The Motley Fool Discussion Boards

Previous Page

Religion & Culture / Christian Fools


Subject:  Re: Cardinal Carlo Martini Date:  10/2/2012  8:29 PM
Author:  RayKinsella Number:  183167 of 199080

Am I obligated to respond?

No I don't. I know lots of Christians. I'm even married to one. It would be fair to say I'm not fond of Christianity (or any religion, but on this board we mostly talk about Christianity), but that's different. I flat don't like JR and a few others, but I actually do like you and Lawrence and Bryan and Robyn and some others.

You take the opposite view vs. Christianity almost every time, even if it violates science and reason. I have rarely read you to write "You know I'm an atheist and all but that post makes no sense"

As for the action, Lot is held up as an exemplary person. He's the only one saved from the city before it is destroyed. It is therefore not unreasonable to infer his actions are deemed in some manner "good" (otherwise he would not have been spared).

No, he isn't. He's spared due to his father in law. He's tricked into incest and lives the rest of his life in shame dealing with the consequences. The rape never happened. It didn't. The people who were offered his daughters were rendered blind. The house it happened in was burned to the ground, as was the entire town that condemned it.
This act was in no way condemned.
You know how I know that I've won an argument with you? It is here:

Now if one takes into consideration that this is OT, and so very old, written in a society that did not particularly value women, it makes more sense**. But then the "divinely inspired" bit is in jeopardy (since that should be independent of the society, and you would hope it would be less misogynistic).

** The context is that the guests were under his "protection" as his guests, and in the society of 3000 years ago that likely would have superseded the value of the daughters.

Suddenly, the entire text is worth throwing out. You defended the story until you lost the argument, at which point it is merely the product of a bygone area.
Copyright 1996-2018 trademark and the "Fool" logo is a trademark of The Motley Fool, Inc. Contact Us