JW Assumptions in their Literature

XBEHERE

Below is the text for the day notice the highlighted areas:

Text

for Thursday, April 20, 2006

Thursday, April 20

Here

I have two daughters who have never had intercourse with a man. Please, let me bring them out to you.—Gen. 19:8.

Some may ask, ‘Why would Lot offer his daughters to the mob?’ Instead of assuming that his motives were bad, why not consider some possibilities? First of all, Lot no doubt was aware of how Jehovah had protected Sarah, the wife of Abraham, Lot’s uncle. (Gen. 12:11-20) It is possible that Lot had faith that his daughters could be similarly protected. Significantly, Jehovah through his angels did intervene. Lot may also have been trying to shock or confuse the men. He may have believed that his daughters would not be desired by the crowd because of the homosexual lust of the Sodomites. (Jude 7) In addition, the young women were engaged to men of the city. (Gen. 19:14) Lot may have hoped that by reason of family ties, some men in that mob would speak up in defense of his daughters. A mob thus divided would not be nearly so dangerous. w 2/1/05 11, 15, 16b

"Consider, no doubt, may also, may have believed, may have hoped" and this is just one paragraph from a watchtower.

Are we supposed to buy this explanation for this really strange passage in the scriptures? In fact if you really look at it they dont really offer any explanation at all just a bunch of possibilities. So the FDS can't with any degree of certainty explain this simple account and yet we're suppposed to trust their doctrines on ressurection, death, the afterlife, Jesus prescence, etc, etc??

MidwichCuckoo

Instead of assuming that his motives were bad

Wonder what Lot's virginal daughters thought? I know what I think.

blondie

I point out words and phrases like this in my review; "apparently" and "evidently" are popular choices. These buzzwords mean that the WTS is about to add to the bible account.

Blondie

sir82

If God really wanted us to come away with that understanding, why not "inspire" the writer to write it that way?

Why wait 3000+ years for a publishing company to come up with various possible explanations, none of which is even hinted at in any text in the original writings?

And what about all the poor saps reading those verses in the intervening 3000+ years, who did not have the benefit of the publishing company expounding their guesses as to what the writer "really meant"?

I have yet to hear any compelling answer to the above questions, which could be asked of just about any Bible verse in which 2 contradictory opinions could be formed.

MidwichCuckoo

......and it's ARROGANT to guess what Lot may have been thinking (old habits die hard I suppose)

freedomlover

This account was always so disturbing to me. How about these possiblities.....

"......Perhaps, Lot was a big sissy and he feared for his own flesh, so he cowardly offered up his own daughters to save his own skin. This is a very plausible explanation given the fact that we know women were viewed as property and inferior to men. Therefore, it is a high possibility that Lot was just an ungodly man that hoped his virginal daughters would appease these savage men."

Now THAT is an explanation that would make sense to me.....

XBEHERE

I will add this to freedomlover's post in that after Lots wife and presumably (TM) his future sons inlaws died they actually get poppy drunk and then have sex with him. This tells me that Lots whole household was whacked out. Perhaps his daughters were molested as children and when they went to the tribal elders they told them to wait on Jehovah instead of exposing their fathers perversion before all. "Evidently Lot's daughters were affected by PTSD and reacted to their mother's and fiancee's losses by acting out against their father in effect "raping" him. Surely a lover of Jehovah would never participate in such blatant acts of loose conduct. Rather they should have sought out the advice of an elder to deal with their stressful condition."

lovelylil

that verse always disturbed me too. I can't imgine throwing my young daughter, who is a virgin out to be raped and abused by a large angry mob. And of course the WT will defend this because they are a bunch of lewd disgusting men. Why else would they insruct elders when officiating over molestation cases to ask about all the little details from young girst? I know some who were asked if they LIKED the molestation. what the hell kind of question is that? They are sick and twisted, like Lot.

Tea4Two

Lot was not a very smart man....Lot knew the two men were Angels sent by God and could defend themsleves if need be. [Which they did by making the wicked men blind.] So why did Lot offer his daughters to the wicked men outside his door? He was just plain STUPID!

Tristram

XB,

Nice job but you missed one.... It is possible that Lot had faith that his daughters could be similarly protected.

JW Assumptions in their Literature

Share this