Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site cbdkc1.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!cbdkc1!ask
From: ask@cbdkc1.UUCP (A.S. Kamlet)
Newsgroups: net.religion
Subject: Re: Re: Sodom
Message-ID: <908@cbdkc1.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 14-Mar-85 23:06:47 EST
Article-I.D.: cbdkc1.908
Posted: Thu Mar 14 23:06:47 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 16-Mar-85 00:59:58 EST
References: <362@gargoyle.UChicago.UUCP> <863@ames.UUCP> <3981@umcp-cs.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Columbus
Lines: 22

>   The unnatural vice that takes its name from this incident was condemned by
>   the israelites though it was common among their neighbors.  However,
>   underlying the story is a horror of the double offense of such behavior
>   towards angels (as the "men" are revealed to be), and the breach of the law
>   of hospitality would also be considered serious.
> 
> This would explain why Lot would rather have them ravage his daughters rather
> than let them abuse his guests.
> 
> Charley Wingate   umcp-cs!mangoe

Yes, that's how I learned it.

The story of Lot's daughters is also interesting.  Immediately after
the destruction of Sodom, and Lot's wife turning into a pillar of salt,
Lot probably wasn't feeling too great.  His daughters thought that
the whole world had been destroyed, and that Lot was the last man on earth.
To keep the human race going (they believed), they got him drunk and
had sex with him.  The child of the older daughter was Moab, the ancestor
of Ruth, the ancestor of King David.
-- 
Art Kamlet  AT&T Bell Laboratories  Columbus {ihnp4 | cbosgd}!cbrma!ask