I noticed your comment about the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. In Hebrew, the word used for "knowledge" in this context is "yada", which has a deeper meaning beyond just intellectual understanding. It often refers to a kind of a merging of two things, the Bible for example uses "know" to describe the merging between husband and wife (when they "become one"). So when you look at it from that perspective, the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil is less about gaining factual information and more about mixing or merging good and evil with each other. It's still a complex topic, but I thought that linguistic detail might add an interesting layer to your understanding of the passage. Cheers!
Putting myself in Cain's position, I spend months growing food out the ground, and giving up the best of it as offering to God, only to discover tha he doesn't appreciate it, and Cain doesn't get blessed. Somehow God didn't see the consequences that followed afterwards, when he played favorites. Also, he didn't give Abel a heads-up, that he would be killed later on, so he couldn't escape somewhere else to avoid death by fratricide. God messed that one up big time !
You make a good point. We ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil and we don't even all agree on what's good and what's evil? We got kicked out of the garden and didn't even get the knowledge! I want to speak to God's manager!
@@christophersnedeker But do't agree on what is good and what is evil. Which ironically is why I would disagree that good and evil exist, since it's just human opinion. Maybe that's why it's a fruit tree in the story, cause good and evil and just like taste. You might like apples, and I don't, and when we bite the fruit, maybe I taste consequentialism and you taste contractualism, for example. Maybe that's the knowledge we got from eating it, that it's all subjective, god didn't want us knowing that. Which, weird in the story that a supposedly omnipotent being somehow doesn't get what they want. But when you put concepts like omnipotence into a story it's going to create plot holes.
Eve was tempted by the fruit of the tree in the midst of the Garden, because it was good for food, and pleasing to the eyes, and it was a tree to be desired to make one wise. Eve was very pragmatic. Adam was tempted by Eve, because she was a smokin' hot babe, and he was madly in love with her, and couldn't bear the thought of losing her, so, he chose to die with her rather than remain loyal to God. Adam loved the creature more than he loved the Creator. And that's how we got here.
So, one of the things I recommend doing is reading a guide on these stories, the primary book that I recommend is 'Genesis for Normal People," although the title kind of sucks as it makes it seem that it's for idiots, it largely goes through the historical context regarding the stories presented and presents information on it so that you may be able to understand it. However, keep in mind, all guides will fall into the authors presuppositions, and all will likely never be fully convincing to anybody, as there are countless claims that can really never be backed, just assumed on the basis of previous word.
The fact that time moves at a different speed based on the speed you move through space leads me to believe time is a part of the same creation as space
What do you mean? Someone travelling at 5km/h as opposed to someone travelling at 50km/h will have different concept of time when travelling in Space??
doesn't the tree of the knowledge of good and evil mean to know good and to know evil? like do good and do evil? i always understood the grammar in that way.
I have a rough understanding of my country's view on the text over the average course of life of a person. The elders tend toward literalist, the young to absolute atheist. I, however, have always been literalist with my reading, and take heart in the historicity of the faith, but lament at how when uou search for it online you get more didmissive opinion artivles or "we are the only church" propaganda pieces than documents covering digsites or letters and translation. On the note of what a pastor might say about geneology chapters, well you got things like "if you literally translate this sequence of names they say a phrase" or "see how even the low are part of God's plan" like if they mention Rahab being in the family tree for Solomon or something. One of the things I find funny is the 2 Enochs thing. We only ever talk about the good one from Seth's family, but Cain had an Enoch. It's a bit funny and can funnier if somebody can do a skit about why he chose that name. As for the regret thing: I think we usually just chalk it up to God having some emotions we might understand. You can make analogies to show that foresight does not necessarily remove the emotional weight or shift the moral weights of certain actions, so that regret before the flood is essentially comparable to Jesus crying over Lazarus. It still hurts even when you know it will happen. I'm sure somebody else may say it but just in case there's some kinda pluralization rules at play so if Abram meant something kind if like father, which is ironic of the sonless man obviously, then Abraham is father of many. Technically many nations, and beside there may be deeper details that a guy like me nevef boyhered with because I'm not that into etymology. On the note of the Onan thing, the theory I hear basically undisputed among most denominations is there was indeed a cultural thing of shagging your brother's widow and calling those kids as your brother's inheritors. I understand it practically speaking, but I agree it sounds strange. The turkey baster kind of misconception is funny, by the way. Reminds me of Don't Breathe. Final note: I don't believe it appropiate to consider God utilitarian. Just think back to Onan real fast. Why have that whole ordeal when he could've told the widow to lock her legs, you get me? In saying this I must admit I feel crass but it does summarize a great point. Don't worry about it. I mean, if He really was a mad god and we're all like little whispering voices in His head animating clay dolls in a series of predetermined skits, there is not much we can do to cutbthose puppet strings, anyway. But such is antithetical to His way and is contrary to the stated reality, where many shall perish in their sins, but His Will and His wish, which is all are called to repentance. So whether He is mostly quiet or frequently communes to a human, our guilt is our's to bear.
Strictly speaking, Adam and Eve weren’t supposed to die, and the moment they ate from the tree, they sinned and they would (now) surely die. So it wasn’t referring to it as in the instant they ate they would die, but rather the instant they ate, their deaths would be guaranteed.
Only way this would only make sense is if when god said they would die, he meant they would never eat from the tree of life if they ever ate from the tree of knowledge of good & evil as its never implied that man was immortal anywhere in genesis. Most christoans take this statement to mean that we would be cut off from god in spirit (though this is no where implied in the text but seems to be an interpretation that came about in order to ensure that god isn't made out to be a liar as that would contradict his " i' never lie" attribute)
@@hanzohasashi607 actually, now that you mention it, you’re right. It’s never said that they were immortal, though it does say that death wasn’t in the world before sin (rom 5:12). So maybe there’s some in between? Anyways… As for the contradiction, here’s my thought process: Because God exists (just making my worldview clear) and he ain’t silly enough that he’d contradict himself in the second chapter of his book. There’s probably gotta be a logical answer. I believe that I’m talking the meaning to woodenly. The expression “on the day you ___, you will surely die” is used as a way to emphasize that the moment ___ happens, you can consider yourself dead. I believe 1 kings 2:37 is a good example, it uses the same exact words, but the person didn’t die the very day, but rather the moment he did ___ thing, he signed his death sentences and died a few days later.
@@FocusAccount_1 Let me build on your point, Genesis 2:4 in some translation says the day God made heaven and earth. Day is obviously not literal when God says they will die that day. 2 Peter 3:8 supports this too.
It’s like watching a recording of a football game. You know what’s gonna happen, and you could fast forward or go back, but the players at the time they were playing were all making their own individual choices.
If thats the case, then what god see's are the possible future actions one could take but never really knows the outcome that might come to pass until the event takes place.
@@hanzohasashi607 As far as I understand it. You are sort of right. The key word to understand it all is “all-powerful” taken to a mind boggling extent (at least for me it’s mind boggling). So yes, god sees all possible options, and I mean all, so if you take the right lane on the road or the left lane, he knows the outcomes of both of those decisions. But he does it to the end of time on all scales. So if you choose to eat out from Burger King and get food poisoning, he knows how that’ll affect your job and how that’ll affect 30 years down the line and so on to infinity. But if you choose to not eat out, he’ll know how that saves your job and then future children 30 years later and so on to infinity. He knows this for Every. Single. Decision. God literally knows every single parallel timeline from start to finish. And I find that mind boggling. That way God is sovereign in knowing all, but you are guaranteed free will.
There are tons of apologist that WILL KILL for that god of theirs. Steve Anderson is definitely one. Also, that god put the tree in the middle of paradise and told his brainless species of humans no touchie. It can't be temptation without the knowledge of evil. Eve just said sure without thinking or struggle. The fee fees that you get when you want to do something wrong knowing it is. Is temptation. Not once does Eve or Adam feel that. Adam just blame eve 'she made me do it daddy 😢'. What a 😾😂
A good method to reconcile free will and God’s sovereignty is to picture God as a master of kung fu (I don’t think it’s kung fu exactly but bear with me) Where the opponent throws a punch at you and you use his punch and momentum to counterattack and throw him off balance. That’s similar to how God reconciles our actions, wether good or bad, with what he has in plans. He takes them in stride, and then turns them for good.
Genesis 4:15: "Then the Lord said to him, 'Not so! Whoever kills Cain will suffer a sevenfold vengeance. And the Lord put a mark on Cain so that no one who came upon him would kill him". WHO WOULD KILL HIM???? There were only two other people in the world. You Know MOM AND DAD. SO MUCH BULLSHIT.
God is outside of space and time. He completely pre exists and transcends time and space. And something that is definitely a metaphor is God regretting doing something. For in God there is "no variableness nor shadow of turning" james 1:17 basically he's simple he doesn't change. He's also perfect and isn't going to feel one way about something he did and then regret it later. Not literally anyway.
I really enjoyed this video as a Christian and I find your perspectives helpful. To answer your question about Abram to Abraham. God added the letter hey (that is equivalent to the English H) because it symbolized the life that God gives to every creature. Not entirely sure though. it's what I have heard from everyone that I have talked to about it that knows a little bit about Hebrew.
Why was Jacob changed to Israel and all the other name changes that didn’t contain H? They do have specific meanings tho. H (Hei) means to “look” or to “behold” in ancient Hebrew (wth a little stick figure holding hands up as if to see a great sight) . It’s great you are on the right track and the Ancient Hebrew Picture-graph Definitly cracks it open as it’s what the bible was first written in.
The serpent in Genesis is Satan. Revelation 12:9 "And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him."
Hey I'm a catholicism just putting my 2 cents in. I think the tree refers to humans gaining the ability to chose what is right and wrong for themselves using the story as a tool to describe how individuals can be immoral yet still believing in their moral righteousness. So like discernment not knowledge if that makes sense.
One theistic evolutionist said genesis isn't actually talking about the material creation of the universe. Rather it's about God naming and assigning roles to the various aspects of creation. He said Adam and Eve were real people who lived thousands of years ago and it all happened but before that was the 13 billion years of evolution.
The Bible contains myth, legend, history and science. The OT has yet to be translated. The little- but significant- parts Kamal Salibi has tells different stories. THM in Gen.1:2 refers to the Tihamah regions- Hijaz, Asir and Yemen- in western Arabia, not the ‘deep ‘. Start at start. Junaynah at Dn- garden of Eden- is located at 20/20 by 42/55 in Asir region western Arabia with the 4 rivers and gold etc. Still Adam and Eve mythical and the trees and cherubim etc. Separating these 4 aspects of the OT is not easy. “The Bible Came from Arabia “, Kamal Salibi,1985, plus his 3 other bible study books and blog for facts not fantasies. Every Bible scholar knows that the ‘Jordan ‘ is nowhere called a river in the OT. Etc, etc. The “ cart before the horse syndrome “ should have long ago been laid to rest. Alas, not yet!
Regarding Sodom and Gomorrah, while it doesn't explicitly list all of the different sins that are committed in the cities, it does give an example of their wickedness in Genesis 19. This chapter has two angels come to Sodom to warn Abraham's nephew Lot about the coming calamity and get him and his family out of the city. Evidently, the angels came in the form of men because the men of the city come to Lot's house and demand that he give them the visiting men so that they could violate them. Lot then says that they could have his daughters if they left the men alone, which is an entirely different can of worms itself, but it does highlight that Lot probably wasn't the most righteous person either but was being saved for his connection to Abraham. This story is why the people of Sodom and Gomorrah get the reputation of being sexual deviants though.
I noticed your comment about the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. In Hebrew, the word used for "knowledge" in this context is "yada", which has a deeper meaning beyond just intellectual understanding. It often refers to a kind of a merging of two things, the Bible for example uses "know" to describe the merging between husband and wife (when they "become one").
So when you look at it from that perspective, the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil is less about gaining factual information and more about mixing or merging good and evil with each other. It's still a complex topic, but I thought that linguistic detail might add an interesting layer to your understanding of the passage. Cheers!
That's very helpful thank you
This was incredible and it’s the exact kind UA-cam video I’ve been looking for! Please Please continue this series
If man was created in god's image therefore, we should be invisible .
Putting myself in Cain's position, I spend months growing food out the ground, and giving up the best of it as offering to God, only to discover tha he doesn't appreciate it, and Cain doesn't get blessed. Somehow God didn't see the consequences that followed afterwards, when he played favorites. Also, he didn't give Abel a heads-up, that he would be killed later on, so he couldn't escape somewhere else to avoid death by fratricide. God messed that one up big time !
4:42 A day to God is a thousand years so they die within a thousand years.
You make a good point. We ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil and we don't even all agree on what's good and what's evil? We got kicked out of the garden and didn't even get the knowledge! I want to speak to God's manager!
Yes but most of us agree there is such a thing.
@@christophersnedeker But do't agree on what is good and what is evil. Which ironically is why I would disagree that good and evil exist, since it's just human opinion.
Maybe that's why it's a fruit tree in the story, cause good and evil and just like taste. You might like apples, and I don't, and when we bite the fruit, maybe I taste consequentialism and you taste contractualism, for example.
Maybe that's the knowledge we got from eating it, that it's all subjective, god didn't want us knowing that. Which, weird in the story that a supposedly omnipotent being somehow doesn't get what they want. But when you put concepts like omnipotence into a story it's going to create plot holes.
Eve was tempted by the fruit of the tree in the midst of the Garden, because it was good for food, and pleasing to the eyes, and it was a tree to be desired to make one wise.
Eve was very pragmatic.
Adam was tempted by Eve, because she was a smokin' hot babe, and he was madly in love with her, and couldn't bear the thought of losing her, so, he chose to die with her rather than remain loyal to God.
Adam loved the creature more than he loved the Creator.
And that's how we got here.
So, one of the things I recommend doing is reading a guide on these stories, the primary book that I recommend is 'Genesis for Normal People," although the title kind of sucks as it makes it seem that it's for idiots, it largely goes through the historical context regarding the stories presented and presents information on it so that you may be able to understand it. However, keep in mind, all guides will fall into the authors presuppositions, and all will likely never be fully convincing to anybody, as there are countless claims that can really never be backed, just assumed on the basis of previous word.
I suggest checking in with rabbi cross denominationally, as for Jews, our focus is Torah (Christianly referred to as old testament).
I go with the way origin of Alexandria went with it, viewing it as allegory, with a purpose to teach lessons or help a Christian with his walk
Do more about the bible!
The fact that time moves at a different speed based on the speed you move through space leads me to believe time is a part of the same creation as space
What do you mean? Someone travelling at 5km/h as opposed to someone travelling at 50km/h will have different concept of time when travelling in Space??
@Nikki-mi8nx yes time moves differently around objects moving at different speeds
doesn't the tree of the knowledge of good and evil mean to know good and to know evil? like do good and do evil? i always understood the grammar in that way.
I'm Christian and love this vid. Crazy that I have learned more from a skeptic than die hard pastors.
BTW, chill out on Rebakah
For the algorithm 👍
Thank you!
Make sure you’re reading the translation where god says “for when you eat” not “if you eat” god knew and had a plan.
I have a rough understanding of my country's view on the text over the average course of life of a person. The elders tend toward literalist, the young to absolute atheist. I, however, have always been literalist with my reading, and take heart in the historicity of the faith, but lament at how when uou search for it online you get more didmissive opinion artivles or "we are the only church" propaganda pieces than documents covering digsites or letters and translation.
On the note of what a pastor might say about geneology chapters, well you got things like "if you literally translate this sequence of names they say a phrase" or "see how even the low are part of God's plan" like if they mention Rahab being in the family tree for Solomon or something. One of the things I find funny is the 2 Enochs thing. We only ever talk about the good one from Seth's family, but Cain had an Enoch. It's a bit funny and can funnier if somebody can do a skit about why he chose that name.
As for the regret thing: I think we usually just chalk it up to God having some emotions we might understand. You can make analogies to show that foresight does not necessarily remove the emotional weight or shift the moral weights of certain actions, so that regret before the flood is essentially comparable to Jesus crying over Lazarus. It still hurts even when you know it will happen.
I'm sure somebody else may say it but just in case there's some kinda pluralization rules at play so if Abram meant something kind if like father, which is ironic of the sonless man obviously, then Abraham is father of many. Technically many nations, and beside there may be deeper details that a guy like me nevef boyhered with because I'm not that into etymology.
On the note of the Onan thing, the theory I hear basically undisputed among most denominations is there was indeed a cultural thing of shagging your brother's widow and calling those kids as your brother's inheritors. I understand it practically speaking, but I agree it sounds strange.
The turkey baster kind of misconception is funny, by the way. Reminds me of Don't Breathe.
Final note: I don't believe it appropiate to consider God utilitarian. Just think back to Onan real fast. Why have that whole ordeal when he could've told the widow to lock her legs, you get me? In saying this I must admit I feel crass but it does summarize a great point. Don't worry about it.
I mean, if He really was a mad god and we're all like little whispering voices in His head animating clay dolls in a series of predetermined skits, there is not much we can do to cutbthose puppet strings, anyway. But such is antithetical to His way and is contrary to the stated reality, where many shall perish in their sins, but His Will and His wish, which is all are called to repentance. So whether He is mostly quiet or frequently communes to a human, our guilt is our's to bear.
"lock her legs", that made me really laugh out loud. 😄
I fall into Metaphorical for Genesis 1 and more literal and gap for the rest of Genesis
Strictly speaking, Adam and Eve weren’t supposed to die, and the moment they ate from the tree, they sinned and they would (now) surely die.
So it wasn’t referring to it as in the instant they ate they would die, but rather the instant they ate, their deaths would be guaranteed.
Ah I see what you're saying. They don't die immediately but they will gain the ability to die later on.
Only way this would only make sense is if when god said they would die, he meant they would never eat from the tree of life if they ever ate from the tree of knowledge of good & evil as its never implied that man was immortal anywhere in genesis. Most christoans take this statement to mean that we would be cut off from god in spirit (though this is no where implied in the text but seems to be an interpretation that came about in order to ensure that god isn't made out to be a liar as that would contradict his " i' never lie" attribute)
@@hanzohasashi607 actually, now that you mention it, you’re right. It’s never said that they were immortal, though it does say that death wasn’t in the world before sin (rom 5:12). So maybe there’s some in between? Anyways…
As for the contradiction, here’s my thought process:
Because God exists (just making my worldview clear) and he ain’t silly enough that he’d contradict himself in the second chapter of his book. There’s probably gotta be a logical answer.
I believe that I’m talking the meaning to woodenly.
The expression “on the day you ___, you will surely die” is used as a way to emphasize that the moment ___ happens, you can consider yourself dead.
I believe 1 kings 2:37 is a good example, it uses the same exact words, but the person didn’t die the very day, but rather the moment he did ___ thing, he signed his death sentences and died a few days later.
@@FocusAccount_1 Let me build on your point, Genesis 2:4 in some translation says the day God made heaven and earth. Day is obviously not literal when God says they will die that day. 2 Peter 3:8 supports this too.
Five is the only correct view.
Just because God knows future events his foreknowledge doesn't affect your choice you still have the ability to choose
It’s like watching a recording of a football game. You know what’s gonna happen, and you could fast forward or go back, but the players at the time they were playing were all making their own individual choices.
@@FocusAccount_1 yes
Yeah I always thought of it like watching a history documentary knowing what's gonna happen
If thats the case, then what god see's are the possible future actions one could take but never really knows the outcome that might come to pass until the event takes place.
@@hanzohasashi607 As far as I understand it. You are sort of right. The key word to understand it all is “all-powerful” taken to a mind boggling extent (at least for me it’s mind boggling).
So yes, god sees all possible options, and I mean all, so if you take the right lane on the road or the left lane, he knows the outcomes of both of those decisions. But he does it to the end of time on all scales.
So if you choose to eat out from Burger King and get food poisoning, he knows how that’ll affect your job and how that’ll affect 30 years down the line and so on to infinity. But if you choose to not eat out, he’ll know how that saves your job and then future children 30 years later and so on to infinity.
He knows this for Every. Single. Decision.
God literally knows every single parallel timeline from start to finish.
And I find that mind boggling.
That way God is sovereign in knowing all, but you are guaranteed free will.
There are tons of apologist that WILL KILL for that god of theirs. Steve Anderson is definitely one. Also, that god put the tree in the middle of paradise and told his brainless species of humans no touchie. It can't be temptation without the knowledge of evil. Eve just said sure without thinking or struggle. The fee fees that you get when you want to do something wrong knowing it is. Is temptation. Not once does Eve or Adam feel that. Adam just blame eve 'she made me do it daddy 😢'. What a 😾😂
A good method to reconcile free will and God’s sovereignty is to picture God as a master of kung fu (I don’t think it’s kung fu exactly but bear with me)
Where the opponent throws a punch at you and you use his punch and momentum to counterattack and throw him off balance.
That’s similar to how God reconciles our actions, wether good or bad, with what he has in plans. He takes them in stride, and then turns them for good.
Genesis 4:15: "Then the Lord said to him, 'Not so! Whoever kills Cain will suffer a sevenfold vengeance.
And the Lord put a mark on Cain so that no one who came upon him would kill him".
WHO WOULD KILL HIM????
There were only two other people in the world. You Know MOM AND DAD.
SO MUCH BULLSHIT.
4:12 The serpent was confirmed to be satan in the new testament.
I’m 3.5
Good video, though you're going way faster than I expected, You could have gotten an hour out of the Eden story alone.
Eden could take up multiple books yeah
God is outside of space and time. He completely pre exists and transcends time and space.
And something that is definitely a metaphor is God regretting doing something. For in God there is "no variableness nor shadow of turning" james 1:17 basically he's simple he doesn't change. He's also perfect and isn't going to feel one way about something he did and then regret it later. Not literally anyway.
Open theism would say otherwise. :-) Not that classical theism isn't coherent or sophisticated, but there are other theological options.
I really enjoyed this video as a Christian and I find your perspectives helpful. To answer your question about Abram to Abraham. God added the letter hey (that is equivalent to the English H) because it symbolized the life that God gives to every creature. Not entirely sure though. it's what I have heard from everyone that I have talked to about it that knows a little bit about Hebrew.
Why was Jacob changed to Israel and all the other name changes that didn’t contain H? They do have specific meanings tho. H (Hei) means to “look” or to “behold” in ancient Hebrew (wth a little stick figure holding hands up as if to see a great sight) . It’s great you are on the right track and the Ancient Hebrew Picture-graph Definitly cracks it open as it’s what the bible was first written in.
The serpent in Genesis is Satan.
Revelation 12:9
"And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him."
Ah okay so it's later on
Hey I'm a catholicism just putting my 2 cents in. I think the tree refers to humans gaining the ability to chose what is right and wrong for themselves using the story as a tool to describe how individuals can be immoral yet still believing in their moral righteousness. So like discernment not knowledge if that makes sense.
One theistic evolutionist said genesis isn't actually talking about the material creation of the universe. Rather it's about God naming and assigning roles to the various aspects of creation. He said Adam and Eve were real people who lived thousands of years ago and it all happened but before that was the 13 billion years of evolution.
The Bible contains myth, legend, history and science. The OT has yet to be translated. The little- but significant- parts Kamal Salibi has tells different stories. THM in Gen.1:2 refers to the Tihamah regions- Hijaz, Asir and Yemen- in western Arabia, not the ‘deep ‘. Start at start. Junaynah at Dn- garden of Eden- is located at 20/20 by 42/55 in Asir region western Arabia with the 4 rivers and gold etc. Still Adam and Eve mythical and the trees and cherubim etc. Separating these 4 aspects of the OT is not easy. “The Bible Came from Arabia “, Kamal Salibi,1985, plus his 3 other bible study books and blog for facts not fantasies. Every Bible scholar knows that the ‘Jordan ‘ is nowhere called a river in the OT. Etc, etc. The “ cart before the horse syndrome “ should have long ago been laid to rest. Alas, not yet!
The new testament reveals the old. Jesus came to translate it for us just ppl don’t like to change their ways or don’t search things fio themselves.
@@Nikki-mi8nx The garden of Eden- and everything else- is in Jesus’ heart? No. Search Kamal Salibi’s blog- “for yourself.”
Regarding Sodom and Gomorrah, while it doesn't explicitly list all of the different sins that are committed in the cities, it does give an example of their wickedness in Genesis 19. This chapter has two angels come to Sodom to warn Abraham's nephew Lot about the coming calamity and get him and his family out of the city. Evidently, the angels came in the form of men because the men of the city come to Lot's house and demand that he give them the visiting men so that they could violate them. Lot then says that they could have his daughters if they left the men alone, which is an entirely different can of worms itself, but it does highlight that Lot probably wasn't the most righteous person either but was being saved for his connection to Abraham. This story is why the people of Sodom and Gomorrah get the reputation of being sexual deviants though.
they should read all the books from the 5 cradles of civilization to get a real grasp of history.