Sorry to disappoint but I have a long standing personal relationship with the Divine thank you very much.gee said:Velos - sorry you don't have relationship with God,
The Oddyssy and the Ilaid are also filled with world history. What is your point?or believe the Bible - which is full of world history - just as real as American Independence or Henry VIII.
If you are truly concerned about the state of the world perhaps instead of lamenting about its supposed imperfections you might try actually doing something to make it a better place.We're not living in a perfect world, and certainly not the world God planned for us to live in. I'd like to hope you see that one day.
If we go along with the myth and say that in the view of the god in the story Lot was a moral man then the question becomes just why would a moral man propose the gang rape of his daughters? Either Lot was not moral after all in which case the god in the story would have withdrawn his blessing form Lot or the brutal rape of children was not considered immoral by the god in the story.gee said:Remember that it wasn't God that told Lot to give his two daughters. It was Lot's idea, but not a wise one.
I thought they did....! It's man who sinned and brought corruption to the world. God loves sons and certainly daughters too. Do you think God enjoys the world as it is, and seeing the pain and suffering? I believe that God is in control yet does not always stop bad things happening. But that's another topic!should they not have intervened on behalf of the children?
My point is you say the story of S&G is myth! Myth and history aren't the same thing! I have discussed lots of things on forums and I know many people who don't believe all the Bible as being actual events. However, I'm one of those who do believe that the whole Bible is true!The Oddyssy and the Ilaid are also filled with world history. What is your point?
Volos said:If we go along with the myth and say that in the view of the god in the story Lot was a moral man then the question becomes just why would a moral man propose the gang rape of his daughters? Either Lot was not moral after all in which case the god in the story would have withdrawn his blessing form Lot or the brutal rape of children was not considered immoral by the god in the story.
And what of the angles present at the offering of the children to the randy gang of men? They dont seem to care much about the offer of the children. as representatives of the supposedly moral God should they not have intervened on behalf of the children?
Lot dutifully trudges along with his uncle. There is yet no hint of the trouble that is to come. When do we get that first hint that something is going awry, that a minor fissure, which will soon become a chasm, has appeared?So Abram went, as the Lord had spoken unto him; and Lot went with him; and Abram was seventy and five years old when he departed out of Haran. And Abram took Sarai his wife, and Lot his brother's son...
Ah, here it is, that first sign that Lot is veering off the path. Previously, in Genesis 12:4, the Hebrew word translated as "with" (as in "Lot went with him") is et. But here, in 13:1, the Hebrew word translated as "with" (as in "and Lot with him") is im. Pharoah had made Abram rich (actually, Abram was rich to begin with, Pharoah just made him even more rich). Our Sages teach that Lot looked at Abram's wealth and thought All of this wealth, it will all be mine one day. Abram & Sarai are old and childless. I'm their nephew and, as such, their heir. All Uncle Abram's wealth will one day be mine. The conflict that would soon break out into the open (between Lot's shepherds & Abram's shepherds) first manifested itself in Lot's heart, whetted as it was by greed, as they returned from Egypt.And Abram went up out of Egypt, he, and his wife, and all that he had, and Lot with him, into the South. And Abram was very rich in cattle, in silver, and in gold...
Abram bids Lot to choose where he will go. Lot sees the wealth of Sodom and its environs and moves to Sodom.One commentary says that although Avra[h]am knew that his spirituality was compromised by Lot's presence, he nonetheless did not chase Lot away until he had no choice. Avra[h]am felt a moral obligation to take care of Lot (including saving him after they parted) even though he knew that G-d was "keeping His distance" with Lot around. There are some interesting ramifications for us, of this behavior of Avra[h]am's. How to we view time spend doing chessed [acts of kindness]; and kiruv [drawing non-religious Jews towards our faith], at the expense of personal growth. Think about it.
And when they angels come to save him from the impending annhilation of Sodom, Lot lingers, such that the angels had to grab him and throw him out of the being-destroyed city (why did they do this? Because, as Gen. 19:16 tells us, God had mercy on him).Lot, the nephew of Avraham, is a strange and tragic figure. His uncle was the greatest man of the age, yet Lot was unable to get along with him. We are taught that after Lot's father passed away, Avraham adopted him and took him under his tutelage. The childless Avraham must have had a special place in his heart and home for his orphaned nephew, yet Lot was unable or unwilling to work on this relationship. Even after Lot and Avraham part ways, Avraham remains concerned and leaps into action when Lot gets into trouble and is kidnapped.
The most famous and tragic story of Lot is his part in the destruction of Sodom. Lot escapes, though not unscathed, as his adopted city crumbles behind him. His behavior in Sodom, and the manner in which he takes leave of the city, draw our attention; viewing this episode in its chronological context may afford us insight to its inner meaning.
(...).
Lot's practice would be more difficult to explain. We could say that as a follower of Avraham he simply mimicked Avraham's lofty deeds. Let us return to the text:
Lot's behavior requires analysis: First of all, he sits at the gate of the city. This is reminiscent of Avraham sitting in the opening of his tent. As Avraham waits for guests to serve, so does Lot. The main difference is that Avraham lives alone while Lot lives in a most inhospitable city. A second connotation to the gate of the city is a common reference in Chumash to the gates of a city as the place of judgment, or the locale of the Judges.4 In fact, later on in the narrative Lot is attacked by his neighbors for placing himself as judge upon them.And there came two angels to Sodom at evening; and Lot sat in the gate of Sodom; and Lot seeing them rose up to meet them; and he bowed himself with his face to the ground. And he said, 'Behold now, my lords, turn in, I beseech you, to your servant's house, and remain all night, and wash your feet, and you shall rise up early, and go on your way.' And they said, 'No; we will stay in the street all night'. And he pressed upon them greatly; and they turned in to him, and entered into his house; and he made them a feast, and baked Matzot, and they ate. (Genesis 19:3)
And they said again,
Here we have the first clue to the tragedy of Lot. Rather than be second to Avraham, Lot strikes out on his own. He craves "top billing" as a leader in Sodom, and not just leader but judge. While it is true that to be a judge is an honorable position, judge of Sodom does seem to be an unfortunate career choice, at best. It must not have been easy to be constantly and totally over-shadowed by his illustrious uncle; Lot decided to make it on his own, and while he tries to be like his uncle, he always seems to fall short. With guests entering his (empty?) courtroom, Lot has an opportunity to be like Avraham. Here is a chance to extend hospitality and kindness. There is only one problem: the people of Sodom will not tolerate this type of behavior, and Lot knows it. Time is of the essence. We hear it in his words; he welcomes his guests, and he discusses their departure before they even agree to stay.'This one fellow came in to sojourn, and he wants to be a judge; now will we deal worse with you than with them.' (Genesis 19:9)
Lot wants to do the right thing; he wishes to perform chesed. The text indicates that these visitors were angelic. He knows what he has to do, but he sounds scared. He wants them to leave before they step in the door. This is why he makes them Matzah [i.e. unleavened bread, of the kind we eat on Passover] - it is the fastest type of bread! Unleavened bread - doesn't even have time to rise. Based on the narrative, that would seem to be the sad reason that Lot gives his guests Matzah: Not because he is celebrating the Seder, but because he is scared and he wants them out as quickly as possible.And he said, Behold now, my lords, turn in, I beseech you, to your servant's house, and remain all night, and wash your feet, and you shall rise up early, and go on your way.
On the other hand, Lot did rise to the occasion. He convinced them to stay; he made a feast. Soon enough, there was knocking on the door.
Maybe taking them home was not the best idea; not in Sodom, not even for the judge. Make no mistake: the mob outside was not the 'chesed committee' welcoming guests. This was a group of Sodomites, looking for a "good time". They wanted to get to "know" them better (keep in mind that this is the Bible, making it superfluous to say that they wanted to know them in the Biblical sense). Lot was now in trouble. His celestial guests were about to be abused in his front yard. He probably wondered what Avraham would do in a situation like this.But before they lay down, the men of the city, the men of Sodom, surrounded the house, both old and young, all the people from every quarter. And they called to Lot, and said to him, 'Where are the men who came in to you this night? Bring them out to us, that we may know them.' (Genesis 19:4,5)
Lot acts heroically yet tragically; he offers the men a better deal:
Lot's interpretation of chesed took a remarkable wrong turn: Rather than endanger his guests he offers his virginal daughters to the mob. "Do what you wish" he tells them, "just don't harm my guests". Something seems terribly wrong. This is not what chesed is supposed to be about. Lot's behavior is morally outrageous. Then again, Lot was never more than a pretender to Avraham's greatness. He paled in comparison to Avraham, which is why he came to Sodom in the first place. Now, the judge of Sodom makes a most injudicious decision that sets the stage for an exodus.And Lot went out the door to them, and closed the door after him, and said, I beg you, my brothers, do not do so wickedly. Behold now, I have two daughters who have not known man; let me, I beg you, bring them out to you, and do to them as is good in your eyes; only to these men do nothing; seeing that they have come under the shadow of my roof.' (Genesis 19:6-8 )
But, as Samson says, from the bitter comes forth the sweet. There was a spark of Abrahamic holiness in Lot. In order for the Children of Abraham to be whole, in order for their redemption to be complete, this spark had to be reunited. Lot was the ancestor of Moab and Ammon. The latent, hidden, spark of Abrahamic holiness in Moab was embodied in Ruth, the great-grandmother of King David. The latent, hidden, spark of Abrahamic holiness in Ammon was embodied in Naamah, the wife of King Solomon & mother of Rehoboam. Between them, Ruth and Naamah, the descendants of irresolute, wandering Lot, are the mothers of the Messiah.The aftermath of Lot's liberation is particularly sordid and tragic:
The connection of this episode to the exodus from Sodom is not immediately clear. Are we being given insight into the lasting moral effects of life in a corrupt society upon the younger generation? Lot is anything but an impressive character: He drinks himself into a stupor and commits incest (though unaware, which is not a glowing testimonial, either!). Are the children solely to blame? Perhaps Lot himself was not fully aware of the repercussions his choice of neighborhood would have on his family, and eventually on the history of nations. Here, then, is a completely different type of plague of the firstborn.And Lot went up out of Zoar, and lived in the mountain, and his two daughters with him; for he feared to live in Zoar; and he lived in a cave, he and his two daughters. And the firstborn said to the younger, 'Our father is old, and there is not a man on earth to come in to us after the manner of all the earth. Come, let us make our father drink wine, and we will lie with him, that we may preserve seed of our father.' And they made their father drink wine that night; and the firstborn went in, and lay with her father; and he perceived not when she lay down, nor when she arose. And it came to pass on the next day, that the firstborn said to the younger, 'Behold, I lay last night with my father; let us make him drink wine this night also; and you go in, and lie with him, that we may preserve seed of our father.' And they made their father drink wine that night also; and the younger arose, and lay with him; and he perceived not when she lay down, nor when she arose. Thus were both the daughters of Lot with child by their father. And the firstborn bore a son, and called his name Moav; the same is the father of the Moavites to this day. And the younger, she also bore a son, and called his name Benammi; the same is the father of the Ammonites to this day.
(...).
One eventual result of this tryst is the birth of David: King David, the chosen, progenitor of the Messiah. Long before the enslavement in Egypt, God prepared the building blocks for the Messianic redemption.
It is a mythgee said:My point is you say the story of S&G is myth!
Yes I know. History actually happened and there is evidence to support its happening (the Destruction of Hiroshima). Myth is a colorful antidote that often (thought not always) has elements in it that defy logic and has no actual corroborating evidence to support it.(the destruction of Sodom)Myth and history aren't the same thing!
pro_odeh said:So a moral man can never make an unmoral descision?
Lot still believed in God, and he saw that what was going on around him was evil. He didnt want to accept it, but still he was tempted.
Well that makes perfect senseWhy do you think he lived there? actually, Lot lived outside the city, but moved in after a while, because of the temptations.
Volos said:Yes I know. History actually happened and there is evidence to support its happening (the Destruction of Hiroshima). Myth is a colorful antidote that often (thought not always) has elements in it that defy logic and has no actual corroborating evidence to support it.(the destruction of Sodom)
In reading this post, I began to grow frustrated that the sin of Sodom seems to elude so many people reading the bible. Thankfully, Neenie saved a portion of my sanity by showing that an explicit reason was stated.Neenie said:It wasn't just all sexual sin. Greed played a big role too...
Ezekiel 16:49-50: "Behold, this was the guilt of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had arrogance, abundant food, and careless ease, but she did not help the poor and needy. Thus they were haughty and committed abominations before Me.Therefore I removed them when I saw it.
The citizens of Sodom were idol worhippers. Literally, worshippers of literal images. That might be in our society today, but I don't know of any off the top of my head.pro_odeh said:Look at how socioty is today, and you have your answer!
God bless!
Now, what in this verse refers to committed same sex relationships?Evee said:JUD 1:7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.
Maybe it is sexual sins.
Sounds as if it is.
In my opinion, it is a more a question of God's design than an explicit statement condemning an act. If the bible were to explicitly state all things regarding God's will, it would take infinite volumes to contain.leecappella said:Now, what in this verse refers to committed same sex relationships?
JUD 1:7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?