From: kimmyd@bnr.ca (Kimmy Posey P920)
Subject: Re: This whole Lot thing ...
Organization: Bell-Northern Research, BNR-RTP 
Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1992 20:29:30 GMT

In article <1992Oct5.162018.18849@netcom.com>, boserj@netcom.com (Jeffrey Boser) writes:
>kimmyd@bnr.ca (Kimmy Posey P920) writes:
>>Let me just clear this Lot situation up for you people.  Lot did THE ONLY
>>THING that could have saved his guests AND his family from the Enemy.  If Lot
>>had agreed to allow his guests to be victimized then his whole family would
>>have suffered the same fate as the rest of the people of that city.  If he
>>had refused their demands completely and barricaded the door then his family
>>and friends WOULD HAVE BEEN RAPED AND KILLED.  The point is that Lot was
>>WILLING to sacrifice his daughters. God seeing Lot's willingness to surrender 
>>himself and his family counted that obedience as righteousness and SAVED LOT'S
>>FAMILY INCLUDING HIS DAUGHTERS.  It was not the act of offering his daughters
>>to be raped that was righteous, but his willingness to do so.  This O.T. story
>>has nothing to do with 'Family Values'.  It has everything to do with trusting
>>God.  Lot knew that God made him and his daughters as well, and that God had
>>every right to do whatever with them he pleased.  He also knew that God loved
>>(and still does love) his daughters and therefore would not allow them to be
>>harmed unless it furthered His purpose.  And further more if they were hurt
>>then God would not only heal that hurt but reward them many fold for their
>>obedience.  But of course we know that God rewarded Lot and saved his house-
>>hold from destruction.  Excluding his wife who DID NOT OBEY GOD'S COMMANDS.
>
>So in other words, it was ok to tell the crowd that they could rape
>his daughters because he knew god wouldnt let them?  makes me wonder
>what he would have done if he didnt know that god would protect them,
>would he have acted so 'morally'?

Well I quess you didn't get the point.  This is not a lesson in morality
here.  It's a question of obedience.  Is it moral to offer your daughters to
a crowd of horny degenerates?  Of course not!  Is it moral to trust God and
obey him?  Absolutely.  Let's look at an even more extreme example.

In Genesis God tells Abraham to offer up his son Isaac as a sacrifice.  Now
God had already promised that Isaac would be the father of a great nation that
would someday produce the Messiah.  Abraham reasoned that because God had
created Isaac, he could just as easily raise him from the dead.  Therefore he
was willing to obey God's commandment.  Of course God saw Abraham's willingness
to obey and prevented the sacrifice in the end.  Much in the same way that
he prevented the violation of Lot's daughters.
  
>It is very debatable that this was his only course of action.  I
>personally would have thought him a better man if he had decided
>to scarifice *himself* to allow his family and guests time to
>escape the crowd.  (or at least have his family slip them out
>back to avoid the mob).

No, I doubt you could successfully debate this issue, since history proves it
to be the only course of action that could have resulted in NO CASUALTIES.
Of course you'll have to find somebody else to duke it out with as it ain't
worth the effort on my part. 

>No, I do not agree that Lot was a man of good morals.  If god
>requires me to sacrifice my daughters to a mob, he can politely
>go to hell.

Jeff, I got a news flash for ya.  God sacrificed His son for you.  He sent Him
to a hideous, shameful and agonizing death as payment for the crimes that YOU
have committed.  Even though He was innocent and didn't deserve to be punished,
He spent 3 days in hell to atone for YOUR sins.  Think about it man.  If I were
you I'd check myself out just in case this Christianity thing is for real.

KimmyD

P.S:  Once again I think this entire debate belongs elsewhere.
Newsgroups: talk.rape