angels and the world of Noah’s day. Now we come to the third illustration—the judgment of Sodom.

“…if he condemned the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah by burning them to ashes, and made them an example of what is going to happen to the ungodly;”—vs.6

Notice two things: God himself both condemned and judged the twin cities of Sodom and Gomorrah by burning them to ashes. Their lifestyle is deemed “ungodly” by Peter, writing under the direction of the Holy Spirit.

In Romans 1, God further elaborates on how He views homosexual practices:

“Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonor their own bodies between themselves:

 25Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.

 26For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:

 27And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly,”

Listen to the adjectives used by the Holy Spirit—unclean, lustful, dishonoring, a lie, vile, unseemly, unnatural; these are God’s descriptions of the homosexual lifestyle.

And yet the pressure to accept homosexuality as an inborn, genetic, “born this way” so therefore valid predisposition is immense.

“Since we are born this way,” the homosexual community claims, “our lifestyle and practices are to be accepted, embraced, and even taught to children as a viable, normal “option.”

But God’s word, alone with scientific study, says otherwise.

The Boston Globe published an article on February 7, 1999 that contributes to the growing body of evidence that homosexuality is not "genetic."

Serious scientists have long known that a simply "genetic" cause for homosexuality was highly unlikely, but the mass media conveyed the misimpression of genetic causation to the general public. In the Globe article, prominent researchers admit the distinct limitations of the "born that way" theory.

The Globe article states:

"The research project in 1993 that indicated many gay men shared a common genetic marker in the X chromosome was hailed as a momentous scientific discovery.

"The idea of a 'gay gene' offered an ironclad defense of homosexuality; if it was genetically predetermined, then being gay could not be cast as 'deviant' behavior, something 'correctable.'

"Six years later, however, the gene still has not been found, and interest in--and enthusiasm for--the 'gay gene' research has waned among activists and scientists alike.”

In April of 2003, a major genetics consortium called “The Human Genome Project” was completed. In this conference, most of the major science journals reported on the progress in the field of genetics. The one piece of information that never materialized from the Human Genome Project was the identification of the so-called “gay gene.” Again, it had not been found. It’s not there.

The fact that there is no “gay gene” does away with the homosexual communities claim that they are a legitimate “minority group” deserving special minority rights. The argument goes like this: “Just as a person cannot help being black, female, or Asian, I cannot help being homosexual.”

But skin color and other genetic traits can be traced through inheritance patterns and simple Mendelian genetics.  Not homosexuals, who are identified not by a trait or a gene, but rather by their actions.

Scripture indicates that, like all other sexual sins, it is a choice. Paul writes three times in Romans 1 that an “exchange” had been made. They had exchanged the truth of God for a lie, exchanged the glory of God for something else, and exchanged the natural for the unnatural.

The word exchange is a verb requiring that a choice was made. Otherwise, God would be utterly unfair in judging it, which he did in Sodom and Gomorrah.

From time to time, God acts in a way as to make an example and to show what He thinks about a given aspect of human behavior. If He doesn’t act that way all the time, it is because He is patient and because, having made an example, He lets it stand at that—a graphic, unforgettable display of His wrath as a warning to all.

The overthrow of Sodom and Gomorrah is just such an example. It is God’s sobering showpiece of what He thinks of homosexuality. The twin overthrows of both the pornographic lifestyle of the antediluvians and the homosexual lifestyle of the men of Sodom stand side by side in Scripture. Both Peter and Jude point us back to these events.

The Lord Jesus foretold that one mark of the end times would be that society once again would become as pornographic as it was in the days of Noah and as perverted as it was in the days of Lot.

Luke 17:26-30 “And as it was in the days of Noah, so it will be also in the days of the Son of Man: 27 They ate, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, and the flood came and destroyed them all. 28 Likewise as it was also in the days of Lot: They ate, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they built; 29 but on the day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven and destroyed them all. 30 Even so will it be in the day when the Son of Man is revealed.”

Peter tells us that God turned the twin cities into ashes. The phrase comes from the word tephroo (tef-ro'-o), which is found only here in the Bible. It paints a graphic picture. The ancient Greeks used the word tephra to describe the ashes of a funeral pyre-- a pile of wood on which a dead body is ceremonially cremated.

In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, the twin cities were engulfed in fumes and flames. Burned to the ground, their few remains were then plunged out of sight beneath the Dead Sea, and the whole scene was left as a sobering scene of desolation.

THE DELIVERANCE OF LOT

Lot, however, escaped. God answered Abraham’s prayer. He did not slay the righteous with the wicked. “He delivered just Lot.” That is, He rescued him. God made a qualitative difference between Lot and the people of Sodom. God says the same thing about Noah—“Noah was a just man” (Gen.6:9).

God saved Lot, not because he was perfect, but because in his heart of hearts he was right with God. And he had come into the blessing of Abraham (Gen.12:1-3).

In fact, Lot should have remained with Abraham as he dwelt in Canaan. It was a bad decision on his part to take his family and belongings, and move to Sodom, parting ways with the man of blessing.

Lot paid a high and horrific price for moving to the cities of sin. He lost his family, his fortune, and his friends in Sodom.

Lot, we are told, was “vexed with the filthy lifestyle of the wicked”—(2:7b) “Vexed” means to be tormented. Lot’s inner turmoil was no light thing. What tormented him was the “manner of life” of the Sodomites.

The Bible’s use of the word “filthy” paints a picture of wantonness, licentiousness, and lasciviousness—“an insolent disregard of decency.”

Peter now tells us what vindicated Lot:

“…for that righteous man, dwelling among them, tormented his righteous soul from day to day by seeing and hearing their lawless deeds.”—2:8

It was the things Lot saw that tormented him. One doesn’t have to look far in our day to be vexed by what the eyes encounter. Perversion is flaunted before us at every turn. Depraved lifestyles, gross immorality, and open debauchery are the order of the day, and we are now told to accept it all as normal.

And it was the things Lot heard. He heard the obscenities, blasphemies, anger, rage, and verbal abuse that go along with a perverted lifestyle.

Lot heard and saw it all. For down there, in Sodom and Gomorrah, it was not just an “alternate lifestyle”: it was the lifestyle. Peter closes verse 8 by calling such a lifestyle lawless.

The word for lawless is anomos, which means “to have contempt for the law.” Not necessarily the laws of man, but for natural law. According to the Bible account of Sodom and Gomorrah, a society that tolerates and even promotes the homosexual lifestyle is ripe for the judgment of God.

Next, Peter brings a glad word for the saint: “…the Lord knows how to deliver the godly out of temptations,”—2:9a

The Lord was well able to preserve His own in their terrible trials. He delivered Noah by way of the ark. He delivered Lot by way of angelic intervention. And he will deliver us from the fiery wrath that is to come on the ungodly.

This glad word to the saints is followed by a sad word for the sinner: “…and to reserve the unjust under punishment for the Day of Judgment,”—2:9b

The word for “reserve” is used of those who are being kept under guard against the day of judgment. The word for “punished” tells us that, without repentance, they cannot escape. Their case has already been referred to the Supreme Court of heaven to be taken up at the Great White Throne Judgment.

Next, Peter focuses on those who seduce the church, spawn cults, and deny the faith. He emphasizes four features that distinguish them:

“…and especially those who walk according to the flesh in the lust of uncleanness and despise authority. They are presumptuous, self-willed. They are not afraid to speak evil of dignitaries, 11 whereas angels, who are greater in power and might, do not bring a reviling accusation against them before the Lord” (2:10-11).

Uncleanness: describes the act of defiling or of being stained. The people in Peter’s crosshairs were indulging all of the foulness of their lower natures with abandon, just as the people of Noah’s and Lot’s day did, staining their character.

Despise authority: “Despise” means “to think slightingly” of something. These reprobates did not know how to honor God’s appointed authority in the earth.

Presumptuous: Means “to be daring, shameless, irreverent.” They have no sense or respect for what is sacred or holy.

Self-willed: Denotes a person ruled only by self-interest. Paul talked of those who would be “lovers of themselves” (2 Tim. 3:2).

Peter next describes their incredible brazenness:

“They are not afraid to speak evil of dignitaries, 11 whereas angels, who are greater in power and might, do not bring a reviling accusation against them before the Lord.”

Jude reminds us of the time when, after Moses had died on Mount Nebo, Satan tried to gain possession of his body. Probably because he wanted to deliver it into the hands of the Israelites that they might turn it into an object of worship.

God sent Michael the archangel, a mighty prince in the heavenly hierarchy (Dan. 10:13, 21), to prevent Satan’s success. We are told that Michael “dared not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, ‘The Lord rebuke you’ (Jude 9).

This amazing restraint on the part of God’s mighty Archangel only adds to the folly of men who do what angels dare not do.