Problems with Christian Church

[Randy Carson]

God was sitting right outside the town after haggling with Lot about how many people he should save. Apparently it was too much to ask that he stop anyone getting raped at all, or protect his own damn angels. And I thought angels were meant to be powerful creatures. If a simple angry mob is a threat to them, they are rather pathetic.

I mentioned before, they must have bum holes too if the tale is meant to be about sodomy. Angels with bum holes. Why would they need those? Expressly for the purpose of accepting angry mob dicks?

The best way to interpret this story is that it's gibberish nonsense that didn't happen, like most of the OT. But the fact that Lot is portrayed as the hero shows what a screwed up sense of morality they had back then. It's scary that some people want us to regress back to that.

Have you ever actually picked up a bible and read the story?

[Redbeard The Pink]

God was sitting right outside the town after haggling with Lot about how many people he should save. Apparently it was too much to ask that he stop anyone getting raped at all, or protect his own damn angels. And I thought angels were meant to be powerful creatures. If a simple angry mob is a threat to them, they are rather pathetic.

I mentioned before, they must have bum holes too if the tale is meant to be about sodomy. Angels with bum holes. Why would they need those? Expressly for the purpose of accepting angry mob dicks?

The best way to interpret this story is that it's gibberish nonsense that didn't happen, like most of the OT. But the fact that Lot is portrayed as the hero shows what a screwed up sense of morality they had back then. It's scary that some people want us to regress back to that.

Have you ever actually picked up a bible and read the story?

I have, and by his account I'd say he has, too. The story of Sodom is a prime example of what arbitrarily cruel morality your Gaud has.

[robvalue]

Yeah, I've read the story. What is the problem with my analysis?

How do we get from a desire to rape angels to anal sex if angels can't be anally raped? Not that it makes sense even then. Clearly the angels had some kind of amazing appeal to the crowd in the town, who mistook the angels for men. There is no mention of the men in the town all having anal sex with each other previously, or being attracted to actual men.

Why am I talking about this like it's an actual historical event? Ugh, my brain.

Wait, now I get it. God sent down angels to the town, knowing that:

1- The men in the town would be sexually attracted to these angels
2- They would be mistaken for men

Then God can say, "Hah! Fags."

The story isn't about "sodomy" at all, ironically.

[dyresand]

I have a few questions regarding your perspectives on the church and Christianity..

**What are the big problems/issues you see in the Christian church today?

**Is your perspective of the former question from the inside (ie, your background was in church) or that of an outsider looking in? What took you away from church, if your background was church?

**What do you think about the person Jesus Christ? Is he real, historical person? Faked?

**What is the point or purpose in your life? What do you live for?

I'm especially interested in your responses to the first question!!

1. It's not dying out fast enough 

2. Saw past through the bullshit it never interested me or i should say i was never brainwashed 

3. Fake there is no historical evidence. 

4. There is no meaning to life only the meaning you give it.

[Esquilax]

Have you ever actually picked up a bible and read the story?

If you have a contention with the way Rob portrayed the story, then tell us what it is. But don't think that the standard party line from christians wanting to dismiss an argument without having to address it- "You clearly don't understand the bible!"- is going to have any effect here. You actually are better than this, Randy; one thing you've never failed at is clearly and concisely stating your views. Why resort to GC-level dismissiveness now?

[Lemonvariable72]

God was sitting right outside the town after haggling with Lot about how many people he should save. Apparently it was too much to ask that he stop anyone getting raped at all, or protect his own damn angels. And I thought angels were meant to be powerful creatures. If a simple angry mob is a threat to them, they are rather pathetic.

I mentioned before, they must have bum holes too if the tale is meant to be about sodomy. Angels with bum holes. Why would they need those? Expressly for the purpose of accepting angry mob dicks?

The best way to interpret this story is that it's gibberish nonsense that didn't happen, like most of the OT. But the fact that Lot is portrayed as the hero shows what a screwed up sense of morality they had back then. It's scary that some people want us to regress back to that.

Have you ever actually picked up a bible and read the story?

Go ahead randy, explain the great moral reasoning behind why God turned lots wife into salt because she turned back to see her home and livelihood one last time as God burned it.

[Wyrd of Gawd]

God was sitting right outside the town after haggling with Lot about how many people he should save. Apparently it was too much to ask that he stop anyone getting raped at all, or protect his own damn angels. And I thought angels were meant to be powerful creatures. If a simple angry mob is a threat to them, they are rather pathetic.

I mentioned before, they must have bum holes too if the tale is meant to be about sodomy. Angels with bum holes. Why would they need those? Expressly for the purpose of accepting angry mob dicks?

The best way to interpret this story is that it's gibberish nonsense that didn't happen, like most of the OT. But the fact that Lot is portrayed as the hero shows what a screwed up sense of morality they had back then. It's scary that some people want us to regress back to that.

Great comments.

The "angels" were not weird creatures with assorted pairs of wings but simply royal messengers from the local bigwig.  The local yokels were not fans of the local bigwig and wanted to rape his messengers as a sign of contempt for him.  In other words, they wanted to tell him to go F himself.  

Lot, being the toady that he was, was willing to throw his own daughters to the mob in order to cultivate favor with the bigwig by protecting his messengers.  Remember, Lot and his daughters worse morals than the potential rapers.  Once they blew the town they whacked Lot's wife upside the head, holed up in a cave, got drunk, and screwed like rabbits.  The local bigwig found out how he saved his messengers and gave Lot a pat on the back.

[Randy Carson]

God was sitting right outside the town after haggling with Lot about how many people he should save.

Have you ever actually picked up a bible and read the story?

I have, and by his account I'd say he has, too. The story of Sodom is a prime example of what arbitrarily cruel morality your Gaud has.[/color]

Yeah, I've read the story. What is the problem with my analysis?

The reason I asked, gentlemen, is that God was not "haggling" with Lot...it was Abraham who was pleading with God not to destroy the city.

Genesis 18:16-33
16 When the men got up to leave, they looked down toward Sodom, and Abraham walked along with them to see them on their way. 17 Then the Lord said, “Shall I hide from Abraham what I am about to do? 18 Abraham will surely become a great and powerful nation, and all nations on earth will be blessed through him.[c] 19 For I have chosen him, so that he will direct his children and his household after him to keep the way of the Lord by doing what is right and just, so that the Lord will bring about for Abraham what he has promised him.”

20 Then the Lord said, “The outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is so great and their sin so grievous 21 that I will go down and see if what they have done is as bad as the outcry that has reached me. If not, I will know.”

22 The men turned away and went toward Sodom, but Abraham remained standing before the Lord.[d] 23 Then Abraham approached him and said: “Will you sweep away the righteous with the wicked? 24 What if there are fifty righteous people in the city? Will you really sweep it away and not spare[e] the place for the sake of the fifty righteous people in it? 25 Far be it from you to do such a thing—to kill the righteous with the wicked, treating the righteous and the wicked alike. Far be it from you! Will not the Judge of all the earth do right?”

26 The Lord said, “If I find fifty righteous people in the city of Sodom, I will spare the whole place for their sake.”

27 Then Abraham spoke up again: “Now that I have been so bold as to speak to the Lord, though I am nothing but dust and ashes, 28 what if the number of the righteous is five less than fifty? Will you destroy the whole city for lack of five people?”

“If I find forty-five there,” he said, “I will not destroy it.”

29 Once again he spoke to him, “What if only forty are found there?”

He said, “For the sake of forty, I will not do it.”

30 Then he said, “May the Lord not be angry, but let me speak. What if only thirty can be found there?”

He answered, “I will not do it if I find thirty there.”

31 Abraham said, “Now that I have been so bold as to speak to the Lord, what if only twenty can be found there?”

He said, “For the sake of twenty, I will not destroy it.”

32 Then he said, “May the Lord not be angry, but let me speak just once more. What if only ten can be found there?”

He answered, “For the sake of ten, I will not destroy it.”

33 When the Lord had finished speaking with Abraham, he left, and Abraham returned home.

+++

One other point, gentlemen: God did not set a trap for the men of Sodom and Gomorrah; he heard the outcry against these men (v. 20) and decided to act.

But outcry from whom, gentlemen? People who knew the depravity of Sodom and Gomorrah perhaps?

Who was calling out to God for justice? Victims of their sexual abuse maybe?

If the men of Sodom and Gomorrah had been Catholic priests who had molested people, you would be delighted that God avenged their victims by destroying them, but because these men were homosexuals, you seek to defend them, and you call God a monster for giving justice to those who had been raped by them.

[abaris]

Ultimately it's useless to argue over the morality of god. I realize it's important for a christian, but for me it's not important at all, since I view these stories as a mirror of the society in question and not at all religious. So the morality of the particular society should be in question. But I consider that as pointless and moot also, since they died some 3000 years ago.

What I don't consider pointless and very much up for debate, are people, who still - smack in the middle of the year 2015 - find these stories inspiring. A father offering up his daughters for gang rape has been the law of the land back then. In that particular region, at that particular time. The host protecting his guests at all costs. I get that much, even more so, since daughters were mainly seen as a commodity. It's not that much different than the father offering a camel or a donkey, as far as that culture is concerned.

But for the life of me, I will never understand, why someone living today, in a different culture,, being a parent, could feel anything but disgust at how this story played out.

[robvalue]

OK point taken, God was haggling with Abraham not Lot. I made a mistake there.

That hardly impacts any of the points I made though, which have not been addressed. I see you don't even want to talk about why angels are so weak they can be raped, or whether they have bum holes. Or whether God was playing with his own bum hole and needed a man and his family to protect his angels.

God is not coming across as powerful, he's coming across as "giving it a college try" with his limited resources, and going about it in a psycopathic manner. As well as being haggled with. Why exactly did he need to send in angels, why didn't he already know what immorality was supposedly happening in the town?

I feel a certain kind of sympathy, you are in the position of defending the indefensible. The more you try and paint God and Lot as the good guys here, the more you sink into an immoral quagmire.