Actions and consequences of Lot’s wife vs. David

by Yesu Kristo Bwana Wangu 29 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • David_Jay
    David_Jay

    The solution is quite simple. You merely have to stop reading the text like a Jehovah's Witness.

    For JWs, the Biblical texts are the complete stories that make up a compendium of religious doctrine. For my people, the Jews who composed them, these stories have been compacted for the purpose of liturgical reading, to hit only the highlights of the stories that come from our history and tradition. We did not write them to be read out of context with these things, but the Witnesses ignore them all and attempt to read the text as if it was a journalistic news report on the past and that there is nothing more to them.

    Every year in the Jewish month of Heshvan, the historical anniversary of these events is marked by the reading of Parashat Vayiera, the name of this section of the Law of Moses, namely Genesis 18:1-22:24 in the synagogue. Designed specifically for this, the written story only hits the highlights so that the religious lessons can be drawn out.

    What the written text doesn't explain is the Jewish understanding that Lot's wife was from Sodom. While Lot was welcoming of strangers in the tradition of his family (in imitation of Abraham), Lot's wife was like the rest of her people. Part of the wife's lack of hospitality is seen in the Torah reading itself in that the dinner she helps to prepare for the guests is far more modest. (Genesis 18:6-8 with 19:3.) This is but a reflection of her siding with her people that is understood by the Jewish audience, part of a plot to rape and even murder the visitors if need be.

    Instead of reading Vayeira as a story about homosexuality, the Jews see the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah as the violent inhospitable acts the towns were known for perpetrating upon travelers. Lot's wife was instrumental to the townspeople learning that Lot was welcoming strangers into their midst, with one tradition saying that Lot's wife used the preparation of the pathetic dinner as a reason to beg salt from the neighbors with the real intention of spreading the news of her husband's visitors and thus setting the attack in motion.

    When her town was destroyed, Lot's wife turned around from the shielding protection of the angel and chose to weep over its demise instead of flee. So she was "turned into salt" as a "fitting" punishment for the attempted murder (and her previous actions of similar acts upon strangers with her people).

    You might say the story of Lot's wife is comparable with David's sin. Both were involved in murder plots, David was involved in adultery, Lot's wife helped to orchestrate group rapes and the murder of visitors to Sodom, both lost family members due to their sin, and both were offered mercy from God. Whereas David accepted God's mercy, Lot's wife refused it and received a due punishment.

    The texts were not designed to be read out of context with their place in the liturgical calendar. Even Christians with the Revised Common Lectionary follow a similar annual cycle of Sunday readings. Jehovah's Witnesses have no liturgy, and no one from Watchtower land even knows what a liturgical calendar is. Ignorant of this, the JWs read the Bible disconnected with the cultural background and understanding that comes with it. When you do this, the stories cannot be reconciled as they are not as complete as the Witnesses claim they are.

  • Drearyweather
    Drearyweather

    How can these two things ever be reconciled with each other?

    Again, my opinion, based on what I know:

    Lots wife and David are two characters separated by two different set of situations. The Bible is silent on whether Lot's wife did anything positive in this entire episode. Lots wife was at the threshold of God's divine judgement against Sodom and Gomorrah. God was about to DESTROY an entire city with its inhabitants and thus expected a sense of urgency among Lot and his family. Even after initial lingering they believed and fled the city. However, when God started raining down fire on Sodom, it was evident to Lot and his wife that what those men told was true and thus it would be to their benefit to believe their command. Did Lot's wife still doubt it? Was she presumptuous? Did pride come her way? In any case, that was no time to stop and think about it nor was the time for repenting on what she did. In this scenario, if Lot or in fact even David were in place of Lot's wife, they would have been killed too.

    David's sin was violation of God written law. But yes, I feel that David had much good things to his credit so God allowed him time to repent, the way he showed mercy to Aaron and Sons of Levi who were spared by God during the golden calf episode. David gave in to his human nature or sinful tendencies and committed the grave sin. But Lot's wife's actions were in direct conflict to God's command during a divine judgment.

    I do not compare these two episodes. It is more than just whether it was a Law or not. For me, these two scenarios are two separate situations with a completely different premise. God's response to each of the character's actions was thus different. Again this is the way I look at it.

  • Yesu Kristo Bwana Wangu
    Yesu Kristo Bwana Wangu

    Drearyweather

    Thanks for your answer. I can agree with a great part of it.

    You said:

    Any divine command given prior to the Mosaic times constituted as 'law' to those hearing it and incurred capital punishment for non-adherence.

    Reading chapter 19, one can read that the angels only were talking to Lot. Whether Lot's wife heard this cannot be known by the information we receive from this chapter. From verse 10 to 12, the angels in the form of men were only engaged in a conversation with Lot. I understand your point here, but we cannot say with certainty that Lot's wife was hearing the conversation between the men and Lot.

    Moreover, where does the Bible tell that any commandments before the Mosaic Law applied to all those hearing it? The commandments given to Abraham in chapter 17, the Covenant of circumsision, were not heard by any other persons than Abraham. It applied however to the descendants of Abraham (verse 9), which were not there when God made the covenant with Abraham. I am not sure if this point is completely relevant to what you say, but I just had to think of this.

    Furthermore, I would like to point out the difference of the covenant of God with Abraham and the advice of the angels for Lot.

    Genesis chapter 17 begins with this:

    Verse 1: When Abram was ninety-nine years old, the Lord appeared to him


    Verse 9: Then God said to Abraham, “As for you, you must keep my covenant,you and your descendants after you for the generations to come. 10 This is my covenant with you and your descendants after you, the covenant you are to keep


    It is very clear that Abraham was aware that it was God talking to him, because he appeared to him.

    For the angels that came to Lot, I understand your view that he might have been aware that they were angels. But this is highly doubtful. I am not convinced that Lot was aware of this.

    To make a new point, however unrelated to what you said:

    Genesis 19:16 When he hesitated, the men grasped his hand and the hands of his wife and of his two daughters and led them safely out of the city, for the Lord was merciful to them.

    First, God is merciful and led Lot and his family safely out of the city, and just moments later, He seems to have changed His mind 180 degrees and kills Lot's wife. What is merciful about that?

    I actually do try to believe that this story has happened the way you describe, but some conclusions cannot be made with the information available to us. I still believe that Lot and his family were not aware that the strangers were in fact angels.


  • Yesu Kristo Bwana Wangu
    Yesu Kristo Bwana Wangu

    David Jay

    Very interesting what you say. There is a lot of information in your post, I will have to take more time to do the research. To what extent are the traditions of the Jews trustworthy? You say

    One tradition saying that Lot's wife used the preparation of the pathetic dinner as a reason to beg salt from the neighbors with the real intention of spreading the news of her husband's visitors and thus setting the attack in motion.

    A tradition is not necessarily something to put faith in. What makes you believe the traditions mentioned in your post are true?

    Lot's wife helped to orchestrate group rapes and the murder of visitors to Sodom

    This is a very heavy accusation. Reading the Bible, we do not read any of this.

    Can you perhaps provide me with the sources of the texts and Jewish traditions where you have read this, and describe their trustworthiness?

    Would love to read the Jewish texts.

    Thanks.

  • punkofnice
    punkofnice

    Oh well, that's me out of the discussion. I don't believe the Bible is accurate and certainly not the word of god.....god cannot possibly exist.

  • Drearyweather
    Drearyweather

    Thanks Yesu. Regarding your comment,

    From verse 10 to 12, the angels in the form of men were only engaged in a conversation with Lot. I understand your point here, but we cannot say with certainty that Lot's wife was hearing the conversation between the men and Lot.

    Agreed. Much of the discussion was between Lot and the angels. But regarding the command not to look back, Genesis 19:17 says, "As soon as they had brought them out, one of them said, "Flee for your lives! Don't look back, and don't stop anywhere in the plain! ..."

    As I see it, this time, this command was addressed to all four of them. If Lot's wife was not attentive to the angel at such a perilous time, then I feel she was all the more careless.

    Moreover, where does the Bible tell that any commandments before the Mosaic Law applied to all those hearing it?

    Sorry for my words. I was trying to say that God gave his commandments to those he purposed too. Regarding the covenant, he spoke to Abraham and it applied to all of his descendants. The command to flee from the city applied to Lot and his family. But as you say, this is bit irrelevant. I apologize for my choice of words.

    But this is highly doubtful. I am not convinced that Lot was aware of this.

    For me, it does not matter whether Lot considered them as angels or mere strangers. But he considered their message as God’s command and diligently acted upon it. In fact, some Early Hebrew manuscripts render Genesis 19:18 as "Oh no, Yahweh, please!....", i.e Lot considered them messengers or spokesmen of God.

    First, God is merciful and led Lot and his family safely out of the city, and just moments later, He seems to have changed His mind 180 degrees and kills Lot's wife. What is merciful about that?

    God let Lot's family out of the city, and then told them to run to the mountainous regions without looking back. (Gen 19:17). The account says that God executed Lot's wife for violating this command. It don't see here God changing his mind or doing anything contrary to what he commanded to all four of them.

  • David_Jay
    David_Jay

    Remember, the word "tradition" means "teaching" or "doctine" in a theological context (very different from what Jehovah's Witnesses teach).

    This is the meaning of Tradition even in Catholicism. For instance, 2 Thessalonians 2:15 states: "Stand firm and hold fast to the traditions that you were taught, either by an oral statement of by a letter of ours." Whether the teaching of doctrine come from Scripture or otherwise, Judaism and religions like Orthodoxy/Catholicism use the word "tradition" to describe it. It simply means "that which is handed down" as a teaching or doctrine from a teacher to a disciple.

    JWs interpret "tradition" to mean that which originates with humans and not God, which of course makes 2 Thessalonians 2:15 unreadable. An oral "tradition" all Christians observe is that the New Testament contains only the 27 books of the canon. There is no written revelation which backs up the list not sets a criteria for such.

    As to the traditions of teachings I mentioned, remember the religion of Judaism is older than the Scriptures as later produced. We did not produce or finalize most of the Scripture texts until returning from the exile to Babylon, and we did not have a "canon" until well after the Marcion heresy issues were settled. (The "canon" concept is a Gentile invention started by Marcion, as the Greek word KANON is also.)

    Our stories came first, not the Scriptures. These stories of ours were set into written liturgical reading portions (you can actually see these divisions in our scrolls), designed for public recitation according to the liturgical calendar. The Scripture texts encapsulate our story and retell our history using religious narrative devices. These stories of ours are not based on the Bible. The Bible is based on our stories.

    The sources are very numerous as they cover secular and Jewish history, include comments from both the Jewish religion and secular archeology. How would you like to proceed? We are talking thousands and thousands and thousands of years of history.

  • David_Jay
    David_Jay

    Also, I am not advocating "faith" in the Scriptures as much as giving you the context of the stories that "fills in the holes" created by the failure of JW theology.

    My objective is to show that the Watchtower religion is lacking, not to advocate a religious solution. By offering the Jewish view I am merely hoping to show how limited JW teaching is.

    Many here do not believe in God or the Bible, and my comments are of NOT meant to challenge their views, only to demonstrate the inefficacy of Watchtower doctrine. Jews do not proselytize.

  • Vidiot
    Vidiot

    IMO, all the academic deconstruction of the account is - in the long run - moot.

    Like the rest of the Bible, it's a mythical retelling of a possibly historical event (the destruction of two ancient cities by some natural disaster - possibly a meteor shower) to teach a lesson of some kind...

    ...like, perhaps that the Moabites were descended from the Isrealite patriarch's materialistic, alcoholic, inbred relatives, and therefore, trust them at your own risk. :smirk:

  • Carol1111
    Carol1111

    Was the death of Lot's wife actually punishment, or just the result of her not running?

    The destruction of Sodom came very quickly so that the angels had to urge Lot to run for his life.

    Surely if someone says "run for your life" it is a good idea to run, not to stop and watch what is coming.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit