mamacat, the WTS will try to explain that there was no Law code yet against having sex with your daughter or with your father. But then they say how wonderful Joseph was because he refused to commit adultery although he wasn't under the Law code.
w73 6/15 p. 384 Questions from Readers ***As far as Judah was concerned, he thought he was having relations with a prostitute. In this he was not acting right, for it was God?s original purpose for a man to have relations with his wife and not for the earth to be filled with prostitutes. Still, Judah did not sin in the sense of transgressing a specific command of God?s law, for the Mosaic law was not given until much later.?Gen. 2:24; compare Leviticus 19:29.
w03 12/1 p. 20 Do You Always Need a Bible Command? ***
Consider the example of Joseph. At the time he was confronting the immoral advances of Potiphar?s wife, there was no divinely inspired written law against adultery. Yet, even without a direct law, Joseph perceived that adultery was a sin not only against his own conscience but also "against God." (Genesis 39:9) Evidently, Joseph recognized that adultery was in violation of God?s thinking and will, as expressed in Eden.?Genesis 2:24.
Interestingly, the people of Sodom and Gomorrah "did not sin in the sense of transgressing a specific command of God's law" yet they were destroyed eternally.
If Lot and his daughters had their little escapade after 1513 BCE, they would have been put to death. Wasn't theirs gross immorality?
Instead the WTS rewrites the Bible.
w72 5/15 p. 320 Questions from Readers ***But it should be noted that there is nothing in the record to indicate that Lot was a habitual drunkard, nor was he habitually involved in acts of incest. His reputation was that of a "righteous man," and this reputation he had with God, who examines the heart. Lot deplored the "lawless deeds" of the people of Sodom. And, evidently, for the Examiner of hearts to view him as righteous, Lot must also have grieved over the wrong conduct in which he himself got involved.