A Fallacious Tear-Jerking Scenario
Farrell Till jftill@midwest.net
Thu, 11 Sep 1997 13:34:07 -0500 (CDT) (00874024447, 199709111834.NAA00400@cdale3.midwest.net)
>LENNY
>
>Before Farrell and April got themselves kicked off Jerry's list they said
>that under some circumstances this would be the morally right thing to do.
>In fact April was going to offer her daughter and Till was going to rape
>her. Maybe they do believe in the Bible?
>
TILL
Yes, but as everyone knows, the scenario that April and I were posting about
was significantly different from the one in which Lot offered his daughters
to the mob. April and I were going to save the lives of 10 million people,
including even April's daughter. Lot was simply offering two women to be
raped in order to save two men from being raped. I suspect that even Lenny
can see the difference. At any rate, he is the absolute moralist on the
list, so he needs to explain to us how that a man who would offer his two
daughters to a mob with rape on its mind could have afterwards been
considered "righteous" enough to save from the destruction of Sodom. We must
keep in mind too that even though Lot's incest with his daughters happened
after Sodom was destroyed, the God who destroyed Sodom and considered Lot so
righteous that he should be spared was presumably an omniscient deity. As
such, he would have known what Lot was going to do right after he was saved
from the destruction of Sodom. If Lenny could somehow know that next week
one of the elders of his church, who would presumably be a man "without
reproach" (1 Tim. 3:1), would have an incestuous relationship with his two
daughters, would Lenny still consider him a righteous man, who should be
spared death if total destruction was going to rain down on Louisville?
Farrell Till
Skepticism, Inc.
jftill@midwest.net