Non-religious people who wait for marriage?

[Mitty]

Sarai (later called Sarah) was Abram's (later called Abraham) WIFE, not sister.

WRONG. Sarah was Abraham's sister (Gen 20:1-6), and Hagar was her hand maid who Abraham committed adultery with, given that biblical morality is obviously just man-made, including the ten commandments etc since they didn't apply to Abraham et al and their ancestors. Which is why it wasn't morally wrong for Abraham to kill his son as a blood sacrifice or for Cain(an) to kill his brother Abel, or for Noah's father to kill a young man (Gen 4:23-24).

Lot's daughters assaulted him while he lay in a drunken stupor, actually. Lot raised them in depraved Sodom, so that should not have been a surprise.

So how did Lot's daughters manage to maintain their elderly father's erection and how did he manage to [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] if he was in a drunken stupor and obviously had brewer's droop. Did they use an electro-ejaculator and turkey basters to inseminate themselves on two successive days which magically coincided with both their ovulations.

Or did Lot tell lies like Trump and made up excuses about how he impregnated the future wives of his sons-in-law after he mocked them. Afterall Lot's sons-in law were outside Lot's house with the other men women and children, and wanted to know what the two strangers were up to and why Lot was trying to pimp their future wives, which is why Lot then mocked them.

The men in the city attempted to have sex with the two men visiting Lot. He stupidly offered his daughters instead. The depraved environment had affected him as well.

So where does the bible say that, and why do you claim that Lot's sons-in-law wanted to have sex with the two strangers who Lot picked up in the street instead of with their future wives who Lot tried to pimp and then sexually assaulted after sneaking out of Zoar with a stack of booze?

The S&G story is about inhospitality as referred to by Jesus (Matt 11:24) and Gen 18 describes how Abraham and a god shared a meal together and had a face to face discusion about the number of righteous children in Gomorrah, and how the god then walked down to Gomorrah to count them for itself since it was neither an omniscient or omnipresent type of god.

You seem to be misunderstanding a few things.

 

[RestoreTheJoy]

WRONG. Sarah was Abraham's sister (Gen 20:1-6), and Hagar was her hand maid who Abraham committed adultery with, given that biblical morality is obviously just man-made, including the ten commandments etc since they didn't apply to Abraham et al and their ancestors. Which is why it wasn't morally wrong for Abraham to kill his son as a blood sacrifice or for Cain(an) to kill his brother Abel, or for Noah's father to kill a young man (Gen 4:23-24).

So how did Lot's daughters manage to maintain their elderly father's erection and how did he manage to [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] if he was in a drunken stupor and obviously had brewer's droop. Did they use an electro-ejaculator and turkey basters to inseminate themselves on two successive days which magically coincided with both their ovulations.

Or did Lot tell lies like Trump and made up excuses about how he impregnated the future wives of his sons-in-law after he mocked them. Afterall Lot's sons-in law were outside Lot's house with the other men women and children, and wanted to know what the two strangers were up to and why Lot was trying to pimp their future wives, which is why Lot then mocked them.

So where does the bible say that, and why do you believe that Lot's sons-in-law wanted to have sex with the two strangers who Lot picked up down the street instead of with their future wives who Lot tried to pimp and then sexually assaulted after sneaking out of Zoar with a stack of booze?

The S&G story is about inhospitality as referred to by Jesus (Matt 11:24) and Gen 18 describes how Abraham and a god shared a meal together and had a face to face discusion about the number of righteous children in Gomorrah, and how the god then walked down to Gomorrah to count them for itself since it was neither an omniscient or omnipresent type of god.

You seem to be misunderstanding a few things. Have you ever actually read the bible?

No need to be obnoxious. Yes, I have read the Bible, and am clearly more conversant with the subject matter.

You need to read and comprehend passages to which you are referring:

Gen 20: 1-7 From there Abraham journeyed toward the territory of the Negeb and lived between Kadesh and Shur; and he sojourned in Gerar. 2 And Abraham said of Sarah his wife, “She is my sister.” And Abimelech king of Gerar sent and took Sarah. 3 But God came to Abimelech in a dream by night and said to him, “Behold, you are a dead man because of the woman whom you have taken, for she is a man's wife.” 4 Now Abimelech had not approached her. So he said, “Lord, will you kill an innocent people? 5 Did he not himself say to me, ‘She is my sister’? And she herself said, ‘He is my brother.’ In the integrity of my heart and the innocence of my hands I have done this.” 6 Then God said to him in the dream, “Yes, I know that you have done this in the integrity of your heart, and it was I who kept you from sinning against me. Therefore I did not let you touch her. 7 Now then, return the man's wife, for he is a prophet, so that he will pray for you, and you shall live. But if you do not return her, know that you shall surely die, you and all who are yours.”

But wait.....This is a second deceptive event to which you refer. She was related to him - as virtually everyone was, considering they intermarried in that culture, but had a different mother. The problem was that she actually WAS his wife.

In Genesis 12, it was already pretty darn clear that there was hell to pay for messing with Abram's WIFE.

17 But the Lord afflicted Pharaoh and his house with great plagues because of Sarai, Abram's wife. 18 So Pharaoh called Abram and said, “What is this you have done to me? Why did you not tell me that she was your wife? 19 Why did you say, ‘She is my sister,’ so that I took her for my wife? Now then, here is your wife; take her, and go.” 20 And Pharaoh gave men orders concerning him, and they sent him away with his wife and all that he had.

You are further incorrect that "Biblical morality is man-made". Nope. God took it pretty darn seriously, as we can see in the previous two passages, only one of which you referred to, neglecting the relevant portions.

It was indeed wrong for Cain to murder Abel. I don't know where you are imagining all this, but it is not biblical.

Sacrifice of Isaac was a test of faith for Abraham. He told the young men who had traveled with them that WE will go sacrifice and WE shall return. They did. God already had a sacrifice ready. Abraham passed this test with flying colors.

Regarding Cain: And when they were in the field, Cain rose up against his brother Abel and killed him. 9 Then the Lord said to Cain, “Where is Abel your brother?” He said, “I do not know; am I my brother's keeper?” 10 And the Lord said, “What have you done? The voice of your brother's blood is crying to me from the ground. 11 And now you are cursed from the ground, which has opened its mouth to receive your brother's blood from your hand. 12 When you work the ground, it shall no longer yield to you its strength. You shall be a fugitive and a wanderer on the earth.” 13 Cain said to the Lord, “My punishment is greater than I can bear.e]">[e] 14 Behold, you have driven me today away from the ground, and from your face I shall be hidden. I shall be a fugitive and a wanderer on the earth, and whoever finds me will kill me.” 15 Then the Lord said to him, “Not so! If anyone kills Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold.” And the Lord put a mark on Cain, lest any who found him should attack him. 16 Then Cain went away from the presence of the Lord and settled in the land of Nod,east of Eden.

About Lot: Gen 19:3-5: 3Yet he urged them strongly, so they turned aside to him and entered his house; and he prepared a feast for them, and baked unleavened bread, and they ate. 4Before they lay down, the men of the city, the men of Sodom, surrounded the house, both young and old, all the people from every quarter; 5and they called to Lot and said to him, “Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us that we may have relations with them.”

Why do you think Sodom was destroyed? It is most decidedly NOT about "inhospitality" as the revisionists like to say. Jude 1:7 clears that misunderstanding up. All scripture must be read in context.

Jude 1:7 just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which likewise indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural desire serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire.

You even trotted Trump out there for some inexplicable reason.

Read the Bible and stop listening to biblical revisionists.

 

[Mitty]

No need to be obnoxious. Yes, I have read the Bible, and am clearly more conversant with the subject matter.

You need to read and comprehend passages to which you are referring:

Gen 20: 1-7 From there Abraham journeyed toward the territory of the Negeb and lived between Kadesh and Shur; and he sojourned in Gerar. 2 And Abraham said of Sarah his wife, “She is my sister.” And Abimelech king of Gerar sent and took Sarah. 3 But God came to Abimelech in a dream by night and said to him, “Behold, you are a dead man because of the woman whom you have taken, for she is a man's wife.” 4 Now Abimelech had not approached her. So he said, “Lord, will you kill an innocent people? 5 Did he not himself say to me, ‘She is my sister’? And she herself said, ‘He is my brother.’ In the integrity of my heart and the innocence of my hands I have done this.” 6 Then God said to him in the dream, “Yes, I know that you have done this in the integrity of your heart, and it was I who kept you from sinning against me. Therefore I did not let you touch her. 7 Now then, return the man's wife, for he is a prophet, so that he will pray for you, and you shall live. But if you do not return her, know that you shall surely die, you and all who are yours.”

But wait.....This is a second deceptive event to which you refer. She was related to him - as virtually everyone was, considering they intermarried in that culture, but had a different mother. The problem was that she actually WAS his wife.

In Genesis 12, it was already pretty darn clear that there was hell to pay for messing with Abram's WIFE.

17 But the Lord afflicted Pharaoh and his house with great plagues because of Sarai, Abram's wife. 18 So Pharaoh called Abram and said, “What is this you have done to me? Why did you not tell me that she was your wife? 19 Why did you say, ‘She is my sister,’ so that I took her for my wife? Now then, here is your wife; take her, and go.” 20 And Pharaoh gave men orders concerning him, and they sent him away with his wife and all that he had.

You need to read and comprehend passages to which you are referring. In other words Abraham shacked up with his biological sister, given that a biblical marriage is simply a personal agreement between two people to shack up together and doesn't require a legally signed marriage contract or witnesses or a wedding celebrant. And it wasn't morally wrong, given that biblical morality is just man-made and the ten commandments etc didn't apply to Abraham including the commandments about his incestuous relationship with his sister and his adultery with Hagar.

You are further incorrect that "Biblical morality is man-made". Nope. God took it pretty darn seriously, as we can see in the previous two passages, only one of which you referred to, neglecting the relevant portions.

It was indeed wrong for Cain to murder Abel. I don't know where you are imagining all this, but it is not biblical.

Where does the bible say that it was wrong for Cain(an) to kill his brother, given that he wasn't punished and was protected from retribution by his god when he relocated to Nod and lived happily ever after with one of the Nod girls, given that biblical morality is obviously just man-made since the ten commandments etc did not apply to him, or to Noah's father when he murdered a boy for injuring him (Gen 4:23-24).

Sacrifice of Isaac was a test of faith for Abraham. He told the young men who had traveled with them that WE will go sacrifice and WE shall return. They did. God already had a sacrifice ready. Abraham passed this test with flying colors.

In other words it wasn't morally wrong for Abraham to kill his son since biblical morality is just man-made and is subjective and not objective given the ten commandments etc did not apply to Abraham et al and their ancestors. And besides, the bible commands genocide (Deut 7:16) and the sacrifice of first born sons (Gen 22:1-14 Ex 22:29-30) and says that it's OK for believers to eat their own children for survival if under siege (Deut 28:53)

Regarding Cain: And when they were in the field, Cain rose up against his brother Abel and killed him. 9 Then the Lord said to Cain, “Where is Abel your brother?” He said, “I do not know; am I my brother's keeper?” 10 And the Lord said, “What have you done? The voice of your brother's blood is crying to me from the ground. 11 And now you are cursed from the ground, which has opened its mouth to receive your brother's blood from your hand. 12 When you work the ground, it shall no longer yield to you its strength. You shall be a fugitive and a wanderer on the earth.” 13 Cain said to the Lord, “My punishment is greater than I can bear.e]">[e] 14 Behold, you have driven me today away from the ground, and from your face I shall be hidden. I shall be a fugitive and a wanderer on the earth, and whoever finds me will kill me.” 15 Then the Lord said to him, “Not so! If anyone kills Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold.” And the Lord put a mark on Cain, lest any who found him should attack him. 16 Then Cain went away from the presence of the Lord and settled in the land of Nod,east of Eden.

In other words it wasn't morally wrong for Cain(an) to kill his brother given that his god even protected him from retribution when he relocated to Nod and lived happily ever after with one of the Nod girls. And why would Cain(an) want to look at his god's face anyway?

About Lot: Gen 19:3-5: 3Yet he urged them strongly, so they turned aside to him and entered his house; and he prepared a feast for them, and baked unleavened bread, and they ate. 4Before they lay down, the men of the city, the men of Sodom, surrounded the house, both young and old, all the people from every quarter; 5and they called to Lot and said to him, “Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us that we may have relations with them.”

Nonsense. That's just a dishonest fake version. The KJV does not say that Lot's sons-in-law wanted to have sex with the two men instead of with their future wives as you claim. Nor does it say that "all the people" (ie men women and children) along with Lot's sons-in-law wanted to have sex with the two strangers either, or even with the incestuous Bad Lot when he came outside and mocked his sons-in-law and tried to pimp their future wives.
Nor does the Oxford English Dictionary define the word "know" as a synonym for sex.

Why do you think Sodom was destroyed? It is most decidedly NOT about "inhospitality" as the revisionists like to say. Jude 1:7 clears that misunderstanding up.

All scripture must be read in context. And it certainly wasn't because Lot's sons-in-law wanted to have sex with the two strangers instead of with their future wives as you claim. And given that Jesus referred to the S&G story as being about inhospitality anyway (Matt 11:24). Or don't you believe what Jesus said, given he said nothing about homosexuality nor why he loved one of his disciples and didn't cleave to a wife after he left his parents (John 19:26 21:7)?

And besides, Gen 18 says that the S&G story was about the number of righteous children, and not about whether or not Lot's sons-in-law preferred to have sex with the two strangers instead of with their future wives.

Jude 1:7 just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which likewise indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural desire serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire.

You even trotted Trump out there for some inexplicable reason.

So what!!! Were the writers of Jude 1:7 actual eye-witnesses of how Lot mocked his sons-in-law when they wanted "TO KNOW" what the two strangers were up to in Lot's house and how Lot tried to pimp their future wives before he sexually assaulted them? Or did they just make that up when they said that Trump and other abominable compulsive-lying whoremongers will be tossed into the lake of fire with Lot (Rev 21:8), given that Moses & Noah & Abraham etc never went to heaven since they didn't believe in Jesus and didn't repent and weren't born again (John 3:13)?

And the bible says nothing about female homosexuality either and only refers to anal sex of women and men which is described as "vile" and "unseemly" (Romans 1:26-27) and disgusting (Lev 18 & 20), like eating oysters (Leviticus 11), given that biblical morality is just man-made.

Read the Bible and stop listening to biblical revisionists.

 

[RestoreTheJoy]

You need to read and comprehend passages to which you are referring. In other words Abraham shacked up with his biological sister, given that a biblical marriage is simply a personal agreement between two people to shack up together and doesn't require a legally signed marriage contract or witnesses or a wedding celebrant. And it wasn't morally wrong, given that biblical morality is just man-made and the ten commandments etc didn't apply to Abraham including the commandments about his incestuous relationship with his sister and his adultery with Hagar.
''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

Nonsense. That's just a dishonest fake version. The KJV does not say that Lot's sons-in-law wanted to have sex with the two men instead of with their future wives as you claim. Nor does it say that "all the people" (ie men women and children) along with Lot's sons-in-law wanted to have sex with the two strangers either, or even with the incestuous Bad Lot when he came outside and mocked his sons-in-law and tried to pimp their future wives.
Nor does the Oxford English Dictionary define the word "know" as a synonym for sex.



So what!!! Were the writers of Jude 1:7 actual eye-witnesses of how Lot mocked his sons-in-law when they wanted "TO KNOW" what the two strangers were up to in Lot's house and how Lot tried to pimp their future wives before he sexually assaulted them? Or did they just make that up when they said that Trump and other abominable compulsive lying whoremongers will be tossed into the lake of fire with Lot (Rev 21:8)?

.

I can't see there isn't much point to this conversation, as you are an atheist, who is extremely intent on misunderstanding scripture - as well as inexplicably throwing Trump's name in this discussion, as a complete non sequitur. ???

I will address only two points: Abraham is not married to his "biological sister", as you keep erroneously claiming. Half-sister, at best, and possibly cousin. Look at Genesis 11.

He told Sarai to tell Pharoah she was his sister, because this would preclude him also being her husband in their eyes.

And you could not be more incorrect; "to know a man (or woman) mean sexual intercourse in biblical terms. Since you are hung up on the King James, though the newer versions simply state it more explicitly as "have relations with", here you go:

To know, in the dictionary, is as follows. We even have a specific phrase, "to know someone in the biblical sense" which means to have sex with that person.

know
(nō)
v. knew (no͞o, nyo͞o), known (nōn), know·ing, knows
v.tr.
1. To perceive directly; grasp in the mind with clarity or certainty.
2. To regard as true beyond doubt: I know she won't fail.
3. To have a practical understanding of, as through experience; be skilled in: knows how to cook.
4. To have fixed in the mind: knows her Latin verbs.
5. To have experience of: "a black stubble that had known no razor" (William Faulkner).
6.
a. To perceive as familiar; recognize: I know that face.
b. To be acquainted with: He doesn't know his neighbors.
7. To be able to distinguish; recognize as distinct: knows right from wrong.
8. To discern the character or nature of: knew him for a liar.
9. Archaic To have sexual intercourse with.
v.intr.
1. To possess knowledge, understanding, or information.
2. To be cognizant or aware.
Idioms:
know (someone) in the biblical sense
To have sexual relations with (someone).

Genesis 4:1 Now Adam knew Eve his wife, and she conceived and bore Cain, saying, “I have gotten a man with the help of the LORD.”

Genesis 4:25 And Adam knew his wife again, and she bore a son and called his name Seth, for she said, “God has appointed for me another offspring instead of Abel, for Cain killed him.”

1 Samuel 19:20: And Elkanah knew Hannah his wife, and the Lord remembered her. 20 So it came to pass in the process of time that Hannah conceived and bore a son, and called his name Samuel, saying, “Because I have asked for him from the Lord.”

Matthew 1: Then Joseph, being aroused from sleep, did as the angel of the Lord commanded him and took to him his wife, 25and did not know her till she had brought forth her firstborn Son. And he called His name Jesus

It is inexplicable to suggest that Jude 1:7 does not mean what it very clearly says, but means rather the men just want to meet them and say hello. The men want to have sex with the angels they think are men. This is Sodom, remember?

 

[Mitty]

I can't see there isn't much point to this conversation, as you are an atheist, who is extremely intent on misunderstanding scripture - as well as inexplicably throwing Trump's name in this discussion, as a complete non sequitur. ???

I will address only two points: Abraham is not married to his "biological sister", as you keep erroneously claiming. Half-sister, at best, and possibly cousin. Look at Genesis 11.

He told Sarai to tell Pharoah she was his sister, because this would preclude him also being her husband in their eyes.

That's just your personal opinion but still doesn't change the fact that the bible says that Abraham shacked up with his biological sister and not his step-sister or a sororal sister, given that a half sister is still a biological sister. If you believe otherwise then where does the bible say that Abraham's wife wasn't his sister? Or are you just trying to point out some of the numerous biblical contradictions and inconsistencies and scientific untruths, and why less than 10% ever bother to go to church now, and why over 30% said they had no religious beliefs on the recent national census compared to 22% on the previous census?

And afterall the Genesis fantasies say that Adam even shacked up with his genetically identical clone also named Adam, which is presumably why it took them 130 "years" to first become pregnant (Gen 5:1-3) since they couldn't work out which was Arthur and which was Martha.

And you could not be more incorrect; "to know a man (or woman) mean sexual intercourse in biblical terms. Since you are hung up on the King James, though the newer versions simply state it more explicitly as "have relations with", here you go:

The bible, however, uses the word "know" in that sense to describe a loving intimate relationship. Or are you claiming that Lot's sons-in-law wanted to have a loving intimate relationship with the two blokes in Lot's house instead of with their future wives? Or are those other versions just fake versions?

To know, in the dictionary, is as follows. We even have a specific phrase, "to know someone in the biblical sense" which means to have sex with that person.

know
(nō)
v. knew (no͞o, nyo͞o), known (nōn), know·ing, knows
v.tr.
1. To perceive directly; grasp in the mind with clarity or certainty.
2. To regard as true beyond doubt: I know she won't fail.
3. To have a practical understanding of, as through experience; be skilled in: knows how to cook.
4. To have fixed in the mind: knows her Latin verbs.
5. To have experience of: "a black stubble that had known no razor" (William Faulkner).
6.
a. To perceive as familiar; recognize: I know that face.
b. To be acquainted with: He doesn't know his neighbors.
7. To be able to distinguish; recognize as distinct: knows right from wrong.
8. To discern the character or nature of: knew him for a liar.
9.
v.intr.
1. To possess knowledge, understanding, or information.
2. To be cognizant or aware.
Idioms:
know (someone) in the biblical sense
To have sexual relations with (someone).

Genesis 4:1 Now Adam knew Eve his wife, and she conceived and bore Cain, saying, “I have gotten a man with the help of the LORD.”

Genesis 4:25 And Adam knew his wife again, and she bore a son and called his name Seth, for she said, “God has appointed for me another offspring instead of Abel, for Cain killed him.”

1 Samuel 19:20: And Elkanah knew Hannah his wife, and the Lord remembered her. 20 So it came to pass in the process of time that Hannah conceived and bore a son, and called his name Samuel, saying, “Because I have asked for him from the Lord.”

Matthew 1: Then Joseph, being aroused from sleep, did as the angel of the Lord commanded him and took to him his wife, 25and did not know her till she had brought forth her firstborn Son. And he called His name Jesus

So why did Jesus say that the S&G story was about inhospitality (Matt 11:24 10:14-15) and not about Lot's sons-in-law wanting to have a loving intimate relationship with two strangers in Lot's house instead of with their future wives as you claim? Or don't you believe what Jesus said?

And are you saying that when a biblical character knew some one that the bible says that they were ALWAYS having sex with them?

Alas, however, unless Gen 19 says that Lot's sons-in-law wanted "to lie with mankind as with womankind" and not just "to know" then you are just grasping at straws.

It is inexplicable to suggest that Jude 1:7 does not mean what it very clearly says, but means rather the men just want to meet them and say hello. The men want to have sex with the angels they think are men.

It's irrelevant unless the writers of Jude 1:7 were actual eyewitnesses of how Lot mocked his sons-in-law when they wanted "TO KNOW" what the two strangers were up to in Lot's house and how Lot tried to pimp their future wives before he sexually assaulted them?

And besides, Gen 19 says that all the people (ie men women and children) were outside Lot's house with Lot's sons-in-law. And are you therefore claiming that all the men women and children also wanted to have a loving intimate relationship with the two blokes in Lot's house as well as Lot's sons-in-law?

Or is the S&G story just an imaginative fantasy based on a volcanic eruption such as Santorini about 1450 BC which caused the demise of the Minoan civilization, and the probable source of the Atlantis legend too?

This is Sodom, remember?

And that's why Abraham's god shared a meal with Abraham and had a face to face discussion about the number of righteous children there, and why the god then walked down to count them since it was neither an omniscient or omnipresent type of god (Gen 18).