Biblical Hebrew Forum

[JimStinehart AT aol.com]

James Christian:
 
You wrote:  “there is no mention of selling out to the hittites in the text.
”
 
Let’s take a look.
 
1.  Chapter 14 of Genesis mentions “Sodom” 8 times.  In the first two 
sentences of chapter 14, Sodom is explicitly stated to be opposed to “Tidal”, 
with “Tidal” being a well-known Hittite kingly name from the mid-2nd 
millennium BCE.  In fact, “Tidal” is a nasty Hebrew nickname for historical 
Hittite King Suppiluliuma I, who seized the Hittite throne by the dastardly 
expedient of murdering his own older brother named “Tidal”/Tudhaliya.  So in 
context, the Hittite king is effectively being referred to by the Hebrew 
narrator as “Murderer”.  This nasty Hebrew nickname is very important, 
because it 
shows the utter hatred and fear of the mighty Hittites by the early Hebrews.
 
The actual name of the princeling ruler of Sodom, namely “Bera”, is given 
only once in the Patriarchal narratives, at Genesis 14: 2.  But the entire 
ending of chapter 14 of Genesis concerns this princeling ruler of Sodom.  I 
believe that the only time in the entire Bible when a Hebrew leader stands 
shoulder to shoulder with a Gentile ruler is at the end of chapter 14 of 
Genesis:
 
“And the king of Sodom went out to meet him [Abraham], after his return 
from the [strike against] Chedorlaomer and the kings that were with him, at 
the 
vale of Shaveh--the same is the King's Vale. … And the king of Sodom said 
unto Abram: 'Give me the persons, and take the goods to thyself.'  And Abram 
said to the king of Sodom: 'I have lifted up my hand unto the LORD, God Most 
High, Maker of heaven and earth, that I will not take a thread nor a 
shoe-latchet nor aught that is thine, lest thou shouldest say: I have made 
Abram 
rich….”  Genesis 14: 17, 21- 23
 
Please note that in chapter 14 of Genesis, (i) Abraham and (ii) Bera of 
Sodom and (iii) the men of Sodom all fight on the same, righteous side, 
opposing a coalition of four rulers that included one ruler with a kingly 
Hittite 
name.  It is of critical importance to realize that at the close of chapter 
14 of Genesis, Abraham and Bera of Sodom are the two most high-profile 
anti-Hittite figures in all of Canaan.
 
2.  Whereas princeling ruler Bera of Sodom and the men of Sodom are good 
people in chapter 14 of Genesis, righteously fighting on Abraham’s side, 
something has gone terribly wrong by the time we get to chapters 18 and 19 of 
Genesis.
 
“And the LORD said: 'Shall I hide from Abraham that which I am doing’….  
And the LORD said [to Abraham]: 'Verily, the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is 
great, and, verily, their sin is exceeding grievous.  I will go down now [to 
Sodom], and see whether they have done altogether according to the cry of it, 
which is come unto Me;  and if not, I will know.'”  Genesis 18: 17, 20-21
 
Abraham knows that the men of Sodom have, fairly recently, commenced to do 
something terrible, which is an ongoing terrible sin.  Abraham correctly 
surmises that YHWH’s plan is to exterminate Sodom from the face of the earth! 
 
Abraham knows that his nephew Lot is living there at Sodom, and Abraham may 
also be somewhat concerned at the prospect of an entire city perishing if 
only some of the city’s inhabitants have committed a great sin.  So Abraham 
bravely says to YHWH:
 
“And Abraham drew near, and said [to YHWH]: 'Wilt Thou indeed sweep away 
the righteous with the wicked?’”  Genesis 18: 23
 
YHWH in fact has heard that every man in Sodom has turned to the dark side 
(with the possible sole exception of Lot’s immediate family).  But YHWH 
reassures Abraham that YHWH will not obliterate all of Sodom until YHWH’s 
angels 
have confirmed, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that all the men of Sodom have 
given up their righteousness that was shown in chapter 14 of Genesis, when 
the men of Sodom fought with Abraham against the dreaded Hittites, but 
instead have now gone over to the dark side.
 
“And he [Abraham] said: 'Oh, let not the LORD be angry, and I will speak 
yet but this once.  Peradventure ten shall be found there.'  And He said:  'I 
will not destroy it for the ten's sake.'  Genesis 18: 32
  
3.  James, as to what thing could  a-l-l  the men of Sodom have recently 
chosen the dark side?  The scholarly “analysis” is, believe it or not, that 
all the men of Sodom have suddenly become savage male homosexual rapists.  Is 
that credible?  Lest you think that our moderator Prof. Yigal Levin might 
be slightly out of the academic mainstream as to this particular point (he isn
’t), here is how famed Genesis Prof. Robert Alter of Berkeley characterizes 
this situation (at p. 85 of his book on Genesis):  “homosexual gang rape”.
 
Is it likely that  a-l-l  the men of Sodom would suddenly become “
homosexual gang rapists”?  Would Lot still be staying at Sodom if  a-l-l  the 
men of 
Sodom had become homosexual predators?  Would Lot have married off his two 
oldest daughters to men of Sodom under such circumstances?  Would the men of 
Gomorrah have similarly had the same sudden switch of  s-e-x-u-a-l  
orientation?  Does the scholarly view of chapter 19 of Genesis make any sense 
at 
all?  No!  The scholarly view is absolutely ridiculous.  There’s no way that 
after righteously fighting the Hittites with Abraham in chapter 14 of 
Genesis, 
the men of Sodom would be portrayed in chapter 19 as, to a man, having 
become male homosexual gang rapists.  No way!
 
Now consider what great sin  a-l-l  the men of Sodom might realistically 
commit, a sin that would gravely threaten the future existence of the 
tent-dwelling Hebrews in Canaan.  The only realistic sin that would bother 
Abraham 
and the early Hebrews is if, as in secular history, some cities near or in 
Canaan succumbed to Hittite pressure, and sold out to the Hittites.  
Historically, that was an all-or-nothing proposition.  If the Hittites 
threatened 
your city, there were only two realistic options for you.  You could league 
with other anti-Hittite neighbors, and try to resist the mighty Hittites.  Or 
else you could go over to the Hittite side, agree to become a docile Hittite 
vassal, and to a man swear allegiance to the mighty Hittites.  There was no 
half-way here.  It was all or nothing.  And Yes, some cities in or near 
Canaan did swing dramatically and become Hittite vassals.  Consider the 
following chilling historical testimony from several princelings in the 
northern 
Transjordan, who tentatively decided to become Hittite vassals rather than 
risk 
the wrath and power of the mighty Hittites:  “They keep saying ‘We are 
servants of the king of Hatti’”.  Amarna Letter EA 197: 23-31
 
Chapter 19 of Genesis is deadly serious.  It’s not a silly story about a 
city whose men, for some unaccountable reason, all decided at some point to 
become male homosexual gang rapists.
 
4.  The key here is to focus on a point that Yigal Levin himself made.  
A-l-l  of the people of Sodom have gone over to the dark side.  At a minimum, 
that includes  a-l-l  of the adult males of Sodom.  In Hebrew, it is unclear 
whether children and females are included or not.  But that ambiguity is 
actually nice here, for in fact the entire community of Sodom has irrevocably 
committed to this sinful path.  No women are trying to restrain their men, 
you will notice.  Nor are any elders of Sodom trying to restrain some young 
hotheads.
 
Here’s the key passage, which Yigal Levin rightly focuses upon:
 
“But before they lay down, the men of the city, even the men of Sodom, 
compassed the house round, both young and old, all the people from every 
quarter.
”  Genesis 19: 4
 
The text is bending over backwards to tell us that “all the people from 
every quarter” of Sodom have embarked on this sinful path.  Please note that 
YHWH had heard “the cry of it” long before those angels went to Sodom.  This 
is an ongoing sin, not a one-time failing.  What could such a sin be, that 
is ongoing, that threatens the tent-dwelling Hebrews, and that is being 
committed at Sodom by “all the people from every quarter”?
 
Realistically, the only sin that will fit the bill here is that the people 
of Sodom have deposed their anti-Hittite former ruler, Bera, and have sold 
out to the Hittites, lock, stock and barrel.  Every single citizen of Sodom 
(but not necessarily resident alien Lot), to a man, has agreed upon this 
desperate course of action.  In order to avoid a possible attack by the 
powerful 
Hittites, “all the people from every quarter” of Sodom have agreed to 
become, in the words of that chilling Amarna Letter, “servants of the king of 
Hatti”.  That is to say,  a-l-l  the citizens of Sodom, to a man, have agreed 
to become subjects of the mightiest Hittite king of all time, Suppiluliuma 
I, whom the early Hebrew narrator in effect (and with good reason) calls “
Murderer”.
 
5.  James, why should we be asked to believe in a fairy tale?  There never 
was a city in Canaan  a-l-l  of whose men suddenly decided to become 
homosexual gang rapists.  Are you kidding?  But there were numerous cities in 
and 
near Canaan which, after previously bravely opposing the dreaded Hittites, 
later in desperation changed their mind and, to a man, swore loyalty to the 
mighty Hittites.
 
Let me quote once again Rebekah’s heartfelt diatribe against the Hittites 
at the end of chapter 27 of Genesis:  “I loathe my life because of the 
Hittite women!  If my son Jacob marries a Hittite woman, from among the local 
girls, my life will not be worth living!”  That’s authentic, genuine 
anti-Hittite invective.  That gut hatred and fear of the mighty Hittites only 
existed 
for a short time, in the Late Bronze Age, but for a few terrifying years, 
that hatred and fear burned very, very hot among the first Hebrews, who 
rightly feared a potentially genocidal assault by the Hittites.
 
No matter how much university scholars love to talk about male homosexual 
gang rape, the actual, historical sin of Sodom was its dastardly, if somewhat 
understandable, decision to jettison its anti-Hittite ruler, and throw 
itself into the hands of the mighty Hittites, with “all the people from every 
quarter” of Sodom, to a man, selling out to the Hittites.  It’s the identical 
sin committed in this same historical time period by the Amorites on the 
northern coast of Lebanon, which is seethingly referred to at Genesis 15: 16 
as “the iniquity of the Amorites” -- the Amorites under Aziru historically 
sold out their Amorite state of Amurru to the Hittites, thereby potentially 
threatening Canaan south of Lebanon.
 
Finally, would a gang of homosexual rapists be likely to articulate a 
distinction between a citizen, as opposed to a resident alien?  By contrast, 
if 
all the  c-t-i-z-e-n-s  of Sodom had decided to sell out to the Hittites, it 
would make perfect sense if they were outraged that a mere resident alien 
like Lot, who was not a citizen, thought that he could jeopardize all the 
citizens of Sodom by harboring his uncle Abraham’s anti-Hittite agitators.  
Now 
Genesis 19: 9 makes perfect sense:
 
“And they said: 'This one fellow came in to sojourn, and he will needs play 
the judge; now will we deal worse with thee, than with them.'”
 
That’s not the way male homosexual gang rapists talk.  No, that’s the way 
concerned citizens talk, who gravely fear the wrath of their new Hittite 
overlords.
 
Please compare my historical analysis of chapter 19 of Genesis, which is 
realistic in all ways and fits everything throughout the Patriarchal 
narratives, with the scholarly view that the text is supposedly presenting 
every man 
in Sodom as recently having changed his  s-e-x-u-a-l  orientation, or at a 
minimum his  s-e-x-u-a-l  habits, and become a savage male homosexual gang 
rapist.
 
Jim Stinehart
Evanston, Illinois