The reader is naturally shocked to find such a heading in a Book attributed to God. One has to read it to believe it. Quickly the reader refers to page 13 to savour the spiciest part of "Combat Kit" first. At the head of the page is the definition from the "New Collins Dictionary.":
Whilst in the middle of this research, I was visited by two Bible peddlers on a Sunday morning at home. They came to give me solutions to the problems of the world from the "Holy" Bible. I changed the subject, and I suggested to them that I was on the verge of writing an anthology on "Incest." 1 asked, whether they knew the meaning of the word INCEST? They said that they knew. 1 explained the meaning to them. It was about having sexual intercourse between . . . father and daughters, between son and mother, between father-in-law and daughter-in-law, between brother and sister.
I asked them what would they say if, on completion of my essay on the subject. I presented it to their teenage sister or daughter to read. They both replied to the effect that they would strangle me! I asked why? They said that that act of my giving a filthy, dirty, immoral book to their loved ones was an attack on their chastity. I said, I would not blame them for their strong reaction. But what if the obscene, immoral treatise on incest was derived from your so-called "Book of God," the Holy Bible. "Impossible", they exclaimed indignantly. "The Bible contains no such pornography! Prove it! they demanded!"
I asked, "The volume you are holding in your hands, is it the Bible?" (The Bible-Thumpers, the Hot-Gospellers always carry one under their arm) "Yes!" was the answer. "Can I have a look?" It was handed to me. I opened it to Genesis chapter and pointing to verse 30, I asked one of them to read. The Bible peddler scanned the verses and "smelt the rat." He wanted to change the subject. 1 asked, "What's wrong, is that not the Word of God?" "Yes," they blurted, "but ... but . . ." But when persuaded what did the Christian read? See pages 14 and 15 for the actual reproduction from the Holy of holies.
Both the reproductions are from the King james Version. You will observe that there are slight variations between them. In verse 32 the first version speaks of the daughters of Lot wanting to "preserve SEED of our father/* whereas the second records as "preserve LINEAGE of our father," but the more modern translations of the Bible calls a spade a spade. They do not mince matters —
"That night they (both the daughters of Lot) gave him (their father Lot) wine to drink, and the older daughter had INTERCOURSE with him ...
The next day the older daughter said to her sister; I slept with him last night: now let's get him drunk again tonight, and you sleep1 with him. Then each of us will have a child by our father.
So that night they got him drunkf and the younger daughter had INTERCOURSE with him...
Was this article helpful?