Lot's Daughters

[TheIndianGirl]

Lot's daughters seem a bit open-minded, calculative, and devious, if they were willing to trick/manipulate their father into drunkenness and incest. I hardly think any father would throw their daughters into gangrape, so it would not surprise me if the daughters agreed to gangrape beforehand (they probably understood the gravity of same-sex rape, especially with honored guests whom they should protect).

 

[Corban]

Lot's daughters seem a bit open-minded, calculative, and devious, if they were willing to trick/manipulate their father into drunkenness and incest. I hardly think any father would throw their daughters into gangrape, so it would not surprise me if the daughters agreed to gangrape beforehand (they probably understood the gravity of same-sex rape, especially with honored guests whom they should protect).

I think so. God did not give the rainbow for nothing. He wiped out all land creatures for angels mixing with women. Men, especially of Lot's era, were still fresh with this idea and trembled at the thought that God might just forget His Covenant and wipe them out again. The angels too, having witnessed their comrades cast into a subterranean prison (2nd Pet.2:4; Jude 1:6), were wary as well. Now, somebody bangs on your door and suggests that not women, but men will fornicate with angels. That is, a corporate effort to sodomize God's messengers. I think if I was Lot I would have had lose bowels by then.

I observe, without comment, that (i) God killed every thing on earth, save what was in the ark, for angels mating with women, (ii) God killed every man, woman, child and whatever lives in a city for Sodomy, but (iii) there has never been a local, or universal judgment for heterosexual fornication.

 

[Absolutely]

"And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh. Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto."

The key to understanding Lot and his daughters is to understand that the Bible is written in parable language. For example, the above verse from Luke is describing the same situation as in Genesis 19, but is using slightly different language. Notice that the men of Sodom, in Genesis 19, compass Lot's house just as the armies compass Jerusalem in Luke 21. Angels in Lot's case are a picture of the believers' and their message, even perhaps of Christ. They arrive at evening, a picture of the time period towards the end of the church age as Christ's coming is nigh, possibly. At that time, the congregations seem to have become wicked and do not know how to do anything but mistreat or reject the true believers such as Lot and those who have come under his roof (roof is a picture of where the gospel being proclaimed). The daughters mentioned in Genesis 19 have not known man, meaning apparently that they are not saved or in Christ. They have not know Christ. The angels on the other hand have come under the roof, meaning apparently that they have come under the protection of the gospel. Notice how the true believers strike the unbelievers blind so that they cannot find the door. The door in parable terms is Christ. Remember, he is the door of the sheep. The true believers' gospel has shut the door for a period of time during which it seems that there is no salvation for those without: "And while they went to buy, the bridegroom came; and they that were ready went in with him to the marriage: and the door was shut." Notice that during this story, Lot and the true believers flee away from the fallen congregations and they flee to Christ himself. Just as Luke tells us to "flee to the mountains"; in parable language this means to flee to the Lord himself. After all, as the mountains surround Jerusalem, so the Lords surrounds his people. Fleeing to the mountains means flee to the Lord. In the heart, the true believer does not flee to institutions that have grown wicked, nor trust in a fallen congregation for salvation. Rather, the true believer flees in his heart to the Lord for help, for salvation, for safety. When Lot offers the two daughters who are apparently unconverted to Christ, to the fallen congregations, it seems to possibly be describing how those who are unsaved, the foolish virgins in the parable of the virgins, will be given over to destruction, whilst Lot (representing those who are wise) is saved.

The foolish virgins were ,without question, saved born again believers.

 

[Absolutely]

One angel points to the crowd and they all go blind.
The other angel tells him "wow Henry watch where you point that thing "

 

[PennEd]

Lot's daughters seem a bit open-minded, calculative, and devious, if they were willing to trick/manipulate their father into drunkenness and incest. I hardly think any father would throw their daughters into gangrape, so it would not surprise me if the daughters agreed to gangrape beforehand (they probably understood the gravity of same-sex rape, especially with honored guests whom they should protect).

I don't think we should be too harsh on Lot's daughters. First off, I don't care how drunk I am, I know whom I'm having relations with! So I don't wanna hear that Lot was innocent.

Secondly, Lot's daughters appear to have truly thought the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah encompassed the known World. They may have feared the end of the human race.


Genesis 19:31

New King James Version

31 Now the firstborn said to the younger, “Our father is old, and there is no man on the earth to come in to us as is the custom of all the earth.


Lastly, Let's remember that Jesus Christ Himself is from the product of this union between Father and daughter.

 

[Corban]

I don't think we should be too harsh on Lot's daughters. First off, I don't care how drunk I am, I know whom I'm having relations with! So I don't wanna hear that Lot was innocent.

Secondly, Lot's daughters appear to have truly thought the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah encompassed the known World. They may have feared the end of the human race.


Genesis 19:31

New King James Version

31 Now the firstborn said to the younger, “Our father is old, and there is no man on the earth to come in to us as is the custom of all the earth.


Lastly, Let's remember that Jesus Christ Himself is from the product of this union between Father and daughter.

You made some good points, but I would like to comment on your last. The term "son(s) of God" can mean four things:

1. Angels (Job.1:6, 2:1, 38:7)
2. Adam (Lk.3:38)
3. Jesus
4. Christians (Jn.1:12-13)

The general idea is that both angels and Adam had their ORIGIN in God, and for this reason are called "sons of God*. Christians undergo an-other birth by "incorruptible seed" in their human spirits, and so are called the "sons of God". The connotation though is still that they had their ORIGIN in God. Not so with "daughters". Although we have "daughters of men", "daughters of Zion" and "daughters of Jerusalem", together with hundreds of mentioned "daughters", there is no term "daughters of God". This is most probably because because of God's government. Sons are the ones who inherit, and women are included in the term "sons of God". The union between the Holy Spirit and Mary was therefore a union to produce a man. The "only begotten Son of God - Firstborn of all creation" was already in existence and "took the form of a man" via this union. The interference of the Holy Spirit was direct in this case❋, but God intervened in a fruitless womb a number of times as He needed (e.g. Sarah, Rebekah, Hannah and Elizabeth).

Thus technically, our Lord Jesus is not the product of a Father - daughter union.

❋ The intervention in Mary's case was direct because the Divinity of the Godhead was imparted to a Man. This did not happen in all other cases of barren/fruitless women being interfered with. Thus, (i) Jesus was God, (ii) Jesus was man, (iii) Jesus was "seed of the woman", (iv) Jesus was son to Adam by virtue of the woman coming out of the man, but (v) the blood line to Adam was broken so that Jesus did not inherit the "sin-nature" of Adam (seeing as it is transmitted by the man - Rom.5:12).

 

[PennEd]

You made some good points, but I would like to comment on your last. The term "son(s) of God" can mean four things:

1. Angels (Job.1:6, 2:1, 38:7)
2. Adam (Lk.3:38)
3. Jesus
4. Christians (Jn.1:12-13)

The general idea is that both angels and Adam had their ORIGIN in God, and for this reason are called "sons of God*. Christians undergo an-other birth by "incorruptible seed" in their human spirits, and so are called the "sons of God". The connotation though is still that they had their ORIGIN in God. Not so with "daughters". Although we have "daughters of men", "daughters of Zion" and "daughters of Jerusalem", together with hundreds of mentioned "daughters", there is no term "daughters of God". This is most probably because because of God's government. Sons are the ones who inherit, and women are included in the term "sons of God". The union between the Holy Spirit and Mary was therefore a union to produce a man. The "only begotten Son of God - Firstborn of all creation" was already in existence and "took the form of a man" via this union. The interference of the Holy Spirit was direct in this case❋, but God intervened in a fruitless womb a number of times as He needed (e.g. Sarah, Rebekah, Hannah and Elizabeth).

Thus technically, our Lord Jesus is not the product of a Father - daughter union.

❋ The intervention in Mary's case was direct because the Divinity of the Godhead was imparted to a Man. This did not happen in all other cases of barren/fruitless women being interfered with. Thus, (i) Jesus was God, (ii) Jesus was man, (iii) Jesus was "seed of the woman", (iv) Jesus was son to Adam by virtue of the woman coming out of the man, but (v) the blood line to Adam was broken so that Jesus did not inherit the "sin-nature" of Adam (seeing as it is transmitted by the man - Rom.5:12).

Ruth was a Moabite, a descendant of Moab, the son of Lot and one of his daughters, IN THE BLOOD LINE OF JESUS CHRIST:

The Genealogy of Jesus Christ
23 Jesus, when he began his ministry, was about thirty years of age, being the son (as was supposed) of Joseph, the son of Heli, 24 the son of Matthat, the son of Levi, the son of Melchi, the son of Jannai, the son of Joseph, 25 the son of Mattathias, the son of Amos, the son of Nahum, the son of Esli, the son of Naggai, 26 the son of Maath, the son of Mattathias, the son of Semein, the son of Josech, the son of Joda, 27 the son of Joanan, the son of Rhesa, the son of Zerubbabel, the son of Shealtiel,[a] the son of Neri, 28 the son of Melchi, the son of Addi, the son of Cosam, the son of Elmadam, the son of Er, 29 the son of Joshua, the son of Eliezer, the son of Jorim, the son of Matthat, the son of Levi, 30 the son of Simeon, the son of Judah, the son of Joseph, the son of Jonam, the son of Eliakim, 31 the son of Melea, the son of Menna, the son of Mattatha, the son of Nathan, the son of David, 32 the son of Jesse, THE SON OF OBED, the son of Boaz, the son of Sala, the son of Nahshon, 33 the son of Amminadab, the son of Admin, the son of Arni, the son of Hezron, the son of Perez, the son of Judah, 34 the son of Jacob, the son of Isaac, the son of Abraham, the son of Terah, the son of Nahor, 35 the son of Serug, the son of Reu, the son of Peleg, the son of Eber, the son of Shelah, 36 the son of Cainan, the son of Arphaxad, the son of Shem, the son of Noah, the son of Lamech, 37 the son of Methuselah, the son of Enoch, the son of Jared, the son of Mahalaleel, the son of Cainan, 38 the son of Enos, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God.


The SON OF OBED, the son of Ruth the MOABite.

 

[Corban]

Ruth was a Moabite, a descendant of Moab, the son of Lot and one of his daughters, IN THE BLOOD LINE OF JESUS CHRIST:

The Genealogy of Jesus Christ
23 Jesus, when he began his ministry, was about thirty years of age, being the son (as was supposed) of Joseph, the son of Heli, 24 the son of Matthat, the son of Levi, the son of Melchi, the son of Jannai, the son of Joseph, 25 the son of Mattathias, the son of Amos, the son of Nahum, the son of Esli, the son of Naggai, 26 the son of Maath, the son of Mattathias, the son of Semein, the son of Josech, the son of Joda, 27 the son of Joanan, the son of Rhesa, the son of Zerubbabel, the son of Shealtiel,[a] the son of Neri, 28 the son of Melchi, the son of Addi, the son of Cosam, the son of Elmadam, the son of Er, 29 the son of Joshua, the son of Eliezer, the son of Jorim, the son of Matthat, the son of Levi, 30 the son of Simeon, the son of Judah, the son of Joseph, the son of Jonam, the son of Eliakim, 31 the son of Melea, the son of Menna, the son of Mattatha, the son of Nathan, the son of David, 32 the son of Jesse, THE SON OF OBED, the son of Boaz, the son of Sala, the son of Nahshon, 33 the son of Amminadab, the son of Admin, the son of Arni, the son of Hezron, the son of Perez, the son of Judah, 34 the son of Jacob, the son of Isaac, the son of Abraham, the son of Terah, the son of Nahor, 35 the son of Serug, the son of Reu, the son of Peleg, the son of Eber, the son of Shelah, 36 the son of Cainan, the son of Arphaxad, the son of Shem, the son of Noah, the son of Lamech, 37 the son of Methuselah, the son of Enoch, the son of Jared, the son of Mahalaleel, the son of Cainan, 38 the son of Enos, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God.


The SON OF OBED, the son of Ruth the MOABite.

Thanks for the reply. I don't know which point of mine you are replying to, but AMEN ... And don't forget Rahab the Canaanitess (who are cursed in Ham) and prostitute, and the illegally taken Bathsheba, wife of a Hitite. Our Lord was not afraid to be connected to the sinner. Main thing is the break at Joseph.

 

[tourist]

Goes to show you how low women were deemed back in lot’s day.

It's still like that in certain parts of the world. Reminds me of Abraham offering up Sarah. Go figure.

 

[oldethennew]

Does anyone have any thoughts as to why Lot would choose to give over his daughters to the wicked men over some strangers he just met?
Doesn't really make sense to me except Lot really wasn't a bright guy through and through.

Behold, I have two daughters who have not known any man. Let me bring them out to you, and do to them as you please. Only do nothing to these men, for they have come under the shelter of my roof.”
Genesis 19:8

=========================
in the very first verse it explains that these two 'men are actually two angels' -
GEN. 19:1.
And there came two angels to Sodom at even; and Lot sat in the gate of Sodom: and Lot seeing them rose up to meet them;
and he bowed himself with his face toward the ground;
and also in the NT, it refers to Lot as 'righteous'.
11PETER 2:7.
And delivered just Lot, vexed with the filthy conversation of the wicked:
8.
(For that righteous man dwelling among them, in seeing and hearing,
vexed his righteous soul from day to day with their unlawful deeds
(1)
the angels of God were considered God's Holy messengers -
(2)
Lot was 'obligated' to take care of God's messengers 'above' his 'own flesh and blood'...
and, he was also to take care of the angels according to the prevailing laws of hospitality... -
in 'short',
he was 'bound' in two ways to 'first take care of the most Holy, this was his obligation, above
the lesser of his obligation, his 'own flesh and blood'...
MATT. 10:37.
He that loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me: and he that loves son or daughter
more than Me is not worthy of Me.

 

[Benadam]

daughters", there is no term "daughters of God". This is most probably because because of God's government. Sons a

I Love this post. I want to add in support of God's government. A reason for no biblical term daughters of God.
The generative force comes from the male. The passive force comes from the female. Giving-receiving. Mankind's relationship with God is the same. God is the generative force we are the passive force. Giver-receiver. This is also why the church is the Bride.

 

[Moses_Young]

Does anyone have any thoughts as to why Lot would choose to give over his daughters to the wicked men over some strangers he just met?
Doesn't really make sense to me except Lot really wasn't a bright guy through and through.

Behold, I have two daughters who have not known any man. Let me bring them out to you, and do to them as you please. Only do nothing to these men, for they have come under the shelter of my roof.”
Genesis 19:8

In those days, women were not worth very much. King Saul sold David his daughter, a princess, for 100 foreskins. Maybe with the devious character of his daughters (they later seduced Lot), Lot didn't value them as highly?

Maybe Lot valued them, but valued his guests even more? Or maybe he was trying to protect the Sodomites from the greater sin of sodomy?