The Poor Fucking Jesus Freaks...

[Crossless2.0]

Given the choice, would you choose to permit your daughters to be raped to save your own ass (and that of a guest), or would you risk everyone be brutalized but at least go down swinging? Remember, either way, you have to look your children in the eyes afterward.

I know my  answer, but I'm not obliged to make lemonade out of this shitty story.

The point is, you can't really blame a guy for panicking in that situation.

The moral of the story was lot wasn't a perfect guy, he and Abraham had problems with their livestock grazing the same land. Abraham gave Lot first choice land, and Abraham would take what was left. Lot chose the best for himself (which happened to be near Sodom), that shows you what kind of man he was.

Lot was saved because he was Abraham's nephew not because of how good of a guy he was. A righteous man would have never been in Sodom to begin with.

Abraham was supposedly a righteous man (we'll leave aside his willingness to kill his own child on orders). Had Lot chosen differently, it would have been Abraham dwelling in or around Sodom.

And "you can't really blame a guy for panicking" isn't an answer to my question. What would you, Huggy, do -- or at least hope you would do -- in that situation?

[Divinity]

So your answer is you'd rather have everyone get raped... Got it.

So your answer is you'd gladly offer your daughters up to be raped, so long as you and your strangers are safe.  Got it.

You're truly a sick fucker.

[Huggy Bear]

The point is, you can't really blame a guy for panicking in that situation.

The moral of the story was lot wasn't a perfect guy, he and Abraham had problems with their livestock grazing the same land. Abraham gave Lot first choice land, and Abraham would take what was left. Lot chose the best for himself (which happened to be near Sodom), that shows you what kind of man he was.

Lot was saved because he was Abraham's nephew not because of how good of a guy he was. A righteous man would have never been in Sodom to begin with.

Abraham was supposedly a righteous man (we'll leave aside his willingness to kill his own child on orders). Had Lot chosen differently, it would have been Abraham dwelling in or around Sodom.

And "you can't really blame a guy for panicking" isn't an answer to my question. What would you, Huggy, do -- or at least hope you would do -- in that situation?

I wouldn't have been in Sodom to begin with.

There is an underlying message here that you guys just don't get.

Abraham represented the elect / true christian (or the bride), Lot represented the nominal christian (or the remnant, aka foolish virgin), and Sodom represented the world with it's worldly pleasures.

A Cristian is supposed to be called out from the world and not to be partakers, yet you have Christians that think they can do both. Notice how when the 3 strangers approached Abraham he refereed to them as "My Lord" showing that he knew that it was God speaking to him, yet when the strangers approached Lot, Lot referred to them as "My Lords", That's what separates the elect from everyone else... revelation of who God is.

Also notice that God was hanging out in the tent with Abraham while the the two angels went down to get Lot.

So long story short, Abraham represent the elect who were called out from the world and are taken up in the rapture, lot represent those Christians that aren't part of the elect but escape through the tribulation period.

---

So your answer is you'd rather have everyone get raped... Got it.

So your answer is you'd gladly offer your daughters up to be raped, so long as you and your strangers are safe. Got it.

You're truly a sick fucker.

Actually I was never asked that particular question, so congrats on making up my answer out of whole cloth, you must be a delight... divorced?

[FatAndFaithless]

Mn, and I suppose that you're part of the elect, Huggies.

[Crossless2.0]

Abraham was supposedly a righteous man (we'll leave aside his willingness to kill his own child on orders). Had Lot chosen differently, it would have been Abraham dwelling in or around Sodom.

And "you can't really blame a guy for panicking" isn't an answer to my question. What would you, Huggy, do -- or at least hope you would do -- in that situation?

I wouldn't have been in Sodom to begin with.

There is an underlying message here that you guys just don't get.

Abraham represented the elect / true christian (or the bride), Lot represented the nominal christian (or the remnant, aka foolish virgin), and Sodom represented the world with it's worldly pleasures.

A Cristian is supposed to be called out from the world and not to be partakers, yet you have Christians that think they can do both. Notice how when the 3 strangers approached Abraham he refereed to them as "My Lord" showing that he knew that it was God speaking to him, yet when the strangers approached Lot, Lot referred to them as "My Lords", That's what separates the elect from everyone else... revelation of who God is.

Also notice that God was hanging out in the tent with Abraham while the the two angels went down to get Lot.

So long story short, Abraham represent the elect who were called out from the world and are taken up in the rapture, lot represent those Christians that aren't part of the elect but escape through the tribulation period.

Oh, right. I forgot that Christian dishonesty extends to claiming that the patriarchs are, in fact, proto-Christians. 

Anyway, nice dodge not answering my question. You wouldn't have been in Sodom to begin with. Whatever, man. Would it kill you just once to answer a straight question without resorting to your usual obfuscations? Would you or wouldn't you, in some situation, throw your children under to bus to be raped to save your ass (or that of a guest), or would you refuse and attempt to fight it out, however hopeless the outlook might be?

[BlackBird]

And I don't see anyone here defending the mob. I think they count here as "the circumstance" for discussing what Lot does.

The point here is that Lot is the 'victim', yet all the blame falls on him...

I'm not blaming Lot for the mob. I'm blaming him for offering his daughters to the mob. And I'm blaming the angels for just watching it play out. Why is this a god I'm supposed to trust again?

[Huggy Bear]

I wouldn't have been in Sodom to begin with.

There is an underlying message here that you guys just don't get.

Abraham represented the elect / true christian (or the bride), Lot represented the nominal christian (or the remnant, aka foolish virgin), and Sodom represented the world with it's worldly pleasures.

A Cristian is supposed to be called out from the world and not to be partakers, yet you have Christians that think they can do both. Notice how when the 3 strangers approached Abraham he refereed to them as "My Lord" showing that he knew that it was God speaking to him, yet when the strangers approached Lot, Lot referred to them as "My Lords", That's what separates the elect from everyone else... revelation of who God is.

Also notice that God was hanging out in the tent with Abraham while the the two angels went down to get Lot.

So long story short, Abraham represent the elect who were called out from the world and are taken up in the rapture, lot represent those Christians that aren't part of the elect but escape through the tribulation period.

Oh, right. I forgot that Christian dishonesty extends to claiming that the patriarchs are, in fact, proto-Christians. 

Christ said that the scriptures testify of him, did he not?

Also

Hebrews 11

24 By faith Moses, when he was come to years, refused to be called the son of Pharaoh's daughter;

25 Choosing rather to suffer affliction with the people of God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season;

26 Esteeming the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures in Egypt: for he had respect unto the recompence of the reward.

*emphasis mine*

[Crossless2.0]

Oh, right. I forgot that Christian dishonesty extends to claiming that the patriarchs are, in fact, proto-Christians. 

Christ said that the scriptures testify of him, did he not?

I have no idea, and neither do you. I only know what was claimed on his behalf well after he was dead.

[TheRocketSurgeon]

The more I think about this, Huggy, the more I'm afraid your position pisses me off.

You seem college-educated. Did you not have classes which talked about African-American history, including the fact that a significant number of the Jim Crow laws were pushed by bigots who used the "they're going to rape your daughters" narrative to make people shut down their empathy and reasoning centers against a hated minority?

You really don't understand how this parallels history? Or do you just pretend not to see it?

 Not even the same thing, were talking about a crowd of people actually trying to rape.

Where as white folks did a lot of raping of slave daughters, tell me exactly what a slave parent was going to do about it?

This is not REMOTELY what I'm talking about. 

I'm talking about a false accusation, the "black man is going to rape your daughters" propaganda that was slanderously/libelously applied to the race, in an attempt to justify bigoted laws against them.

The same thing we're now seeing done with trans people.

Don't try to strawman my argument or deflect it into an arena which I was not even remotely discussing. Yes, the real rapes were happening TO the black community, just as the real rapes are happening TO the trans community. And both horrors are made even worse when the bigots use propaganda to try to make the victims seem like a perpetrator worth oppressing.

Edit to Add: ...especially when they use a tiny percentage of real perpetrators and try to apply it to the community as a whole, the way they used Willie Horton's horrible actions to justify locking up almost a quarter of an entire generation of African-American men.

[Huggy Bear]

Christ said that the scriptures testify of him, did he not?

I have no idea, and neither do you. I only know what was claimed on his behalf well after he was dead.

Then explain what Moses putting a bronze serpent upon a pole, so that everyone that looked upon it would live was supposed to represent?