Moses tells us that– after escaping some presumptive "evil [Genesis 19:19]" in the mountain he was instructed by the angels who destroyed Sodom to escape to–: Lot escaped the 'life of his soul [Genesis 19:20]', Bela, which he called Zoar; and dwelt in the mountain previously 'feared' by the same Lot as more evil than "little" Zoar: now preferring a cave to the city he saved. Lot's two unwed daughters went with him to the mountain.
Apparently, Lot's soul was now so secure (now that he had vouched [Genesis 19:21e] for "Zoar" to the salvation of the great wickedness of Sodom thereby; and done that which he was originally counselled to do by the destroying angels) that he wasn't likely to ever leave his man- cave in the mountain. Moses (with the translators' help) writes, "And [Lot's] firstborn [daughter] said unto the younger [daughter], Our father is old, and there is not a man in the earth to come in unto us after the manner of all the earth [Genesis 19:31]:" in proposing to her sister that they get Lot drunk and molest their father; each on her several night. Three words are added by the translators to Moses' original text of Genesis 19:31, to make it sensible in English– and, perhaps, to keep their heads on their shoulders–: "is" and "there is."
It seems reasonable to me, that, the less a text is altered: the more of it's true substance is encountered. This case is no different; but the substance in this case is repulsive.
If the razor of parsimony is applied to the passage under present scrutiny, the text would read something more like: "And the firstborn said unto the younger, Our father is old, and not a man in the earth to come in unto us after the manner of all the earth [Genesis 19:31]:" This is most likely the more faithful rendering, and insinuates gut- checks uncomfortable to express: all things doctrinally considered.
The most obvious- seeming scandal described by the text, as Moses wrote it, is the insinuation that Lot's daughters may not have been his own, but rather the 'love children' of the whoredoms his wife was compelled to in pursuit of "a man in the earth to come in unto [her] after the manner of all the earth." Lot did save a city which was on the kill list for the same reasons Sodom was on the same. He called it 'the life of his soul' before he called it Zoar. Let's face it: Lot and Abraham were most likely queer as three- dollar 'billies.
The former scandal raises the specter of another. When Lot's eldest daughter says her father is "not a man in the earth to come in unto [herself and her younger sister] after the manner of all the earth," this could well imply inbreeding with one's own daughters was commonplace in that time and place.
Considering the importance placed on whores, harlots, and adulteresses in the 'Holy Bible', the possibility that Lot's wife was one- or- more of these could be generally significant. After all, Lot's wife never entered into the 'life of Lot's soul' with him. "She became a pillar of salt [Genesis 19:26b]" while viewing the destruction of those cities of the vale which Lot wasn't able to save.
Speaking of which: Why was Lot's wife turned into a pillar of salt? Granted: according to the text, the angel said, "look not behind thee [Genesis 19:17e]," but it was in the same breath that he said, "neither stay thou in all the plain;" and "escape to the mountain"; both of which were ignored by Lot and the angel. If the angel compromised on these two directives, isn't compromise implied where all others of the same set are concerned? Wasn't Lot, after all, going back to Sodom in Zoar?
Were the citizens of Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, and Zeboiim somehow not destroyed what time their respective cities were destroyed? Were spaceships involved? Were they beamed- up by the same birds that burned- down their respective cities? Judges 5:20 says, "They fought from heaven; the stars in their courses fought against Sisera." Could something of the same sort have occurred at Sodom's destruction; that being the reason why Lot's family was commanded to not look behind them? Was someone covering- up a rapture with a 'holocaust'? If so, will not someone, someday, cover- up a holocaust with a 'rapture'? What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
"Remember Lot's wife [Luke 17:33]."
No comments:
Post a Comment