Was Lot a righteous man?

Justin108 · Post by **Justin108** » Mon Apr 24, 2017 7:38 am

2 Peter 2:7

and if he rescued Lot, a righteous man, who was distressed by the depraved conduct of the lawless

Well according to Peter, he was. Yet...

Genesis 19:5-8

They shouted to Lot, â€œWhere are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us so we can have sex with them!â€�

Lot went outside to them, shutting the door behind him. He said, â€œNo, my brothers! Donâ€™t act so wickedly! Look, I have two daughters who have never had sexual relations with a man. Let me bring them out to you, and you can do to them whatever you please. Only donâ€™t do anything to these men, for they have come under the protection of my roof.â€�

How can you possibly consider a man who offered his own daughters to be gang-raped a righteous man?

onewithhim · Post by **onewithhim** » Sun Apr 30, 2017 8:00 pm

Willum wrote: [Replying to post 25 by onewithhim]

I'll take your second attempt to segue what I said into something else as a concession that you have no argument against it.

Lot was not remotely a holy man. He did not do anything to his daughter, despite an abomination against God.

In the abstract: What would you do if your daughters did this? What would your husband do?

But it's OK for Lot? His daughters?
No, it's an abomination.
An abomination that is OK when some people do it.

?

I have not "attempted" to distort anything you said, and I have addressed your thoughts on the subject as honestly as I can. Your accusations that I am being "dishonest" are, frankly, contemptible. I haven't even said that I thought it was OK for Lot and his daughters to do what they did. Why are YOU distorting what I said?

.

Willum · Post by **Willum** » Sun Apr 30, 2017 8:11 pm

[Replying to post 30 by onewithhim]

Well, if it absolutely supports what I said, then it must contradict what you said, even denied.
Address the subject please, not make a commentary on my style.

Lot has been demonstrated to be an abominable man
and as an added bonus
We have shown Jesus to be a blasphemer and more.

Take your pick.
But provide some kind of scripture or backing against.
As wonderful as your opinions are, they hold no candle to the power of quoted scripture.

onewithhim · Post by **onewithhim** » Sun Apr 30, 2017 8:16 pm

Willum wrote: [Replying to post 30 by onewithhim]

Well, if it absolutely supports what I said, then it must contradict what you said, even denied.
Address the subject please, not make a commentary on my style.

Lot has been demonstrated to be an abominable man
and as an added bonus
We have shown Jesus to be a blasphemer and more.

Take your pick.
But provide some kind of scripture or backing against.
As wonderful as your opinions are, they hold no candle to the power of quoted scripture.

I HAVE presented scripture to back my points, and just because you refuse to recognize that fact doesn't make your ideas credible. Why do you accuse me of not quoting scripture when I have?

Willum · Post by **Willum** » Sun Apr 30, 2017 8:27 pm

[Replying to post 33 by onewithhim]

Well, you quoted Psalms, but you weren't talking to me.
Ho-hum.

Derrrpp · Post by **Derrrpp** » Mon May 01, 2017 12:37 pm

[Replying to post 26 by onewithhim]

I think that the prevailing wisdom is correct that Jesus provides the correct answer here. What is missing is that none of us here- that I know- is a historically learned rabbi capable of fully apprciating the subtleties at hand. Since the leaders were out to get Jesus and trap him i would think that they would have instantly said Ha got ya! if Jesus had actually said something wrong. But no Scripture says they were amazed and left. Of course we have to be objective but I think we Are missing a distinction. Jesus makes the issue about 'property' rather than tithing. Jews have interesting property laws and 'labelled' and abandoned property places certain demands on the finder. If as a rabbi, he fully makes this relation, then Jesus in affect accuses them of stealing, not having returned the property sooner and that they are responsible to have invested and secured it to the fullest- so by Jewish law- they owe Caesar even more!. Im not especially trained and I might be full of it but it sounds far more compelling to me that Jesus makes this irrefutable equation to them... Is there a Rabbi in the house to help support my claim?

Willum · Post by **Willum** » Mon May 01, 2017 4:05 pm

[Replying to post 35 by Derrrpp]

They were amazed and so disgusted they had to leave:
They were amazed (and disgusted), because he put the God Caesar's priorities before God's.
They were amazed (and disgusted), because he asked them to handle a graven image of a false god, a coin that claimed Caesar's divinity.
They were amazed (and disgusted), because he did this within walking distance of a temple dedicate to the Caesar's.

Jesus said so many things wrong.
And he also endorsed Rome's pagan government, above God's will, as Rome wasruled by the authority of Jove.
Another no-no.

So great, he was able to placate the gentile Greeks and Romans, your culture, but he completely infuriated the Jews of the time.

Listen to what Jesus really said:
Render to the god Caesar, what is Caesar's, and to the god Theos, what is Theos'.

Which is why they insisted Rome crucify him.

onewithhim · Post by **onewithhim** » Mon May 01, 2017 9:40 pm

[Replying to post 36 by Willum]

Just won't stop berating Jesus will you? Even when explanations are offered to you that explain that he did not place Caesar's laws ahead of God's. How sad.

You may be disgusted with Jesus, Jehovah and the Bible (and that's your prerogative), but I don't like it. I'm done listening to your acerbic accusations that have no substantiation.

Have a good week.

Willum · Post by **Willum** » Tue May 02, 2017 6:54 am

[Replying to post 37 by onewithhim]

I am sorry: No foundation?
Are you denying that the coins the God Caesar demanded weren't graven images of himself claiming his divinity?
Are you claiming that Rome was not a government whose power stemmed from Jove (according to the Romans)?
Are you claiming that Jesus did not mention the God Caesar in his speech before he mentioned Theos? (Context-based language mind you)?
Are you denying that the God Caesar wanted, in return for his divine miracles of fresh water and sanitation, protection, food and all those other divine miracles he provided, those same graven images?
Are you denying Romans, Matthew and other scripture tells you to obey authority, even Rome's blasphemously divine authority, because God said so?

Jesus was a blasphemer, and supported Rome above Theos. That is why the Jews had him killed.

ttruscott · Post by **ttruscott** » Tue May 02, 2017 2:06 pm

Willum wrote:They were amazed (and disgusted), because he asked them to handle a graven image of a false god, a coin that claimed Caesar's divinity.

Saying to give to Caesar what was his to begin with is NOT to support his false claims to divinity because Caesar had no divinity so He is saying to support what he has had from the beginning which is his sinful manhood only. As a man, his coin had no spiritual value at all.

They were amazed because if anyone accused Him of denouncing Caesar, which He was indeed doing, it could not be proven any more that you can prove your false interpretation he was blaspheming.

Willum · Post by **Willum** » Tue May 02, 2017 3:21 pm

[Replying to post 39 by ttruscott]

Very funny.

So please sir, give me an example of a true divinty to vie against Yahweh.
There are not, so of course any other claim of divinity is the blasphemy.

They were amazed because Jesus endorsed a man, Caesar, who claimed to be a God, above God.

Or, perhaps you can instruct me on how the Commandments should be applied?
Worshiping the God Ba'El is a blasphemy, because he is not a God, right?
Yetworshiping Caesar because he is not a God is OK, right?

'Splain it to me if I am wrong...