Genesis 19: Lot offers his 2 daughters to the crowd to be raped ? ! ?

[Multicolored Lemur]

Bible Gateway passage: Genesis 19 - King James Version

And there came two angels to Sodom at even; and Lot sat in the gate of Sodom: and Lot seeing them rose up to meet them; and he bowed himself with his face toward the ground; And he said, Behold now, my lords, turn in, I pray you, into your servant's house, and tarry all night, and wash your...

www.biblegateway.com

5 And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we may know them.

6 And Lot went out at the door unto them, and shut the door after him,

7 And said, I pray you, brethren, do not so wickedly.

8 Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as is good in your eyes: only unto these men do nothing; for therefore came they under the shadow of my roof.

-King James Version

============

Thank goodness, I am not a Christian.

Or a Jew or Muslim or any other all-encompassing monotheistic faith which believes some ancient book was “written by” God.

Why did Lot offer his daughters to be raped?

And I think the healthiest response of evangelical Christians is, I don’t know. I don’t know why the Bible would state that Lot is a righteous man and then show him doing something like this.

Perhaps similar to the parables of Jesus not meant to be taken literally, there are parts of the Old Testament which are meant to be allegorical, perhaps?

In any case, I do not know.

 

[Multicolored Lemur]

I say the Bible is deserving of respect just like any ancient book, but not more so.

I became a Christian when I was age 13 going on 14. I stayed a Christian for about a year and a half. There were good parts. In fact, there were many good parts.

But it was a rocky avalanche when I started to believe that I was “being led by the Holy Spirit” to do certain semi-crazy things [as evangelicals are apt to believe], especially in regards to “witnessing” as was the case with me.

And it was pretty rocky when I started to have doubts.

I kind of decided some nonchristian kids were pretty alright kids.

And I kind of planned that Summer to dive into philosophy.

And just planning to do this got me thinking, there’s no external reason to believe Christians are right and Hindus are wrong.

And now at age 60, I am a comfortable atheist / slash / agnostic.

I’m an agnostic regarding philosophy and so on. And I’m an atheist on practical matters.

 

[AgnosticBoy]

I definitely do not think the Bible should be viewed as anything special. It should be viewed just as we would any other book. Some Christians might find that to be dishonoring to their faith, but it's really just being neutral or trying to prevent any bias.

In the case of Lot being considered righteous (2 Peter 2:7), I think there is a good answer for that. The standards for what counted as "righteousness" changed from time to time throughout the Bible. In Genesis, or before the Law, there was one standard (e.g. Genesis 15:6 which seems to just involve trust). Then after that, around the time of Moses, came the Law which was based on deeds or "works" (Romans 3:19, 20). Then in the NT, we have righteousness through faith (Romans 3:21,22,28), which is similar to the type of righteous status that Abraham had.

Lot was righteous not because he acted perfectly in the incident with the two strangers in Genesis 19—-far from it.

So then how was Lot righteous? Lot was righteous in the same way that you and I are righteous—-by trusting in the God of Abraham. God remembered Abraham (Gen 19:29), whose faith was counted to him as righteousness (Gen 15:6).

All quotes come from here: https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/you-asked-how-could-sinful-lot-have-been-righteous/

Besides that, I think we have to distinguish stories in the Bible that are just descriptive (just reporting what happened) vs. prescriptive ones (telling you what is moral or what should be done).

 

[Multicolored Lemur]

Besides that, I think we have to distinguish stories in the Bible that are just descriptive (just reporting what happened) vs. prescriptive ones (telling you what is moral or what should be done).

Yes, I think this is a good approach.

 

[Multicolored Lemur]

—> “Where do ethics possibly come from?”

That’s a question deeply religious persons often ask, and I think we should meet it head on.

First off, as the above verses show, religion doesn’t always provide the greatest competition.

And then, I don’t think we should make it harder than it is. For example, I was in Boy Scouts from age 11 to 17. We had the “Scout Oath” and the “Scout Law.” These may not be perfect. But it’s something to think about, something to argue about if need be.

I think Girl Scouts also have their version of the Scout Law and Scout Oath.

Now, if someone is looking for something absolutely proved like something in geometry class, you may be looking for something not there. Or something you’re not super likely to find.

Again I ask, please don’t make ethics more complicated than it needs to be.

 

[AgnosticBoy]

—> “Where do ethics possibly come from?”

That's an important question and a good extension for this topic. Ethics come from many sources which explains why there are different standards. What a lot of people would want to know though is which ethical system is the right one to follow or are there more than one that can be followed. If God or some higher power exists, I'm sure it would have some manual hanging around somewhere. Christians think the Bible is like an autographed copy.

 

[Multicolored Lemur]

Christians think the Bible is like an autographed copy.

Some Christians, I’d add.

There are a lot of Christians who are plenty devout enough and who think Noah‘s Ark or Jonah being swallowed by the whale [large fish] did not literally happen.

And I’d say the story of Moses leading his people free and wandering in the desert for 40 years, and Moses himself not making it but his people making it, is a great story.

 

[AgnosticBoy]

Christians think the Bible is like an autographed copy.

Some Christians, I’d add.

There are a lot of Christians who are plenty devout enough and who think Noah‘s Ark or Jonah being swallowed by the whale [large fish] did not literally happen.

And I’d say the story of Moses leading his people free and wandering in the desert for 40 years, and Moses himself not making it but his people making it, is a great story.

That's a good thing to consider. I think liberal theologians tend to take the approach that you mention here, and even conservative theologians do so to a lesser degree.

 

[Multicolored Lemur]

and even conservative theologians do so to a lesser degree

as do a lot of individual Christians.

Many persons think Noah’s Ark is not to be taken literally, think that obsessing on these types of details is missing the point, etc.

Often it’s teenagers who take things most literally. That was my life experience.

At 14, a friend started a Summer-before-high-school Bible group. And we decided to dive into the Book of Revelation.

 

[AgnosticBoy]

At 14, a friend started a Summer-before-high-school Bible group. And we decided to dive into the Book of Revelation.

Yeah, I read that book at a young age, as well, and I think it was all literal. After watching this movie Seventh Sign, I thought we were all in trouble by the year 2000. Thankfully, none of that happened. I'm now convinced though that much of that book is non-literal just as we'd expect a lot of dreams/visions to be.