Lot, One of the Bible's bad Guys

[Thana]

It's not an impossible standard to expect someone to not abuse their power in a way that he sends someone to die so he can have his wife, or expecting someone to care enough about their daughters (or sons) to not offer them up for a gang rape. No one is perfect, but those deeds are utterly despicable. David could have starved himself to death over guilt and stress, but it wouldn't have done the victim any good. Lot made an offering that no reasonable or good parent would even think of. Being "men of god" should not be sufficient to excuse such abhorrent actions and proclaim them "righteous."

If they don't deserve forgiveness and a second chance then neither do you and neither do I.

Honestly, where do you get off judging others? Are you perfect? Do you think if you were born in ancient times and were made King you would've been perfectly just and fair? Come on.

 

[Thana]

Okey dokey, but the Bible never says Lot repented of anything, much less of what he did to his daughters, yet Christians say he was righteous. The Bible never says Lot revered god, yet Christians say he was righteous. Of course one can always suppose he repented, or suppose he revered god, but this could be said about anyone. So the big question is, why make an issue of his righteousness?

Why does 2 Peter 2:7 make a point of calling him a righteous man? Why not say Lot ate lamb last Thursday? It's no less significant.

Lot was a man of God, of course He revered Him. And he did actually try to do the right thing, regardless of the result he still tried. He was not a bad man, atleast that is not what I got from the story. He was just a flawed man, but all the men in the bible were flawed men. Job, David, Abraham, all of them sinned and made mistakes and did bad things. Just like us.

And there is only one small reference to Lot's righteousness, So I don't think it was made into an issue. In fact the only one who has made it into an issue here is you.

I wish you would just read the whole chapter, Instead of just cherry picking. It goes on to explain why Lot was considered righteous and who is considered unrighteous.

"For if God did not [even] spare angels that sinned, but threw them into hell and sent them to pits of gloom to be kept [there] for judgment; and if He did not spare the ancient world, but protected Noah, a preacher of righteousness, with seven others, when He brought [the judgment of] a flood upon the world of the ungodly; and if He condemned the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to destruction by reducing them to ashes, having made them an example to those who would live ungodly lives thereafter; and if He rescued righteous Lot, who was tormented by the immoral conduct of unprincipled and ungodly men (for that just man, while living among them, felt his righteous soul tormented day after day by what he saw and heard of their lawless acts), then [in light of the fact that all this is true, be sure that] the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from trial, and how to keep the unrighteous under punishment until the day of judgment, and especially those who indulge in the corrupt passions of the sin nature, and despise authority.

Presumptuous and reckless, self-willed and arrogant [creatures, despising the majesty of the Lord], they do not tremble when they revile angelic majesties, whereas even angels who are superior in might and power do not bring a reviling (defaming) accusation against them before the Lord. But these [false teachers], like unreasoning animals, [mere] creatures of instinct, born to be captured and destroyed, reviling things they do not understand, will also perish in their own corruption [in their destroying they will be destroyed], suffering wrong [destined for punishment] as the wages of doing wrong. They count it a delight to revel in the daytime [living luxuriously]. They are stains and blemishes [on mankind], reveling in their deceptions even as they feast with you. They have eyes full of adultery, constantly looking for sin, enticing and luring away unstable souls. Having hearts trained in greed, [they are] children of a curse. Abandoning the straight road [that is, the right way to live], they have gone astray..."

 

[Ingledsva]

How could David have truly repented to the man he sent on a suicide mission? He couldn't have, and that is the one he needed forgiveness from. Doing what David did, there is no justification in calling him "righteous" just because he was a "god fearing" man. Lot offered his daughters to be gang raped. Someone who would resort to such a thing has no right or business being called "righteous." God fearing or not, offering your daughters as expendable pieces of meat is something only a real ******* could do.

And in the David story, - after King David commits the sins of adultery, and murder, - he lives and is called great and righteous, - while their innocent baby is murdered by YHVH - for the sins.

*

 

[Ingledsva]

If they don't deserve forgiveness and a second chance then neither do you and neither do I.

Honestly, where do you get off judging others? Are you perfect? Do you think if you were born in ancient times and were made King you would've been perfectly just and fair? Come on.

So why didn't the innocent baby get a second chance?

Why did YHVH harm the innocent wives?

Patriarchal stories, and not from God, - any one?

2Sa 12:11 Thus saith the YHVH, Behold, I will raise up evil against thee out of thine own house, and I will take thy wives before thine eyes, and give them unto thy neighbour, and he shall lie with thy wives in the sight of this sun.

2Sa 12:14 Howbeit, because by this deed thou hast given great occasion to the enemies of the LORD to blaspheme, the child also that is born unto thee shall surely die.

2Sa 12:15 And Nathan departed unto his house. And the YHVH struck the child that Uriah's wife bare unto David, and it was very sick.

2Sa 12:18 And it came to pass on the seventh day, that the child died.

*

 

[Thana]

So why didn't the innocent baby get a second chance?

Why did YHVH harm the innocent wives?

Patriarchal stories, and not from God, - any one?

2Sa 12:11 Thus saith the YHVH, Behold, I will raise up evil against thee out of thine own house, and I will take thy wives before thine eyes, and give them unto thy neighbour, and he shall lie with thy wives in the sight of this sun.

2Sa 12:14 Howbeit, because by this deed thou hast given great occasion to the enemies of the LORD to blaspheme, the child also that is born unto thee shall surely die.

2Sa 12:15 And Nathan departed unto his house. And the YHVH struck the child that Uriah's wife bare unto David, and it was very sick.

2Sa 12:18 And it came to pass on the seventh day, that the child died.

*

God made us. Our lives come from Him and if He wills it, our deaths. It's His right to give or take away, as He see's fit.

And death isn't a bad thing anyway.

 

[Ingledsva]

God made us. Our lives come from Him and if He wills it, our deaths. It's His right to give or take away, as He see's fit.

And death isn't a bad thing anyway.

I get so tired of hearing that from Christians.

There is no excuse for killing the innocent, - for the crimes of sinners, - especially when the sinner lives and gets called righteous.

Only a patriarchal group would write stories where innocent women and children are murdered for the sins of men.

And I will say again, - it is these stories that tell me the Bible is from men, - not any God.

*

 

[Deeje]

It's not an impossible standard to expect someone to not abuse their power in a way that he sends someone to die so he can have his wife, or expecting someone to care enough about their daughters (or sons) to not offer them up for a gang rape. No one is perfect, but those deeds are utterly despicable. David could have starved himself to death over guilt and stress, but it wouldn't have done the victim any good. Lot made an offering that no reasonable or good parent would even think of. Being "men of god" should not be sufficient to excuse such abhorrent actions and proclaim them "righteous."

Shadow, I think you are missing some vital points in this discussion. If Lot had done wrong in God's eyes, he would have said so, not had him written up as a righteous man when he was really wicked.

Peter says that Lot was "righteous"...Why would Peter lie about that? The destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah was pictorial of what was to come at the time of the end. We again have much sexual immorality tolerated in today's world. SSM is generally accepted even among "Christians" and homosexuality is celebrated as a normal alternative lifestyle. This is not what the Bible teaches, nor is it the standard set by the Creator.

Peter wrote in 2 Pet 2:6-10....

"And by reducing the cities of Sodʹom and Go·morʹrah to ashes, he condemned them, setting a pattern for ungodly people of things to come. 7 And he rescued righteous Lot, who was greatly distressed by the brazen conduct of the lawless people— 8 for day after day that righteous man was tormenting his righteous soul over the lawless deeds that he saw and heard while dwelling among them. 9 So, then, Jehovah knows how to rescue people of godly devotion out of trial, but to reserve unrighteous people to be destroyed on the day of judgment, 10 especially those who seek to defile the flesh of others and who despise authority."

Lot did not condone the conduct of the people around him and God sent angels to rescue him before he wiped the city off the map....would he have done that for an unrighteous man?
Lot was fully aware of the sexual deviants of the city and what they would have done to these strangers in town, (unaware at the time that they were angels) had they not been invited to stay under his roof and his under his protection....the men of the city would have raped them as the account testifies. Offering his daughters was merely a stalling tactic because he knew that these deviates were not interested in women....they wanted to have sex with the men.

In David's case, his sins were grave, but he was Israel's king. God dealt with David's sin personally and because he knew David's heart, he did not put him to death but gave him opportunity to repent. By sending his prophet Nathan to David and telling David the story of a man who had one lamb that he cherished, but a rich man stole that lamb and served it to his guest....David was incensed! He said that man should die! Nathan said..."you are the man". Cut to the heart, David fell to his knees and repented. He was forgiven, but he would suffer the consequences of his sin for the rest of his life. True to God's declaration, David had major troubles in his household from then on.

"Righteous" in God's eyes is obviously different in yours. Humans judge by what appears to the eyes, but God judges the heart. He sees the good in us, not just the sin.

The 130th Psalm begins with the words...."From the depths I call to you, O Jehovah.
2 O Jehovah, hear my voice. May your ears pay attention to my pleas for help.
3 If errors were what you watch, O Jah, Then who, O Jehovah, could stand?
4 For with you there is true forgiveness, So that you may be held in awe."

 

[Ingledsva]

Shadow, I think you are missing some vital points in this discussion. If Lot had done wrong in God's eyes, he would have said so, not had him written up as a righteous man when he was really wicked.

...

The point being - obviously - these texts are not from any God.

They are written by men with warped ideas of justice, and right.

*

 

[Thana]

I get so tired of hearing that from Christians.

There is no excuse for killing the innocent, - for the crimes of sinners, - and especially when the sinner lives and gets called righteous.

Only a patriarchal group would write stories where innocent women and children are murdered for the sins of men.

And I will say again, - it is these stories that tell me the Bible is from men, - not any God.

*

And I get so tired of Atheists trying to sell me on their idea of morality, as if their idea of morality is objective.

Please.

 

[Ingledsva]

And I get so tired of Atheists trying to sell me on their idea of morality, as if their idea of morality is objective.

Please.

You aren't debating with an Atheist.

And in what warped world is morality, - the innocent murdered for the crimes of the guilty, - who then are called great?

Why do we get obviously false stories like that of lot, and his sleeping with his daughters?

We pointed out all of the flaws in the story. Such as obviously there would have been other men around.

*

 

[Thana]

You aren't debating with an Atheist.

And in what warped world is morality, - the innocent murdered for the crimes of the guilty, - who then are called great?

Why do we get obviously false stories like that of lot, and his sleeping with his daughters?

We pointed out all of the flaws in the story. Such as obviously there would have been other men around.

*

Agnostic, Buddhist, Animist, whatever you call yourself.
You advertise yourself as a heathen so I assumed Atheism since most polytheists don't appreciate the term

And morality is fickle, forever changing. If you were born in Kazakhstan you would find it morally acceptable to kidnap women and marry them, as is their custom to this day.
You do not have the 'moral high ground' so enough with the attitude.

 

[LuisDantas]

And I get so tired of Atheists trying to sell me on their idea of morality, as if their idea of morality is objective.

Please.

Better get used to it. I have a hard time even imagining a reason to stop.

Certainly not because one would eventually convince me that morality comes from God. Not gonna happen.

Even when I was young and had not yet realized that there are such people as Bible literalists who truly believe that there is a God who we somehow must believe in and accept as source of morality, the very idea was just too odd to seriously consider.

The one thing that changed since is that I learned that yes, there are such people.

 

[Thana]

Better get used to it. I have a hard time even imagining a reason to stop.

Certainly not because one would eventually convince me that morality comes from God. Not gonna happen.

Even when I was young and had not yet realized that there are such people as Bible literalists who truly believe that there is a God who we somehow must believe in and accept as source of morality, the very idea was just too odd to seriously consider.

The one thing that changed since is that I learned that yes, there are such people.

And then there are people who recognize that morality is as flawed as the creatures who came up with it, and don't attribute it to God.

 

[LuisDantas]

And then there are people who recognize that morality is as flawed as the creatures who came up with it, and don't attribute it to God.

Therefore...?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

If they don't deserve forgiveness and a second chance then neither do you and neither do I.

I've never even provoked a fight, so what I have done isn't even comparable. David sent someone to die so he could have his wife, and Lot offered his daughters to be gang raped. We're not talking about petty theft, a drunken brawl, or even sleeping with someone you know is married. We're talking about murder via "divine right to rule" and a man who has absolutely no right or business to call himself a dad. And even though he was drunk, and even though people can do dumb things while drunk, he still had sex with his own daughters. At least my "sins" don't have a negative impact on the lives of others. To say "neither do I," I lied to my mom, frequently, about where I was so I could go hang out with friends and go to concerts. That's not even comparable to sending someone to their death or offering my nieces (I don't have any kids) up for a gang rape.

Honestly, where do you get off judging others?

It's a human thing to do. I judge people like ISIS to be scum of the Earth, and I was talking with one of my nieces last night (she works at the library I used to work at) and we judged one of the higher-ups to be a very sweet, kind, and adorable lady.

If Lot had done wrong in God's eyes, he would have said so, not had him written up as a righteous man when he was really wicked.

If your God saw absolutely nothing wrong with Lot offering his daughters to be gang raped, your God has a seriously broken and distorted moral compass. If you tried that today, regardless of the excuse, CPS would take your children, you would face legal consequences, and society would pretty much be in unanimous agreement that you don't deserve to be a parent or be called a mom/dad.

 

[LuisDantas]

If they don't deserve forgiveness and a second chance then neither do you and neither do I.

That is quite the unsupported, and perhaps undefensable, claim. I am fairly certain that I never stooped so low as one would have to to offer his daughters, or to raise them as being such racists as to decide to commit incest in order to procreate.

Honestly, where do you get off judging others?

At interesting moral questions, most of the time.

Are you perfect? Do you think if you were born in ancient times and were made King you would've been perfectly just and fair? Come on.

Why would that be of any relevance?

 

[columbus]

And then there are people who recognize that morality is as flawed as the creatures who came up with it, and don't attribute it to God.

To be fair, I am not talking about God. Nor am I judging people and their relative "sinfulness". I am questioning the judgement of the people who wrote the Bible.
I would not care as much if the people who deem Lot righteous didn't deem my sex life an abomination before God. Then go on to advocate against my civil rights based on what they read in the Bible.
Tom

 

[viole]

David knowingly sent a man to his death, all to steal that mans wife and slake his lust for her. And God called Him a man after His own heart.
None of us are perfect, but do our sins negate whats in our hearts?

He was a righteous man, in as much as man can be righteous.
But he was not perfect, as none of us are.

If none of us are, it is not clear why He flooded the world killing women and children and just killed everything that walked or crawled on earth at one time or the other. Were they so much worse than a guy who offers his daugther to public rape?

Ciao

- viole

 

[viole]

According to the scriptures everyone sins and the stories of the Bible are not trying to hide this glaring reality about anyone. All the main characters of the biblical accounts are not put on a pedestal as if they are exceptions. So there is some other factor by which Lot, David, or others who clearly behaved really badly at times are called God called righteous. Maybe some smart person can figure it out.

I don't think it takes Einstein to figure that out.

The Bible has been written by bronze age males that had no respect whatsoever for women. They probably thought it was ok to let their daughters be raped, rather than being rude to their guests. The God you read there is the figment of the imagination of those people and, therefore, necessarily reflects the character and nature of those people at that time.

Look how simple my solution is

Ciao

- viole

 

[viole]

God made us. Our lives come from Him and if He wills it, our deaths. It's His right to give or take away, as He see's fit.

That is bold moral statement.

If I had the technology to create a conscious being, with all the characteristics of us humans, do I have the moral right to destroy it whenever I want?

Ciao

- viole