|
Righteous Lot
Biography
Righteous Lot
"And
delivered just Lot, vexed with the filthy conversation of
the wicked."—2 Pet. 2:7
Have you ever
thought of Lot as a just or righteous man? Would you be
more inclined to call him "bad Lot" or
"weak Lot?" Why would the Apostle Peter use
this appellative "just" to describe a character
usually viewed as one who was far less than faithful?
Lot was the
nephew of Abraham, being the son of his older brother,
Haran. He was part of the entourage which Terah,
Abraham’s father, led out of Ur of the Chaldees
northwestward along the Euphrates river to a place they
named Haran, in honor of Terah’s oldest son, now
dead.
After the death
of Terah, Abraham left Haran for "the promised
land," a land which God had indicated he would
inform him of when he was still residing in Ur. This act
of Abraham is denoted as one of the great acts of faith
in his life by the Apostle Paul in Heb. 11:8.
"By faith
Abraham, when he was called to go out into a place which
he should after receive for an inheritance, obeyed; and
he went out, not knowing whither he went."
If it was faith
which prompted Abraham to leave Haran, was it any less
faith on the part of Lot? Some might say that he was
younger, and therefore he had little choice. But his
sister, Milcah, was left behind. He did have a choice. He
chose to go with Abraham. Assuredly, this was an act of
faith on Lot’s part! Yet, he was not singled out for
this act of faith as was Abraham. Why? Because his faith
did not continue to grow to maturity.
Arriving in the
land of Canaan, both Abraham and Lot prospered so much
that "the land was not able to bear them, that they
might dwell together: for their substance was
great." (Gen. 13:6) Strife developed between their
herdsmen. In an amicable discussion, the two decided to
part company. Lot chose the then fertile area around the
base of the Dead Sea. Although now a barren area, it was
apparently agriculturally productive before the cataclysm
that destroyed the twin cities of Sodom and Gomorrah.
This decision to
relocate in the area of Sodom was not in itself an act
unpleasing to God. Given first choice, it was only
logical to select the area with the best prospects for
prosperity. However, it did place Lot in a position of
temptation. Prosperity is always tempting, and one of
then greatest antagonists of faith. Where prosperity
exists, man feels less and less need for God.
Six
Steps to Sin
Following the
course of temptation, the move to Sodom traces his
decline in six successive steps.
1.
STRIFE. (Gen. 13:7) Disagreements are natural.
No two independent people can long live without
differences of opinion, but these disputes need not
degenerate into strife. "For where envying and
strife is, there is confusion and every evil work."
(Jas. 3:16) Strife breeds suspicions of the other
person’s motive and destroys the incentive to work
together. While Jude says that we are "to contend
earnestly for the faith" (Jude 4), he does not say
that we are to be contentious for it.
2. BEHOLDING.
(Gen. 13:10) Every materialistic act begins with a
desire. "Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth
forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth
death." (Jas.1:15) Modern commercial enterprises
spend millions of dollars for the very purpose of
creating just such desire. Stores invest heavily in
creating eye appeal. For Mother Eve, one of the appeals
of the "tree of knowledge of good and evil" was
that "it was pleasant to the eyes." (Gen. 3:6)
Similarly, one of the strong temptation to the Christian
is "the lust of the eyes." (1 John 2:16)
3. CHOOSING.
(Gen. 13:11) Desiring an object in a store window does
not mean that we must buy it. Noticing the fertility of
the Jordan valley, Lot could have considered other
aspects of his decision: perhaps he should defer to his
older uncle, Abraham; perhaps he should have taken into
consideration the character of his new neighbors, which
was already iniquitous. But Lot carried through with his
desires and made a positive decision to make a choice
based solely on materialistic considerations.
4. DWELLING
TOWARD SODOM. (Gen. 13:12) To Lot’s credit,
he did not choose to live in Sodom, with all its
iniquities. Nevertheless, by pitching his tent
"toward Sodom" he was inviting the future
temptations which caused him such loss in his later life.
In similar vein, Solomon writes in his love song,
"Take us the foxes, the little foxes that spoil the
vines." (Song of Solomon 2:15) It is the little
temptations, the small sins, which sear the conscience,
opening the door for the greater sins to follow.
5. LIVING
IN SODOM. (Gen. 14:12) True to this pattern, it
is only a short while before we see Lot changing his
residence to within the city. No doubt the conveniences
of an urban environment over a desert tent and the
prosperity which enabled him to purchase a home in the
city were all factors in this decision.
"Surely," he may have thought, "there can
be no greater danger in living in the city than in
dwelling in its environs." But there was, and it
took two great cataclysms to extricate him from his
difficulties.
6. SITTING
IN THE GATE. (Gen. 19:1) The position of
"sitting in the gate" was reserved for the
elders, or judges, of the city. It denoted a position of
prominence and esteem. After experiencing the wickedness
of his Sodomite neighbors, Lot chooses not to leave the
city, but to try to reform it. Numerous compromises would
have been required to win the acceptance and necessary
votes to hold such a high office, but a conscience which
is seared often chooses to ignore the dangers of such
compromises.
Two
Tragendies
As a result of
Lot’s living in Sodom, his very life came into
danger on two occasions. In one he was taken captive, in
the other he fled to avoid destruction. In the one, the
whole city was saved for Lot’s sake. In the other,
the whole city was destroyed for Lot’s sake.
The first of
these incidents is recorded in Genesis, chapter 14.
Chedarlaomer, king of Elam, had been holding the people
around the Dead Sea as a tribute people. A rebellion
finally occurred, in which all the residents of Sodom,
including Lot, were taken captive.
Upon hearing of
this, Abraham garners together his entire household, some
318 men, and sets out on a rescue mission. Successful, he
restores all of Sodom’s possessions to the king of
Sodom, and Lot to his home. On the return journey he is
met by Melchizedek, king of Salem, and after partaking of
ceremonial bread and wine, gives Melchizedek a tithe, or
ten percent, of the spoils.
The second
tragedy is recorded in the 19th chapter of Genesis, and
this time the attacker of Sodom is God himself, because
of the extreme wickedness of the residents of both Sodom
and its sister city, Gomorroh. After negotiating for its
being saved from destruction if 10 righteous people could
be found therein, Abraham leaves the matter in God’s
hands. (Gen. 18)
Ten righteous
were not found. Only Lot, his wife and two daughters were
sufficiently concerned to flee the city before an
earthquake cause subterranean deposits of sulfur and salt
to be forced up through the resultant fissures. The
friction thus caused set the sulfur on fire and, with the
accompanying salt, rained back on the earth. Lot’s
wife, stopping to look longingly back, became encrusted
in the descending salt and was turned into a salty
pillar.
How well these
two incidents demonstrate workings of God in our lives.
How often our wrong decisions put us in harm’s way.
How frequently the Lord delivers us from these
situations, even though they may be of our own making.
Delivering us, he does not change our life’s
environment. He returns us to our individual Sodoms. The
choice is ours, whether to remain or flee. The time
comes, however, when no other choice is left us. It will
be "flee, or die."
It is worthy of
consideration, in this regard, to note the counsel of
Rev. 18:4, ""And I heard another voice from
heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be
not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her
plagues."
If Israel had
not sprinkled their doorposts with the blood of the lamb
on the night of the passover, they, too, would have
suffered the terrible consequences of the last plague on
Egypt—the death of their firstborms.
It is incumbent
upon the Christian to note the consequences of his own
actions, to ask the Lord for deliverance and to accept
that salvation. But they must go further. They must
repent of their former wrong conduct and change their
future course of action lest, ultimately, they be
destroyed with the wicked.
Vexation
of Soul
"And
delivered just Lot, vexed with the filthy conversation of
the wicked: (For that righteous man dwelling among them,
in seeing and hearing, vexed his righteous soul from day
to day with their unlawful deeds.)"—2 Pet. 2:
7, 8
Peter’s
evaluation of Lot, despite his history, was that he was
"just" and had a "righteous soul."
Noting Lot’s involvement with the Sodomites, he
assures us that this was vexing to his soul. It is worthy
of note that the word translated "vexed" in
verse 7 is very different from the one translated
"vexed" in verse 8.
Both the New
International Version and the Revised Version translate
verse 7 with the word "distressed." Lot was
distressed with the unrighteous acts of his neighbors. He
did not agree with them. He probably sought his judgeship
with a hope of reforming the city, perhaps enacting a
more strict legal code on moral matters.
The word
"vexed," however, in verse 8, comes from the
Greek basanizo, a word often translated
"torment:" but which, according to
Strong’s Concordance, meant literally "a touch
stone." A touch stone was used in gold mining, to
assay the gold content of ore. The ore was rubbed against
the stone and, if containing gold, would leave streaks of
gold on the touch stone. Idiomatically, it came to
signify a "putting to the test, an investigation, to
assay or assess."
The thought,
then, in our text, is that, being distressed with the
unrighteousness surrounding him, Lot’s soul was put
to the test. How would he react. Would he seek to reform,
or would he flee? It was, indeed, a vexing question.
Entering
the Defenced Cities
A parallel to
this lesson is found in Jer. 8:9-22. Here he talks of
"wise men" who had "rejected the word of
the Lord." In consequence their wives and fields
were given to others. Their response to the troubles
around them was to say, "Peace, peace, where there
is no peace." Like Lot, they compromised with the
evil for the sake of maintaining peaceful
relationships—co-existence.
The further
deterioration in conditions around them lead them to the
decision of Jer. 8:14. "Why do we sit still?
assemble yourselves, and let us enter into the defenced
cities, and let us be silent there: for the LORD our God hath put us to silence,
and given us water of gall to drink, because we have
sinned against the LORD."
It was this
decision, one that was just as wrong as Lot’s
decision to remain in Sodom after being rescued by Lot,
which causes these "wise men" to lament in
verse 20: "The harvest is past, the summer is ended,
and we are not saved."
Righteous
Lot
Thus, in spite
of the deterioration of Lot’s faith and his
continuing association with the Sodomites. he earns
Peter’s judgment as "just" and
"righteous." But, as the story shows, being
righteous does not necessarily mean being right. His
righteousness related to his heart intents. They were
good. He was vexed, distressed, by the wickedness which
surrounded him. But his decisions were not right. Thus he
failed of the high commendation of faith which Paul gave
his uncle Abraham.
The judgment of
Lot in the Lord’s eyes is not given in the Bible. We
do well, though, to profit from his mistakes and not to
repeat them. As for his judgment or ours, how comforting
are the Apostle’s words in 2 Cor. 8:12, "For if
there be first a willing mind, it is accepted according
to that a man hath, and not according to that he hath
not."
|
|
