Zoidberg wrote:He has no problem whatsoever with a father offering his daughters for a mob to rape. Or making someone into a pillar of salt for a heinous crime of turning around.
Brad Neely did an awesome cartoon on the topic. Warning: language and somewhat graphic.
Is there a rule that says if it happened or is related in the Bible God approves of the action?
Its the old... 'The Bible is the Word of God' idea.
;-)
~dancer~
It seems to me that stories communicate in the same general way whether the author is a man, woman, or God. In any case a story might be an example of what should happen or it might be an example of what should not be. In this story I think we have an example of something intended to show what is wrong at that time. It intentionally offends all of our sense of right in order to say that the situation at Sodom was really bad. The people there had no respect for visitors or anybody else as well. The story puts Lot in a bad light. He so freigntened that he acts irrationally. That seems pretty straight forward. Lot is not set up as an example or leader. He is a nephew of Abraham. There is no reason to think that that relationship qualifies him to be an example of divine will or Gods character.
I should point out that the story appears as part of a discussion with God about whether there is any hope of saving the city. At least verbally God goes through a demonstrating patience toward the city if there was any hope left. But hope has left the town. Instead things happen like this story. We are supposed to be horrified by it.
huckelberry wrote:To imagine that God had no problem with the daughters being given to the mob is totally bizarre to my reading. I cannot even beging to imagine that God had no problem with it. I also am at a loss for a theory of what interpretive filter or method would yield the conclusion God had no problem with it.
Is there a rule that says if it happened or is related in the Bible God approves of the action?
God's messengers were there at the time, and there is no description of them rebuking Lot for such a generous offer to the mob. Or if it happened, it was not found important enough to either pass this knowledge down to descendants or include it in the Bible, even though it came from God's messengers. In this case, not much damn must have been given about the words of God's messnegers. Which makes the whole Bible dubious. Who knows what else could have been omitted?
Take your pick.
by the way, a similar story is described in Judges 19. In that case, a woman was gang-raped to save her husband (the kind host was willing to throw his virgin daughter in with the guest's wife, but, after some haggling, they settled on just the wife). No mention of God condemining that behavior. In either Lot's case or the Levite's case.
Yet the same God sends a bunch of bears to munch on a bunch of children for making fun of the prophet.
"reason and religion are friends and allies" - Mitt Romney
Is there a rule that says if it happened or is related in the Bible God approves of the action?
Its the old... 'The Bible is the Word of God' idea.
;-)
~dancer~
It seems to me that stories communicate in the same general way whether the author is a man, woman, or God. In any case a story might be an example of what should happen or it might be an example of what should not be. In this story I think we have an example of something intended to show what is wrong at that time. It intentionally offends all of our sense of right in order to say that the situation at Sodom was really bad. The people there had no respect for visitors or anybody else as well. The story puts Lot in a bad light. He so freigntened that he acts irrationally. That seems pretty straight forward. Lot is not set up as an example or leader. He is a nephew of Abraham. There is no reason to think that that relationship qualifies him to be an example of divine will or Gods character.
I should point out that the story appears as part of a discussion with God about whether there is any hope of saving the city. At least verbally God goes through a demonstrating patience toward the city if there was any hope left. But hope has left the town. Instead things happen like this story. We are supposed to be horrified by it.
I think you are mistaken, Huckleberry. The story is meant to show what godly hospitality really means. If you aren't willing to throw your daughters to a mob for the sake of angelic visitors, you can give up any hope of heaven.
Really, the only thing that story can teach anyone is that the Old Testament is a primitive tribal history (no matter how pretty the writing can be) -- nothing to do with God and everything to do with men.
Brad Neely did an awesome cartoon on the topic. Warning: language and somewhat graphic.
Zoid, that was freakin hilarious. I don't remember laughing so hard.
“All knowledge of reality starts from experience and ends in it...Propositions arrived at by purely logical means are completely empty as regards reality." - Albert Einstein
Brad Neely did an awesome cartoon on the topic. Warning: language and somewhat graphic.
Zoid, that was freakin hilarious. I don't remember laughing so hard.
He really should do one on the Book of Mormon. I know for a fact that he knows at least that it was written on gold plates. Maybe we should pitch him the idea, what with all the Romney hype going on, hmm?
"reason and religion are friends and allies" - Mitt Romney
All this confusing evil garbage is one of the reasons why I prefer to seek my peace by studying the accounts of individuals relating their near death experience.
Many NDE'Relief Society share a common thread of unconditional love by a form of diety that cannot parallel the character of the gods of much of cannonized scripture.
It has been difficult to cast aside the scales of biblical fears and superstitions, but I am attempting to make the transition in belief systems. This the direction I may find hope, balance and consistancy.
Who are you going to believe so far as the nature of diety is concerned?
a) A book written by a number of messed up immoral dead guys who justified deplorable anti-social behavior in the name of their creator?
or
b) The testimonies of thousands of living human beings that have much to lose by simply relating their impressions of a life altering event that influenced them for good?
Inconceivable wrote:All this confusing evil garbage is one of the reasons why I prefer to seek my peace by studying the accounts of individuals relating their near death experience.
Many NDE'Relief Society share a common thread of unconditional love by a form of diety that cannot parallel the character of the gods of much of cannonized scripture.
It has been difficult to cast aside the scales of biblical fears and superstitions, but I am attempting to make the transition in belief systems. This the direction I may find hope, balance and consistancy.
Who are you going to believe so far as the nature of diety is concerned?
a) A book written by a number of messed up immoral dead guys who justified deplorable anti-social behavior in the name of their creator?
or
b) The testimonies of thousands of living human beings that have much to lose by simply relating their impressions of a life altering event that influenced them for good?
I choose "b"
thoughts?
I think there is a natural explanation for NDEs. But I agree that the type of deity you describe is not even comparable to the God of the Old Testament.
What kills me is how Mormonism relies so heavily on both warm fuzzies and religious texts. Yet either can be rejected if necessary, and the other used to justify the rejection. It's just mind-boggling.
"reason and religion are friends and allies" - Mitt Romney
Zoidberg wrote:What kills me is how Mormonism relies so heavily on both warm fuzzies and religious texts. Yet either can be rejected if necessary, and the other used to justify the rejection. It's just mind-boggling.
What a great quote! That is sig line worthy!
If there's one thing I've learned from this board, it's that consensual sex with multiple partners is okay unless God commands it. - Abman
I find this place to be hostile toward all brands of stupidity. That's why I like it. - Some Schmo