Someone once asked me, if God is so good, why did Lot
offer his daughters to be raped. I barely suppressed an eye roll at the gap in
logic there. We should remember that there is a difference between what the
Bible records and what it approves. Lot’s actions were not always good or
approved by God. Lot shouldn’t have moved back to this evil city in the first
place. Lot was also some sort of official in Sodom, since he was sitting near
the gate. He’d built a life in this degenerate place that persisted in sin even
when it was delivered by Abraham, saw his example, and its king saw
Melchizedek. Lot probably shouldn’t even be in this area. When Abraham first
heard God’s voice, he should have left Lot with the rest of his family, since
God said to leave his family behind. Lot has only caused trouble for Abraham
ever since. Then he raised his children in a community that perverted them. These
guys, although better behaved than their neighbors, aren’t perfect and have
free will to disobey God.
We should also
remember that the social norms of history are different than ours. Lot hasn’t grown up listening to Gloria
Steinem or modern church pastors. In that society, it was extremely
dishonorable to let your guests come to harm or get raped. Even though we,
thousands of years later, think it’s more important to prevent violence to
women than to guests, Lot’s sacrifice of his children was good in his eyes. You
can see these different priorities in Lot’s explanation that his guests came
under the “protection of his roof.” Lot was doing the “good thing” for the
norms of his time, making a sacrifice that likely hurt him. Lot thought
sacrificing his daughters was a lesser evil. Women had low social standing in
ancient cities, and Lot was not immune from his culture’s influence. Later, the
Bible gets more progressive with women in the New Testament (telling their
husbands to be willing to die for them), but right now, God’s voice is meeting his
people in their society, where they are, and tugging them a few steps forward,
not a whole mile.
There’s a debate about whether this chapter condemns
homosexual relationships. The “strange flesh” the rapists were after could have
been angelic flesh, not specifically gay flesh. Angels are kind of neuter,
right? They are called “men” in this chapter, but the main sin in this scene was
trying to violently hurt God’s messengers. The would-be rapists in this chapter
don’t exactly pair with long-term, monogamous, and willing homosexual
relationships. Ezekiel also points out that Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed
because they were greedy, having much and not sharing with their neighbors, and
they were arrogant. They also did “detestable things” and were sexually
immoral/perverse. You know, like rapists. But this chapter is interpreted as
condemning homosexuality, so that’s why the legal word for anal sex is
“sodomy.” My point here is, if you believe the Bible is against homosexuality, this
isn’t going to be your strongest passage from which to draw during an argument (that
would absolutely be the Leviticus verse). It can be debated. As far as that controversy goes, I'm going to stand on the fence for the purposes this blog and present both sides. I think that will be most interesting and will enable me to write some points you might not have heard before, whether you agree or not. But that will come later. Leviticus is the place, not Sodom.
Back to the crowd. They started trying to break in. The
angels finally decide to use their angel powers, striking the men with
blindness so they couldn’t find the door. The angels told Lot to get all his
people and leave, because they were going to destroy Sodom. “The outcry to the
Lord against its people is so great that he sent us to destroy it.” Once again,
this city was destroyed mainly because there was injustice and the suffering of
innocents. That was God’s main beef, and that’s what’s most serious. While we
sit in judgment of gays, thinking we’re not Sodom, remember that we can get
pretty greedy and cause suffering, as a nation. I love the U.S., but it’s true.
Lot went to the guys promised to his daughters in
marriage and said, “Get out, because God’s going to take this place down.” They
thought he was joking, so they were not saved. Dawn was coming and the angels
could see Lot’s hesitation. Lot was still attached to this evil place and the
success he had built there. This is a miserable place to be. Lot was too
comfortable with the world to live for God, but he had too much righteousness/knowledge
of God to really enjoy worldly pleasures fully and blindly. I can really relate
to that. I think this is descriptive of a lot of Christians. They are too deep
to shrug off signs of God everywhere, but they have too much wealth and
opportunity to dive right into living for God completely.
So the angels took Lot’s hand and the hands of his wife
and daughters and led them out of the city. Then the Lord rained burning sulfur
on S and G. Lot’s wife looked back and was turned into a pillar of salt. Lot
and his daughters settled in the mountains where he lived in a cave with his
daughters. Now we find out that they were the worst daughters ever. How is it
that they were virgins?!! They were total pervs. True daughters of Sodom. They
said, “We have no men to give us kids, so let’s get our dad drunk and sleep
with him.” Apparently, they had wine in this cave. They are pretty much
destitute, but they’ve managed to bring along some booze, which really shows
their priorities.
They got Lot so drunk that he passed out and didn’t even notice when they slept with him. They did it on different nights too. How is this possible? How can you be THAT drunk and be able to...you know...get it up? I'm no expert, but is it possible that this is Lot's version of the story? "Oh yeah. They got me drunk. I wasn't even awake for it." Is it possible that he was willing? I believe in the Bible's accuracy, but...is it possible that this part got warped? Maybe it really did happen that way though. Anyway, they became pregnant. The older daughter had a son, Moab, the father of the Moabites. The younger daughter had a son named Ben-Ammi, who became the father of the Ammonites. These people are Israel’s future enemies.
They got Lot so drunk that he passed out and didn’t even notice when they slept with him. They did it on different nights too. How is this possible? How can you be THAT drunk and be able to...you know...get it up? I'm no expert, but is it possible that this is Lot's version of the story? "Oh yeah. They got me drunk. I wasn't even awake for it." Is it possible that he was willing? I believe in the Bible's accuracy, but...is it possible that this part got warped? Maybe it really did happen that way though. Anyway, they became pregnant. The older daughter had a son, Moab, the father of the Moabites. The younger daughter had a son named Ben-Ammi, who became the father of the Ammonites. These people are Israel’s future enemies.
Sometimes when reading these kinds of passages I wonder if we are witnessing an episode of "True Blood" sans vampires. Agree with you that this chapter is only a supporting argument against homosexuality (if that). It's more of a condemnation of hedonism in general, whatever the partner (willing or unwilling).
ReplyDeletePutting something which was such an affronts to God before him warranted destruction...and to imagine two entire cities without anyone worth saving...scary stuff.
And we wonder why this part of the world has so many problems when descendants were born of drunken incest...jeez.
Who says The Bible is a boring, old book? Not.
Yeah, between this and the Ishmael thing, that area was off to a bad start.
DeleteAnd if God were still into the overt smiting, Bon Temps would be gone, haha. If it were real.