a response
Among Christian commentators there seem to be two schools of
though regarding Lots decision at Sodom.
The first is that he was wrong. The second is that he knew that the daughters
would not be accepted by the men. From the text it is unclear which is true,
but it is a clear consensus among most bible scholars that the daughters were
not accepted.
John Calvin (though I don't necessarily agree with Calvinism
and the way he presents the idea of predestination he did write one of the best
commentaries of the bible) writes this:
------
Moses relates that a defect was mixed with this great
virtue, which sprinkled it with some imperfection. For, being destitute of
advice, he devises (as is usual in intricate affairs) an unlawful remedy. He
does not hesitate to prostitute his own daughters, that he may restrain the
indomitable fury of the people. But he should rather have endured a thousand
deaths, than have resorted to such a measure. Yet such are commonly the works
of holy men: since nothing proceeds from them so excellent, as not to be in
some respect defective.
------
Calvin goes on to acknowledge the fact that there is some
validity to the school of thought that Lot knew the
daughters would not be accepted as a substitute, though he himself does not
believe that.
It is essential that we remember that Lot
was merely a man. There is no such thing as a giant of the faith.
"There is no one righteous, not even one;" (Rom 3:10)
And
"All of us have become like one who is unclean, and all
our righteous acts are like filthy rags; we all shrivel up like a leaf, and
like the wind our sins sweep us away." Isaiah 64:6
------
Though I like to think that Lot knew
that he had the upper hand in the negotiations it does not cause me any problem
to think otherwise. We know that Abraham claimed to be the brother of Sarah to
not get killed and the only reason the king didn't have sex with her is because
God intervened. Paul, who became later the greatest missionary of all time
first appears in the Bible killing Christians. David, who was called a man
after God's own heart, had countless wives and had a man killed so that he
could gain one more.
The bible does not give us simple story book pictures of heroes;
instead we are given real people.
-------
We also know that as Christians sin is not a measure but a
state of being.
"Everyone who sins breaks the law; in fact, sin is
lawlessness."
1 John 3:3-5
God does not measure sin the way we do. It is not an issue
of putting weights on scales to see how much we owe (that would be Islam).
Christianity is far more complicated, yet at the same time
much simpler. Sin is a state of being. The law (or commands we are given in the
bible) are not sin.
Paul writes:
What shall we say, then? Is the law sin? Certainly not!
Indeed I would not have known what sin was except through the law. For I would
not have known what coveting really was if the law had not said, "Do not
covet." 8But sin, seizing the opportunity afforded by the commandment,
produced in me every kind of covetous desire. For apart from law, sin is dead
(Rom 7:7-8)
--------
We are dealing here with a few very fundamental
philosophical dilemmas
1) The state of man's being:
Is man born
good and corrupted by society? (an idea first given to us by Rousseau) Or, is
man born into this world with sin?
If sin is a state of being and not
an action per se, then we are born in that state of being according to
Christians and therefore are in need of God.
To believe that man is essentially
pure (Rousseau calls this the “noble savage”) means that we do not need “god”
and is essentially nihilistic. This idea comes out of the humanist movement
during the “enlightenment period.” Humanism essentially states that man is
rational (he is not), and that man can understand everything (also a lie), and
finally that man is more important than God (which seems rather arbitrary).
Though Aquinas argued that man’s
ration would be able to solve all of our philosophical problems if we look to
God is accepted by many Christians but not all. Aquinas essential held that
during the fall (adam and eve and that whole deal with the garden and the
fruit) our intellect, or mind, was left unharmed. Christian thinkers both
before and since have argued that during the fall, which gave way to disease
and death in the world, our entire being became subject to decay and that as a
result our logic is not perfect and our ration can be flawed. As a result (and
as Kierkegaard would argue) we can not rationalize the faith. The only way to understand the truth of
Christianity is to live Christ’s commands. – Kierkegaard
2) Sin as a measurement
I addressed
this earlier. There is no concept of sin having size in the Bible. In fact all
sins required blood sacrifice. A Jew in the Old Testament could sacrifice a
lamb, ox or dove and the atonement would be the same. In the New Testament Christ
is that atonement and the perfect sacrifice that is able to cover all sins.
As a
Christian I can, in good faith, say that Jeffrey Dahmer is in heaven along side
Mother Teresa. This is for many people the one thing about Christianity that is
so repulsive.
The other
side to this is that no matter how much good a person does it does not make
them righteous. “Clearly no one is justified before God by the law, because,
"The righteous will live by faith." (Gal 3:11)
To seek righteousness is to seek to be not just “right” but
rather “in the right” it is a goal to be reached, not a place. There is no
concept of “enlightenment” in the Christian mind. Instead Christ is our
righteousness (1 Cor 1:30)
In turn this is the only way to truly receive mercy. If our
salvation were based on works that would not be God’s mercy on us but our own
works. Mercy is only possible when we
don’t deserve it
You can choose either to accept or reject these basic foundations
to Christian thinking, but it does not work to analyze the Bible from a
humanist stand point.
The Bible calls us to a radically different mindset than
that of the world. It is concerned with our relationship to God. Be critical of
the historical figures. Know their faults. Most importantly know that their
faults are not excused, but that their atonement is through faith.
| 
