Freethought & Rationalism Archive

IamJoseph · 08-07-2009, 10:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by show_no_mercy

That does question God's omniscience.

I don't think so. The entire incidents in the chapter are tests - as was the command to 'offer' [as opposed to sacrifice] his son. Abraham passed these tests, thus Noah is slighted as rightious only 'in his generation' - which was not a good generation of rightious ones, because, unlike Abraham, Noah did not strive for the saving of others.

Quote:

He should have known that there was at least one innocent person. Of course, a Christian could simply spin it to say "he was testing Abraham to see if he could find Lot".

The limitation for savaing was 10, not 1 innocent. This says critical mass applies.

IamJoseph · 08-07-2009, 10:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Newfie

Quote:

Originally Posted by storytime

Lot is a weird character. He doesn't really want to leave his Sodomite buddies and the angels have to literally pull him out and run for their lives. After the death of Lots wife, Lot and his daughters have a roll in the hay, so to speak. Lot is not condemned in either old or new testaments for his incestuous behavior; although the new testament story gives Lot an excuse, that he was "vexed" in his spirit, and by this situation he was portrayed as the "righteous Lot".

By "vexed" don't they mean seduced, Lot's daughters did get him drunk with the plan to get pregnant, didn't they? I mean, that kind of behavior is even frowned on in Alaska!

The sisters' intention was profound: they imagined they were the only survivors on earth.

IamJoseph · 08-07-2009, 10:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by steve_bnk

Didn't abraham essentialy pimp out his wife, as we would say today?

No. The position he found himself in would have got him killed - thus he was saving not just himself but also Sarah. The peoples of Egypt had never seen a blonde haired woman before ['AND SARAH WAS FAIR TO LOOK UPON'/GEN], and it was the custom that a beautiful woman or anything precious was to be taken to the Pharoah as his concubine and possession. A brother would not be killed but a husband would.

premjan · 08-07-2009, 10:29 PM

Fair to look upon != Fair haired. Also red haired mummies have been found in Egypt.

IamJoseph · 08-07-2009, 10:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Susan2

Lot is willing to allow his daughters to be done as the men pounding at his door would like, just don’t touch the men in his house, specifically the angels, i.e. the message. Of course that begs the question what message?

A rightious person can/must forfeit his life to save an innocent person. Lot knew the people of Sodom's character, and he was trying to appease them, even by an offering deemed of the greatest value - after all else failed. Here, Lot was at his most rightious point.

Quote:

Later we see that Lot’s wife, who has not even the dignity of a name, is turned into a pillar of salt for having looked back. Did she listen to her own conscious? Did she hear the cries of the people?

She ignored a holy command, inferring this was a tradition with her.

Quote:

We know that she had two son-in-laws left behind because they thought that Lot was joking (Gen 19:14). Did she love them? Were they good son-in-laws? Did they have a name?

The people of Sodom were regarded as the most bad people in history - it marks the first time an entre city is destroyed. Usually, those not meant to be remembered for good are not named; those very good have their names repeated twice - as with MOSES, MOSES.

Quote:

Why did she look back? We don’t know, we are traditionally told that she was struck dead because she didn’t listen, obey the message. Of course by tradition, we are not allowed to think.

Disobeying a holy command does not infer 'thinking'.

Quote:

I presume that the son-in-laws who ‘thought’ that Lot was joking were, left behind and killed for thinking.

The sodomites reached a threshold of no return - a use-by date applies. Many nations are not around any more, and some are.

Quote:

Later we see that the daughters are shamed for thinking.

Rewarded - for acting out of a profound higher thought.

Quote:

Lot’s wife was not afraid. She stands there as a monument, a remembrance of injustice, perhaps even ignorance of the times.

This eronous thinking can result from reading the Hebrew bible through uninitiated minds - namely not of the Hebrew sages and prophets.

IamJoseph · 08-07-2009, 10:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by premjan

Fair to look upon != Fair haired. Also red haired mummies have been found in Egypt.

Sarah is regarded one of the three most beautiful women in biblical history - in the category of Eve and Esther. The hebrew word 'fair' denotes blonde, among other things, and this is clarified by the reaction to Sarah in Egypt.

steve_bnk · 08-07-2009, 11:11 PM

I've heard this before. The 'real' Jews of the OT realy weren't like the those of Jewish decent today and like the people of the area in the tine of JC, they were realy blonde haired and blue eyed, just like the modern American Chriustian inages of JC.

IamJoseph · 08-07-2009, 11:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Newfie

Quote:

Originally Posted by storytime

Lot is a weird character. He doesn't really want to leave his Sodomite buddies and the angels have to literally pull him out and run for their lives. After the death of Lots wife, Lot and his daughters have a roll in the hay, so to speak. Lot is not condemned in either old or new testaments for his incestuous behavior; although the new testament story gives Lot an excuse, that he was "vexed" in his spirit, and by this situation he was portrayed as the "righteous Lot".

By "vexed" don't they mean seduced, Lot's daughters did get him drunk with the plan to get pregnant, didn't they? I mean, that kind of behavior is even frowned on in Alaska!

Their intention was profound. The texts clarifiies their actions: the pervasive destruction, desribed in terms akin to a nuclear devastation, which left them hidden in the crevice of a mount, assuming no other men prevailed on the earth anymore [underlined]:

Quote:

29 And it came to pass, when God destroyed the cities of the Plain, that God remembered Abraham, and sent Lot out of the midst of the overthrow, when He overthrew the cities in which Lot dwelt. 30 And Lot went up out of Zoar, and dwelt in the mountain, and his two daughters with him; for he feared to dwell in Zoar; and he dwelt in a cave, he and his two daughters. 31 And the first-born said unto the younger: 'Our father is old, and there is not a man in the earth to come in unto us after the manner of all the earth. 32 Come, let us make our father drink wine, and we will lie with him, that we may preserve seed of our father.'

Also, the law forbidding incest was not given yet, and would not even apply in such critical circumstances.

steve_bnk · 08-08-2009, 12:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamJoseph

Quote:

Originally Posted by Newfie

By "vexed" don't they mean seduced, Lot's daughters did get him drunk with the plan to get pregnant, didn't they? I mean, that kind of behavior is even frowned on in Alaska!

Their intention was profound. The texts clarifiies their actions: the pervasive destruction, desribed in terms akin to a nuclear devastation, which left them hidden in the crevice of a mount, assuming no other men prevailed on the earth anymore [underlined]:

Quote:

29 And it came to pass, when God destroyed the cities of the Plain, that God remembered Abraham, and sent Lot out of the midst of the overthrow, when He overthrew the cities in which Lot dwelt. 30 And Lot went up out of Zoar, and dwelt in the mountain, and his two daughters with him; for he feared to dwell in Zoar; and he dwelt in a cave, he and his two daughters. 31 And the first-born said unto the younger: 'Our father is old, and there is not a man in the earth to come in unto us after the manner of all the earth. 32 Come, let us make our father drink wine, and we will lie with him, that we may preserve seed of our father.'

Also, the law forbidding incest was not given yet, and would not even apply in such critical circumstances.

I see, god hadn't passed the word down the chain of command yet.

IamJoseph · 08-08-2009, 01:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by steve_bnk

I see, god hadn't passed the word down the chain of command yet.

From here comes the law, a law is not a law unless it is written down as a mandated law. Thus the tort: 'ON WHAT CHARGES?'

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

08-07-2009, 10:29 PM	#14
premjan Obsessed Contributor Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: NJ Posts: 61,538	Fair to look upon != Fair haired. Also red haired mummies have been found in Egypt.

08-07-2009, 11:11 PM	#17
steve_bnk Contributor Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Seattle Posts: 27,602	I've heard this before. The 'real' Jews of the OT realy weren't like the those of Jewish decent today and like the people of the area in the tine of JC, they were realy blonde haired and blue eyed, just like the modern American Chriustian inages of JC.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.