If Abraham was so great, why was he constantly prostituting his wife?

[Lion777]

The point of Abraham story was not that he was perfect flawless man who never made a mistake, but someone who at certain key points in his life had faith in God and obeyed that faith. When he was called to leave home for an unknown land he trusted in God. When he was told to sacrifice his own son, he was willing to trust that God would make it right, since God promised that his son Isaac was the child of promise. When Abraham and Sarah tried to fufill God’s promise of a son their own way by using Hagar as a surrogate they suffered serious consequences. Like Moses and David who also made errors in judgement, Abraham was an imperfect type or preview of the perfect Jesus Christ who made no mistakes, had perfect faith and a perfect relationship with God the Father. Imperfect as Abraham was, he had a heart for God, and Faith and trust in the Lord that we should try to emulate.

Posted from Catholic.com App for Android

 

[LilyM]

I for one find it somewhat offensive to call what Abraham did ‘prostitution’, as if Abraham’s motives were financial or sordid. He comes across as thinking far more of Sarah’s welfare (which he could only guarantee by himself surviving) than of anything else.

 

[Reuben_J]

The greatness of Abraham is not because he was a hero but because he was obedient to God. The beginning of that obedience was when he obeyed God to leave his homeland to a place that was totally foreign to him. Other than that he was merely a man who would do certain thing as many men would.

As for telling them that Sarah was his sister, he was being merely shrewd. In a place where he might be killed, it was suicidal and foolishness to defend his ‘wife’s honor’. There was no way he could fight them off physically and he was not young or a martial artist. He was simply desperate to get what they (him and Sarah) wanted and it was an act of desperation. The moral of the story was that God rescued them and this theme continued to ring through the history of mankind with God. He rescues us from defeat, from calamity and most of all from sin.

 

[fred_conty]

Every single time they show up in a new city, he’s all “Tell them you’re my sister and go sleep with the king!” What the heck is up with that? Why is he portrayed as this great guy who went to Heaven? From the way the Bible describes it, the only good thing he did was being willing to kill Isaac, but in retrospect, it’s quite possible he did it to save his own skin out of fear of God. After all, he was constantly telling his wife to sleep with random people to save his own life. Am I missing something here?

Jesus was asked the question if having more than one wife was ok.

He said that God allowed it because of the hardest of the heart. But he said it was never God’s intention to allow this and now it is wrong.

I think we must place ourselves back 4000 years in those times in their mentality and customs. Today their customs seem twisted to us and they are by our standards. But in those days their thinking was different, and God met them where they were at. And since God made the rules he may also bend them a bit, or in certain cases only. (I gave God permission to do as he pleases without asking me.)

Just a thought.

 

[chevalier]

Abraham’s relationship with Hagar didn’t come about because he reasoned he had to take matters into his own hands – it came about because his wife requested it. The lack of trust started with her. Unfortunately, like Adam, Abraham chose to listen to his wife and do as she requested.

Gen. 16:1-2 Now Sar’ai, Abram’s wife, bore him no children. She had an Egyptian maid whose name was Hagar; and Sar’ai said to Abram, “Behold now, the LORD has prevented me from bearing children; go in to my maid; it may be that I shall obtain children by her.” And Abram hearkened to the voice of Sar’ai.

BTW, I’m a woman and a wife. As such, there are lessons to be learned from Scripture. Among them to realize the influence we have with our spouses because of their love or us, and therefore to be careful that any requests we make of them are in conformity with God’s will.

It was part of the secular laws of the times (IIRC it was present in the Hammurabi code) that a childless wife could give her husband her maid for concubine and then the children would actually legally count as the wife’s, not the servant’s.

So when the wife got the perk of the kids counting as her own, then she was perhaps seeing it in a different light from a modern wife. The kids are hers, so what’s the deal might have been the attitude then.

Just casting some light, not taking a stand on moral aspects.

I for one find it somewhat offensive to call what Abraham did ‘prostitution’, as if Abraham’s motives were financial or sordid. He comes across as thinking far more of Sarah’s welfare (which he could only guarantee by himself surviving) than of anything else.

Well, you do seem to be giving him the benefit of the doubt there (i.e. assuming the best intention).

 

[speakttruth]

But it still doesn’t make it right and moral to do so. Modern day it would be counted as mortal sin. Good question. But almost most of the chosen ones in the Old testament had flaws like that. (We all do) It just shows how God can choose literally anybody and how just perfect Jesus is.

God created us and he made the rules for us after a time he felt we needed them. Like the ten commandments. Not us. Which came with Moses. God allows us to make our mistakes to bring the greater good out it. He has his reasons why he allowed us to live different in the old testament than the new testament. That is why he is God. He warned us what what happen if we didn’t listen. But he gave us free will. We can’t know the mind of God, your thinking with a human mind not God’s mind. God told us ,My ways are not your ways.

GB

 

[ALLGIRLS]

OK… so you would rather that he die, unsuccessfully defending your honor, than stay alive and have a chance to save you? Hmm…

In the 21st century, that’s a reasonable way to look at it. Way back then, ‘commodity’ may not be too unrealistic a way to look at it.

Are we going to castigate Abram for not having 21st-century sensibilities? That’s hardly fair…

Exactly! People try to project 21st century morals and ideals back onto people of antiquity. Women WERE commodities back then. As much as feminists complain about how “horrible” Christians treat women, with wanting them to “submit” to their husbands and all, in reality, Christianity made life for women 100000x better, by stating that women and men are created by God equal in dignity and equal in the eyes of Christ (and by forbidding infanticide, which is what happens to most baby girls before then). Jimmy Akin has a blog about the “dark passages of Scripture” that explains this kind of thing.

And btw, you know what’s even grosser than your husband giving you to another man? You and your sister taking turns getting your father drunk so you can have sex with him so he impregnates you. Of course, he’s kind of got it coming, since he did offer you both up to be gang raped by a lavicious mob before your town was destroyed. Nice family there, Lot!

In Christ,
Ellen

 

[speakttruth]

Exactly! People try to project 21st century morals and ideals back onto people of antiquity. Women WERE commodities back then. As much as feminists complain about how “horrible” Christians treat women, with wanting them to “submit” to their husbands and all, in reality, Christianity made life for women 100000x better, by stating that women and men are created by God equal in dignity and equal in the eyes of Christ (and by forbidding infanticide, which is what happens to most baby girls before then). Jimmy Akin has a blog about the “dark passages of Scripture” that explains this kind of thing.

And btw, you know what’s even grosser than your husband giving you to another man? You and your sister taking turns getting your father drunk so you can have sex with him so he impregnates you. Of course, he’s kind of got it coming, since he did offer you both up to be gang raped by a lavicious mob before your town was destroyed. Nice family there, Lot!

In Christ,
Ellen

Yet God felt he was the only one worthy of saving. We still can’t figure out the mind of God. It’s a mystery.
GB

 

[Gorgias]

Exactly! People try to project 21st century morals and ideals back onto people of antiquity. Women WERE commodities back then.

And btw, you know what’s even grosser than your husband giving you to another man? You and your sister taking turns getting your father drunk so you can have sex with him so he impregnates you. Of course, he’s kind of got it coming, since he did offer you both up to be gang raped by a lavicious mob before your town was destroyed. Nice family there, Lot!

And of course, in the context of his own culture and time, Lot’s actions would have been seen as virtuous – after all, his actions were meant to protect the visitors whom he had welcomed under the protection of his household! (Now, his daughters’ incestuous actions, on the other hand, would have been seen as abhorrent…!)

 

[Mike_from_NJ]

And of course, in the context of his own culture and time, Lot’s actions would have been seen as virtuous – after all, his actions were meant to protect the visitors whom he had welcomed under the protection of his household!

I can’t see how offering up your daughters to a mob of rapists is virtuous, no matter the intended result. It’s just wrong.

 

[Megan7]

Every single time they show up in a new city, he’s all “Tell them you’re my sister and go sleep with the king!” What the heck is up with that? Why is he portrayed as this great guy who went to Heaven? From the way the Bible describes it, the only good thing he did was being willing to kill Isaac, but in retrospect, it’s quite possible he did it to save his own skin out of fear of God. After all, he was constantly telling his wife to sleep with random people to save his own life. Am I missing something here?

 

[LaSainte]

Yet God felt he was the only one worthy of saving. We still can’t figure out the mind of God. It’s a mystery.
GB

Ha! I know- they really glossed over the whole “Lot situation” in the new Bible show on television. I never understood the whole Lot story and why it was ok for him to offer up his daughters to the mob.

 

[LaSainte]

I can’t see how offering up your daughters to a mob of rapists is virtuous, no matter the intended result. It’s just wrong.

Right? Why didn’t he offer himself up to the rapists? That’s what they really wanted anyway. They don’t call it “SODOMy” for nothin’!

 

[Aloysium]

I can’t see how offering up your daughters to a mob of rapists is virtuous, no matter the intended result. It’s just wrong.

I don’t like making such comments because it feels like I am setting the standard by which I will be judged, in this case by rules that I never heard of and sensitivities that do not yet exist. (This all happening centuries before the 10 Commandments, I believe)
Jesus came for a reason.

 

[Mike_from_NJ]

I don’t like making such comments because it feels like I am setting the standard by which I will be judged, in this case by rules that I never heard of and sensitivities that do not yet exist. (This all happening centuries before the 10 Commandments, I believe)
Jesus came for a reason.

I feel that if rape is the solution, then maybe we should reassess the problem. I’m confident that no scenario in the past or in the future warrants my daughters being raped by my influence. I can’t imagine how much moral relativism would need to be applied for such a vile act to be condoned.

 

[speakttruth]

Ha! I know- they really glossed over the whole “Lot situation” in the new Bible show on television. I never understood the whole Lot story and why it was ok for him to offer up his daughters to the mob.

You know too, God spoke directly to them in the OT and by all accounts maybe God wanted to see what they would say if he offered his daughters up. They show they were real young in the Bible show on TV, yet you get the sense they were much older in the Bible. The strangers were also Angels too and he must of have known this, maybe he knew if God was in control he may have helped his daughters. Maybe he would have been thinking that he needed to show God by protecting the angels meant he loved God more than his children, Sort of a test like Abraham, but in the end the Angels were able to help Lot and his family be safe, except his wife didn’t obey and turned to stone. The daughters thought they would never find a man again and wanted children, so at least they got his father drunk so he wasn’t as aware of what was happening. Like I said God has the plan and our minds are not of Gods, so we can’t judge him according to our rules or with our puny brains… He could snuff us out in a second and he would have a right too. But he never treats us as bad as we deserve, but we do it to ourselves. History shows over and over again God tells us what to do, then we are good for awhile then we turn evil, then he let’s us stew in our own sins and when we had enough we cry Abba Father help us and like a loving Father he comes to our rescue. The Bible is put together in a certain way for us to understand the testaments which means covenant

OT
the law, history, wisdom, prophecy
NT
the Gospels (the law), the acts of the Apostles, (history), Epistles, (Wisdom)
Revelation (Prophecy)

The new testament is hidden in the old testament and the old testament is revealed in the
new testament and is the fulfillment of the old. testament

There are typologies that are similar in both. Like the lamb in the old is Christ in the new
It is really fascinating how we are to learn about our salvation.

 

[Aloysium]

I feel that if rape is the solution, then maybe we should reassess the problem. I’m confident that no scenario in the past or in the future warrants my daughters being raped by my influence. I can’t imagine how much moral relativism would need to be applied for such a vile act to be condoned.

Gen 19: 5 Calling out to Lot they said, ‘Where are the men who came to you tonight? Send them out to us so that we can have intercourse with them.’
6 Lot came out to them at the door and, having shut the door behind him,
7 said, ‘Please, brothers, do not be wicked.
8 Look, I have two daughters who are virgins. I am ready to send them out to you, for you to treat as you please, but do nothing to these men since they are now under the protection of my roof.’
9 But they retorted, ‘Stand back! This fellow came here as a foreigner, and now he wants to play the judge. Now we shall treat you worse than them.’ Then they forced Lot back and moved forward to break down the door.
10 But the men reached out, pulled Lot back into the house with them, and shut the door.
11 And they dazzled those who were at the door of the house, one and all, with a blinding light, so that they could not find the doorway.
12 The men said to Lot, ‘Have you anyone else here? Your sons, your daughters and all your people in the city, take them away,
13 for we are about to destroy this place, since the outcry to Yahweh against those in it has grown so loud that Yahweh has sent us to destroy it.’
14 So Lot went off and spoke to his future sons-in-law who were to marry his daughters. ‘On your feet!’ he said, ‘Leave this place, for Yahweh is about to destroy the city.’ But his sons-in-law thought he was joking.
15 When dawn broke the angels urged Lot on, ‘To your feet! Take your wife and your two daughters who are here, or you will be swept away in the punishment of the city.’
16 And as he hesitated, the men seized his hand and the hands of his wife and his two daughters – Yahweh being merciful to him – and led him out and left him outside the city.

From the text please show:

1. that God condones rape
2. where you understand there to be anything about moral relativism

I just noticed you you identify yourself as an atheist. I’m not sure why I’m bothering, but here you go. Why are you trolling for heaven’s sake? :banghead:

 

[Nan_S]

Lot offered what he possessed - his family - to protect the strangers. His daughters were, in essence, his property, and therefore he was offering something which was his own and which was perfectly within his right to offer. Sure, by today’s standards that’s abhorrent. That’s the problem with viewing scripture through a modern lens. In order to understand what happened and why, you have to learn to read it in the context of the times as they existed back then.

Why did Abraham prostitute his wife? It seemed the prudent thing to do at the time.

Abraham still had to learn to trust God fully and completely. Abraham was a man who lived by his wits within powerful pagan societies. God asked him to do some crazy stuff, which he agreed to do because he believed that he would be blessed. Complete trust in God was a different issue. For a long time Abraham impaitently kept his own counsel when it came to getting out of impossible situations. Not being paitent or trusting enough to wait for God to come through, Abraham offered Sarai to the Egyptian king, then later took Hagar into his bed.

Abraham loved God, he was blessed by God, but he still didn’t completely trust God. Why should he? All the other gods he had ever known were notoriously untrustworthy when things mattered the most. Back then a wise man lived by his wits instead of trusting himself to fate.

Abraham finally did figure out that he could trust God 100% in all things when he was forced to send Ishmael away, then told to sacrifice the one person through whom the promise of future generations would be fulfilled. With the command to sacrifice Isaac, God finally put Abraham in a box that he could not get out of by using his wits. In lifting the knife to slay his son, Abraham finally committed himself to trust that God would make a way even though he himself could not understand how.

 

[Mike_from_NJ]

Gen 19: 5 Calling out to Lot they said, ‘Where are the men who came to you tonight? Send them out to us so that we can have intercourse with them.’
6 Lot came out to them at the door and, having shut the door behind him,
7 said, 'Please, brothers, do not be wicked.
8 Look, I have two daughters who are virgins. I am ready to send them out to you, for you to treat as you please, but do nothing to these men since they are now under the protection of my roof.'
{snip}

Before we go any further can we agree that the angry mob outside of Lot’s house were looking to rape the angels inside? Can we agree that Lot was telling them to rape his daughters instead? Finally can we agree that Lot is affording the angels a level of protection far greater than that of his daughters or even his sons-in-law?

From the text please show:

1. that God condones rape
2. where you understand there to be anything about moral relativism

I was only talking about Lot here, but I’m more than fine with showing how repulsive Yahweh is in this scene.

1. Two angels (searching for 10 righteous men) visit Lot’s house and break bread with him. When the mob storms the house the angels (assumedly acting as the hand of God) transport Lot, his two daughters, and his wife out of the city just before God destroys it. God, the ultimate arbiter as to what and what is not good and righteous declares Lot as such. If offering up your daughters to be raped by a mob doesn’t tarnish one’s righteousness, then God condones it in at least in the circumstances you quoted above.
2. By stating an act can be evil or good depending on the situation, that is moral relativism. Now I’m not against it as a concept but different people will put different constraints on it. Every once in a while there will be a thread on CAF questioning whether bearing false witness is allowed depending on the situation. Often times this will come in the form of, “Would it have been ok to lie to a Nazi as to the whereabouts of a Jew in hiding?” Those in favor will argue the good that comes from it outweighs the sin.

The thing is even those who disagree with that notion of good lieing can at least see where those in favor are coming from. Here you’re arguing that the good of the rape offer outweighs the sin of letting your daughters be raped. Not only is this clearly moral relativism but it’s of a scope far greater than helping a people escape genocide.

I just noticed you you identify yourself as an atheist. I’m not sure why I’m bothering, but here you go. Why are you trolling for heaven’s sake? :banghead:

I see that you’re repeatedly banging your head against a brick wall. Only via multiple concussions could a person assume that arguing that rape is never, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever good equates with trolling.

 

[Nan_S]

Before we go any further can we agree that the angry mob outside of Lot’s house were looking to rape the angels inside? Can we agree that Lot was telling them to rape his daughters instead? Finally can we agree that Lot is affording the angels a level of protection far greater than that of his daughters or even his sons-in-law?

Your problem, Mike, is that you’re insist on viewing scripture through present-day eyes, applying present-day standards, and assuming that present-day family relationships are unchanged throughout history. Your opinion of the bible is skewed because you aren’t making even the slightest effort to read it in the context of the time when the stories happened.

These events happened 4,000 years ago, when fathers practically owned their daughters, when it was more shameful to dishonor a guest than to harm your own self (and your family was an extension of yourself), when daughters and sons put more emphasis on family honor than on their personal desires, when a man took a bride from his own close family to ensure the family wealth stayed in the family, when polygamy to ensure an heir was normal. Outside of the Muslim countries, few of these 4,000 year old societal norms still exist.

But until you cast off your modern-day glasses, until you view the events of 4,000 years ago within the context of society as it existed 4,000 years ago, you will be totally clueless when it comes to understanding the motives of the people involved.