This is the kind of stuff I picked up from reading the Old Testament that got me thrown out of Sunday School at age 7. I found that Fundamentalists don’t like you asking questions about the more objectionable bits of the Bible, even (or perhaps especially) if they’re perfectly innocent questions. I was more wigged out about Lot offering his (allegedly) virgin daughters to the crowd so that they’d leave him and his ‘guests’ alone. And this is a good and pious man?
Stranger
Stranger on a Train:
No, Lot was a very flawed man - the kind who would choose to live in a place like Sodom. G-d protected him to some degree as a favor to Abraham, but nowhere is it implied that Lot was considered “pious” by the Bible.
Hey, if you have to repopulate an entire post-flood planet… hehehe
it was post destruction of Soddom and Gommorah, not the flood.
Lot’s daughters thought that the entire world was destroyed, not just soddom and gommorah. Therefore, they considered it their duty to repopulate the planet.
An archeologist by the name of Ken Weeks, found that Pharoh’s son’s grave sites, and If I remember correctly there was 50 sons and all lived to adulthood. There was names and writings by each son’s burial place,and I do not believe it mentioned his daughters and as I understand it the Pharoh had 100 children. That was Ramses the 2d who was believed to be Pharoh during that period.
A jewish man told me once that they considered a Meses(May not be the correct spelling) to be the Moses of the OT. But he agreed that if Moses was a historical person he too thought that the Egyptians would have wrote more about him.
Monavis
Chaim,
That’s because you (and I) are not looking in the right place:
2 Peter 2 (NIV)
Now neither you nor I may put much stock in Peter, but it’s possible that Stranger does.
Zev Steinhardt