And Lot lifted up his eyes, and beheld all the plain of Jordan, that it [was] well watered every where, before the LORD destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, [even] as the garden of the LORD, like the land of Egypt, as thou comest unto Zoar.
10. And Lot lifted up his eyes ] The spot near Bethel, from which the view described in this verse can be obtained, is easily identified. Travellers speak in glowing terms of the scene commanded by this piece of high ground.
all the Plain (R.V. marg. Circle) of Jordan ] The word kikkar, a “round,” or “circle” (Skinner renders “Oval”), was applied by the Israelites to the broader portion of the level country on either side of the river Jordan, extending northwards as far as the river Jabbok, and southwards, originally, according to the tradition, to the supposed site of the submerged cities of the Plain at the lower end of the Dead Sea. Cf. Gen 19:24-29 ; 2Sa 18:23; 1Ki 7:46. The kikkar is specially mentioned in connexion with Jericho in Deu 34:3; Neh 3:22; Neh 12:28. The present passage suggests, that the narrative emanated from a source, according to which the formation of the Dead Sea was subsequent to the destruction of the cities of the Plain (19), and that its bed had previously been a fertile agricultural region.
well watered ] The basin of the Jordan is famous for its fertility. The climate is tropical, and the soil is watered by the Jordan and its tributaries.
before the Lord destroyed, &c.] The writer pictures this scene of fertility extending itself to the southern extremity of the Dead Sea, before the catastrophe described in Gen 19:24-29.
like the garden of the Lord ] “The garden of Jehovah” is the garden of Eden (chap. 2; cf. Isa 51:3), the ideal of beauty and fertility. “Like the land of Egypt”; the writer adds a second simile. “The land of Egypt” was well known for the richness of its soil and for the abundance of its irrigation. The two similes, following in succession, have been thought to overload the sentence, but are not, on that account, to be regarded as glosses.
as thou goest unto Zoar ] Zoar, a town situated probably in the S. E. of the Dead Sea (cf. Gen 19:22): and hence this clause, as it stands, must be connected with “the Plain of Jordan, that it was well watered every where,” the intervening clauses being parenthetical.
Another reading, “Zoan,” found in the Syriac Peshitto, would connect the clause with the mention of Egypt, by specifying the fertile district of the famous city of Tanis on the east of the Nile Delta.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Gen 13:10-12
Lot chose him all the plain of Jordan
Abraham and Lot
The lesson to be gained from the history of Abraham and Lot is obviously this: that nothing but a clear apprehension of things unseen, a simple trust in Gods promises, and the greatness of mind thence arising, can make us act above the world–indifferent, or almost so, to its comforts, enjoyments, and friendships; or, in other words, that its goods corrupt the common run of religious men who possess them.
I. ABRAHAM AND LOT HAD GIVEN UP THIS WORLD AT THE WORD OF GOD, BUT A MORE DIFFICULT TRIAL REMAINED. Though never easy, yet it is easier to set our hearts on religion or to take some one decided step, which throws us out of our line of life and in a manner forces upon us what we should naturally shrink from, than to possess in good measure the goods of this world and yet love God supremely. The wealth which Lot had hitherto enjoyed had been given him as a pledge of Gods favour, and had its chief value as coming from Him. But surely he forgot this, and esteemed it for its own sake, when he allowed himself to be attracted by the riches and beauty of a guilty and devoted country.
II. GOD IS SO MERCIFUL THAT HE SUFFERS NOT HIS FAVOURED SERVANTS TO WANDER FROM HIM WITHOUT REPEATED WARNINGS. Lot had chosen the habitation of sinners; still he was not left to himself. A calamity was sent to warn and chasten him: he and his property fell into the hands of the five kings. This was an opportunity of breaking off his connection with the people of Sodom, but he did not take it as such.
III. THE GAIN OF THIS WORLD IS BUT TRANSITORY; FAITH REAPS A LATE BUT LASTING RECOMPENSE. (J. H. Newman, D. D.)
A worldly choice and its consequences
That Lot was a good man in the ground of his character there is no reason to doubt. But good men have their besetting sins. Lots was worldliness, and it cost him dear.
1. CONSIDER SOME FEATURES OF THE CHOICE WHICH LOT MADE.
1. Worldly advantage was the chief element in determining his place in life. The volcanic fires, slumbering beneath, made the plain of Sodom so fertile that its riches had become proverbial; and the Jordan, which has now so short a course to the Dead Sea, then wandered through the plain, like the rivers of Eden. Lots eye regarded neither the dangers sleeping beneath nor the light of God above, but only the corn and wine and verdant pastures.
2. Lots choice betrayed a want of generosity. Abraham gave to Lot the selection of place, and had Lot been capable of appreciating his generosity he would have declined to avail himself of the offer. But he grasped at it eagerly and took the richest side. Such men are the most unsatisfactory of friends, paining us constantly by their selfishness, and failing us in the hour of need.
3. Lots choice showed disregard of religious privileges. The sins of the men of Sodom were of a peculiarly gross and inhuman kind; had Lots religion been warm and bright he would not have ventured among them. He may have excused himself to his conscience by saying that he was going to do good, but when he left Sodom he could not count a single convert.
II. CONSIDER THE CONSEQUENCES OF LOTS CHOICE.
1. As he made worldly advantage his chief aim, he failed in gaining it. Twice he lost his entire possessions; he left Sodom poorer than he entered it. He was stripped of the labours of years, and dared not even look behind on the ruin of his hopes.
2. As Lot failed in generosity to Abraham, he was repeatedly brought under the weightiest obligations to him. He took an unfair advantage of Abraham, but ere many years had passed he owed all he had–family, property, liberty–to Abrahams courageous interposition.
3. Lots disregard of spiritual privileges brought on him a bitter entail of sin and shame. His own religious character suffered from his sojourn in Sodom. This alone can account for the grievous termination of his history. His life remains as a warning against the spirit of worldliness. Both worlds frequently slip from the grasp in the miserable attempt to gain the false glitter of the present. (J. Ker, D. D.)
Lots choice
I. THERE ARE DECISIVE MOMENTS IN ALL LIVES. There are hours when character is fixed as by some powerful mordant, and thenceforth the writing is indelible. There are minutes in which destiny is determined, as one may step to this side or to that of the sharp crest of a hill. These are the times in which we make the choices on which our future lives depend. It is such a time in the life of the still youthful Lot that we are to consider. Such times come surely to us all,–not once alone, perhaps, though perhaps only once,–from the decisions of which henceforth we do not swerve. More often a few such opportunities come to a life, and they come chiefly in its youth.
II. CHOICE IS BOTH THE EXPRESSION OF CHARACTER AND ITS DETERMINATION. So Lot shows what was in him, as Abram reveals his character in the choice.
1. Abram looks to the Lord, and Lot looks to the land. It is the contrast of the prayerful with the worldly spirit.
2. Abram showed himself to be a man of peace. Lot let the quarrelling go on;–who knows but he may profit by it in the end?
3. Abram was generous beyond the demands of ordinary liberality. He gave up the rights of his seniority, of family headship; chose to give up his choice, and let the younger man take what seemed to him best. And Lot took it–thinking only of his own interests.
4. Abram was the faithful friend. The friend of God is always the friend of man as well. Prosperity in this case, as in so many others, tested their friendship and fidelity more than adversity. Poverty and loneliness might bring them close together. While Abram was growing very rich, and Lot, the junior partner, was catching the overflow and coming to the possibility of self-support, he would by no means leave his advantage. But now that he has come to independence and can get no more out of his association with his older friend, but rather lose by it, he is quite ready to sever the connection.
III. THE FOLLY OF A WORLDLY CHOICE. The man who leaves out God, Gods purpose for us and Gods calling, is never wise and never comes to true success. The man who makes his decisions on the mere ground of worldly advantage is never sure and never safe. The example we are studying is striking in this regard. It is shown, whether you consider it as a mere natural succession of causes and effects or as a matter of supernatural awards. The wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. The principles taught, and the example set, by the Lord Jesus Christ do not seem at first sight to be well adapted to present success. The unpractical character of other-worldliness is often contemptuously set over against the evils of this-worldliness. But it is a great mistake. The principles of Christ are exactly adapted to this world and to this life, not to a shallow and disappointing success, but to the real attainment of all which in this world is best and most enduring. Every Abram who gives up all to follow God, God takes in hand and guides more safely than he could have gone alone. (G. M. Boynton.)
Abram and Lot
I. This story shows HOW RICHES ENGENDER STRIFE. Oftener a cause of jealousy and estrangement than of increased attachment and magnanimity.
II. THIS STORY SHOWS ON WHAT FRIVOLOUS GROUNDS MEN BECOME ESTRANGED. For the sake of some small advantage they fling away the hearts whose love is more precious than gold; or they make them suffer from their ill-humour and their peevishness, until it can be borne no longer. A friendship that has been tested by years of experience and the strongest proofs of affection, is sometimes quenched by the merest trifle.
III. This story shows HOW A GOOD MAN AVOIDS IMPENDING STRIFE. Not by standing stiffly upon his rights, but by timely concession.
IV. This story shows THE SPIRITUAL PERILS OF SELFISHNESS.
V. This story also shows THE REWARD OF PIETY (Gen 13:14-17). God gave Abram for a perpetual possession the land on which he gazed from the eminence of Bethel. He gave him His own friendship in the place of Lots, for whose departure he sorrowed. He made him also, then a childless old man, hopeless of any posterity to bear his name, and who had hoped, perhaps, that Lot would be to him in place of a son–God made him, in anticipation, the father of a great multitude that could not be numbered. Thus his reward for his integrity and piety was exceeding great. Choosing God and the land where God was found, he derived from this world and its life the best it affords. It is ever so. He who chooses God for his portion, has also the best of His gifts. (A. H. Currier.)
A worldly choice
I. IT WAS DETERMINED BY EXTERNAL ADVANTAGES.
1. External advantages are not the chief end of life.
2. External advantages are not the true happiness of life.
3. External advantages, when considered by themselves, tend to corrupt the soul.
II. IT WAS UNGENEROUS.
III. IT SNOWED TOO LITTLE REGARD FOR SPIRITUAL INTERESTS. (T. H.Leale.)
The character of Lot
I. BEFORE HE TOOK UP HIS ABODE AT SODOM. It appears that he was influenced by the same grace to leave his idolatrous country, and to share with Abraham the difficulties of a pilgrims life, that he might follow the guidance and join in the worship of the true God. We, therefore, find him a fellow traveller with Abraham (Gen 12:4), and the Lord blessed him with an abundant increase of His substance. But how seldom does increasing wealth produce increasing happiness! He separates from Abraham; and what a wretched change does he make! He pitched his tent toward Sodom. By what motive was he influenced? Let us beware of the love of money, which is the root of all evil: They that will be rich, fall into temptation and a snare.
II. DURING HIS RESIDENCE IN SODOM. Preserved from the general contagion. A bold reprover of abominations. But one circumstance in this history is very remarkable. The very end for which Lot was induced to fix his residence at Sodom, was entirely defeated. Alas! how can we expect to prosper, when the love of gain is our principle? The Lord will, in mercy, disappoint His children, and bring them into trials to preserve them from apostacy. Behold Lot a stranger to comfort in Sodom. Grieved with observing the conduct of the wicked, as well as hated and persecuted by them! And what would avail him the fruitfulness of the soil?
III. AFTER HIS DEPARTURE FROM SODOM. He who was vexed with the filthy conversation of the wicked, fell into the most abominable wickedness indeed. This proves two things–
1. When we do stand, it is by the power of God alone: to Him therefore we must ascribe all the excellence and perseverance of His people. Even Paul, in his most advanced state, is nothing: Not I, but the grace of God which was with me.
2. When we are not upheld by Him, no place is secure; and any temptation, how small soever, is enough to overcome as. What other expedient, then, is left us, but,
(1) To be humbled under a sense of our great depravity and abominable corruptions. Instead of censuring the conduct of Lot, let us look into our own hearts, and we shall find abundant cause for humiliation. We are encouraged, however,
(2) To apply to the blood of sprinkling for its cleansing influence, and that we may appear before God with joy and confidence; having washed our robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb. But still it behoves us,
(3) To watch and pray; remembering the dangers to which we are exposed, and that all our security from day to day must be in the power of God: Hold Thou me up, and I shall be safe: and I will have respect unto Thy statutes continually. (Essex Remembrancer.)
Lots choice
I. HIS CHOICE.
II. HIS MOTIVE.
1. Not the expectation of better religious advantages.
2. Not the hope of benefiting others.
3. Evidently to advance his worldly interests.
III. WHAT HE GAINED. fit home in Sodom.
IV. WHAT HE LOST.
1. The helpful influence of Christian fellowship.
2. Moral tone in character–evidently on the downgrade.
3. His happiness.
4. His property; first in war, then by fire.
5. All of his adherents, and part of his own family, in the final destruction of Sodom. (The Homiletic Review.)
Abrams generosity and Lots selfishness
I. THE GENEROUS OFFER.
1. Abram was a peace maker.
2. Abram was unselfish.
3. Abram was patient.
II. THE SELFISH CHOICE.
1. Lot was self-seeking.
2. Lot was worldly-minded.
3. Lot was hasty in his choice.
III. THE LARGE BLESSING. (W. S. Smith, B. D.)
Lots unwise choice
1. Good men may be too hasty and solicitous for worldly advantage–as Lot.
2. The lust of the eye, covetous desire may misguide gracious souls sometimes in their choice.
3. Pleasant fruitful possessions on earth are apt to take up too much the care of the saints.
4. The pleasantest habitations are not always the best: if God grow angry.
5. God spares not to destroy the choicest places where sin abounds (Gen 13:10).
6. Good men may be too selfish. He offers not Abram the choice.
7. Gods own left to their choice, may choose and possess the worst portion.
8. Brethren may be parted by choice of distinct portions, when ordered by God to higher ends (Gen 13:11). (G. Hughes, B. D.)
Lessons
1. Grace makes a soul sit down contented with its promised portion. So did Abram.
2. The promised portion with all its inconveniences, is better than the most pleasant with sin.
3. Good souls may sometimes sit down with content in large and pleasant places without God.
4. Saints sometimes may meet with an hell, where they look for a paradise; so did Lot.
5. It is a soul blemish, for Gods servants to covet fruitful places, though never so sinful (Gen 13:12).
6. Fruitful places are apt to have the foulest sinners.
7. The excess and height of sin is in obstinate opposition to Jehovah.
8. Jehovah will make known such to be sinners to the purpose and brand them, as here Sodom is notorious to all ages (Gen 13:13). (G. Hughes, B. D.)
Christian worldliness
In the expression Christian worldliness there may be considered by some to be a formal contradiction in terms. But it is the plain epitaph written over the historical grave of one of the best known and worst reputed characters in the Scriptures.
1. To begin with, LET US ACCEPT THE ANNOUNCEMENT THAT THIS KINSMAN OF ABRAM WAS AN OLD TESTAMENT CHRISTIAN. A righteous man dwelling in Sodom is so palpably out of place in our conception of propriety that he needs the word offered in extenuation, namely, that, day after day, he vexed his righteous soul with the unlawful deeds he beheld around him. We must never forget that the question of his piety as an orthodox believer in God is settled for us (2Pe 2:7-8). But now, with all this generous notion of him, it muss be calmly acknowledged that Lot was a very poor Christian.
2. In the second place, find an instant explanation of the failure; LOT WAS A MERCENARY CHRISTIAN. The very earliest inquiry is, How did he come to be in Sodom at all? We must remember that Lot did not go to Sodom directly, nor even at once. Men do not ever plunge into evil; they glide, they slide, or they drift. Lot only pitched his tent towards Sodom. He went close enough to hear how prices were ranging from day to day; he had a market for all he had to barter; there was gossip among his neighbours; oh, it was a good, nice place, not so very wicked, and always so lively! This is the way of the world, and that is the way of worldly believers now in the New Testament church. They make compromises with a very easy conscience. They do not go straight into wrong; they pitch their tents towards it. Men fall, said Guizot, on the side toward which they lean.
3. Observe, in the third place, THAT LOT WAS SOON EVIDENCED AS A BACKSLIDING CHRISTIAN. How do we know this? We notice that wherever Abram went in that wandering life of his, he set up an altar the first thing he did, and a regular service of worship made him known as a follower of Jehovah. A careful search will fail to reveal that Lot ever did anything to cause remark in this direction. The story of the life of that group of sons and sons-in-law is just downward, downward, as they grew depraved more and more in tastes, capabilities, and principles. First, they walked in the counsel of the ungodly; next, they were found to stand in the way of sinners; then they began to sit in the seat of the scornful. And the one great commonplace lesson for us to learn is this: even a believer who neglects his religious duty is moving forward in sin.
4. But pass on; for we need, in the fourth place, to look at LOT AS A SERIOUSLY UNHAPPY CHRISTIAN. He vexed his righteous soul there from day to day, in seeing and hearing the unlawful deeds of those indescribably vicious people; he detested their filthy conversation. Now, I know you will give me full sympathy when I say I am really glad this patriarch had a miserable time. I wish it had been worse. It is the only evidence we get of his sincerity as a child of God.
5. Once more; you are ready, in the fifth place, to find in this man LOT A MOST INEFFECTIVE CHRISTIAN. When you discover how worldly a man has become, you are not at all surprised to see that his religious usefulness is destroyed. So slight was the influence of this patriarch over those who knew him best, that even when he had received a visit from the angels sent from God in heaven, and came forth trembling and frightened to tell them that the city was soon to be destroyed, they jeered at him for a coward, and laughed at him for a fool. It was clear to them that the less he said about his interviews with God, the safer it would be for his credit; they thought he was joking.
6. It is somewhat cheering now, in the sixth place, to look upon Lot as A TRULY SAVED CHRISTIAN. And yet we are forced to go over into the New
Testament passage to get our proof; read again the text of Peter. This shows, not only that Lot was saved, but that his salvation, so graciously achieved, was of so narrow a sort that it could be given as one of the extreme examples of Divine mercy towards the undeserving; and that it must be taken in connection with the fact that all the inhabitants of the wicked city, out of which he was so hurriedly rushed, were turned into ashes. Furthermore, this passage shows that, while the Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly, He knows how also to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished. One thing is absolutely clear; he never could have been saved in Sodom. The turning point in his career was reached when Sodom was set on fire. (C. S. Robinson, D. D.)
The importance of a choice
We have seldom the choice put before us so dramatically and sharply; but it is as really presented to each. There is the shameless cynicism of the men who avowedly only ask the question, Will it pay? But there are subtler forms which affect us all. It is the standing temptation of Americans and Englishmen alike to apply a money standard to everything, to adopt courses of action of which the only recommendation is that they promote getting on in the world. Men who call themselves Christians select schools for their children, or professions for their boys, or marriages for their daughters, down in Sodom, because it will give them a lift in life which they would not get up in the starved pastures at Bethel, with nobody but Abram and his like to associate with. If the earnestness with which men pursue an end is to be taken as any measure of its importance in their eyes, it certainly does not look much as if modern average Christians did believe that it was of more moment to be united to God, and to be growing like Him, than to secure a good big share of earthly possessions. Tried by the test of conduct, their faith in getting on is a great deal deeper than their faith in getting up. But if our religion does not make us put the world beneath our feet, and count all things but loss that we may win Christ, we had better ask ourselves whether our religion is any better than Lots, which was second hand, and was much more imitation of Abram than obedience to God. Let teaches us that material good may tempt and conquer, even after it has been overcome. His early life had been heroic; in his young enthusiasm, he had thrown in his portion with Abram in his great venture. He had not been thinking of his flocks when he left Haran. Probably, as I have just said, he was a good deal galvanized into imitation; but still, he had chosen the better part. But now he has tired of a pilgrims life. There are men who cut down the thorns, and have the seed sown; but thorns are tenacious of life, and quick growing, and so they spread over the field and choke the seed. It is easier to take some one bold step, than to keep true through life to its spirit. Youth contemns, but too often middle-age worships, worldly success. The world tightens its grasp as we grow older, and Lot and Demas teach us that it is hard to keep for a lifetime on the heights. Faith, strong and over renewed by communion, can do it; nothing else can. Lots history teaches what comes of setting the world first, and Gods kingdom second. For one thing, the association with it is sure to get closer. Lot began with choosing the plain; then he crept a little nearer, and pitched his tent towards Sodom; next time we hear of him he is living in the city, and mixed up inextricably with its people. The first false step leads on to connections unforeseen, from which the man would have shrunk in horror, if he had been told he would make them. Once on the incline, time and gravity will settle how far down we go. (A. Maclaren, D. D.)
Abraham and Lot
1. Mark, on the one hand, the self-sacrifice manifested by Abraham, and, on the other, the selfishness by which Lot was characterized.
2. But, as another point of contrast, notice how Abraham took a long look forward, while Lot chose simply for the immediate future. He that believeth shall not make haste. Whosoever will save his life shall lose it; and whosoever will lose his life for My sake shall find it.
3. Note, finally, the contrast in the after career of the two men. From this point on, there is evident a gradual process of deterioration in Lot. Toward Sodom soon became in Sodom. In Sodom soon developed into matrimonial alliances between the members of his family and the Sodomites. Then last of all, and worst of all, his own moral nature was hardened; the womanhood of his daughters was dishonoured; and the closing incidents of his life were such that we gladly draw a veil over their enormity, and sigh to think that, after so fair a morning, his sun went down behind so dark a cloud. But while Lot deteriorated, Abraham advanced. That which marked Lots point of departure from the right course was a milestone that indicated new progress in Abraham. The decision which he made over this dispute was another step in that upward ladder of self-conquest on the topmost round of which he stood when he laid Isaac upon the altar. It was an important decision for both, yet it was all over a very ordinary and everyday occurrence. We are continually having to make similar decisions in our common lives, and always we are tested by them. It is a very solemn question how we have stood such tests; and if we want to stand them as Abraham did, we must be partakers of Abrahams faith; for that faith, as we have seen, animated the patriarch, not only in such great things as the leaving of his country and the sacrifice of his son, but also the actions of his life in his intercourse with his fellow men, (W. M. Taylor, D. D.)
Lots choice
I. A CHOICE WITHOUT CONSULTING GOD.
II. A CHOICE WHICH DEPRIVED HIM OF A GOOD MANS COMPANY. Every worldly-minded man forfeits–
1. The sympathy of good men.
2. The assistance of the good.
III. A CHOICE ANTAGONISTIC TO THE GOOD MORAL TRAINING OF HIS FAMILY. Moral culture ought to be of greater importance in our estimation than wealth.
1. Because it is of higher value.
2. Because it elevates the man.
3. Because its beneficial results are more certain.
IV. A CHOICE WHICH EXPOSED HIM TO MANY DANGERS.
1. The danger of his sympathy with the good being narrowed.
2. The danger of looking upon sin in a false light.
3. The danger of losing his own soul. (Homilist.)
Lot
I. THE EVIL WHICH FOLLOWS AN ILL-ADVISED STEP.
1. That there are constantly before us opportunities of selection.
2. That that is not the most advantageous which at first sight appears so.
3. That any course entered upon without consulting the guiding of Providence is likely to lead us astray.
II. THE NATURAL TENDENCY OF AN UNRENEWED HEART. Looking to what is pleasant.
III. THE MERCY OR DIVINE PROVIDENCE. Lot brought trouble on himself, but God did not desert him.
IV. THE INCOMPATIBILITY OF PIETY: WITH SIN. (Homilist.)
Avarice
Avarice has ruined more men than prodigality. (Colton.)
Avarice hindered in mercy
It is sometimes of Gods mercy that men in the eager pursuit of worldly aggrandisement are baffled; for they are very like a train going down an inclined plane–putting on the brake is not pleasant, but it keeps the car on the track. (H. W. Beecher.)
Lessons from Lot
I. THE EVILS WHICH MAY FOLLOW FROM ONE WRONG STEP IN LIFE. There are certain matters in relation to which our determinations must have special importance.
1. The choice of a place of residence.
2. The choice of a trade or profession. What is likely to be the moral and spiritual effect of this pursuit on me?
3. The choice of a life partner.
II. THE STEALTHY INSIDIOUSNESS OF SIN. There is a wide difference between the happy household that used to join with Abrams in sacrifice at the Bethel altar and that which we read of in Sodom on the night before the destruction of that city. That divergence was not caused by any single volcanic upheaval of passion, but by gradual defection. We have the key to it in the question addressed by Lot to the angel, when, asking to be allowed to flee into Zoar, he said, Is it not a little one? Depend upon it, that was not the first time Lot reasoned in such a way. Most likely he did so on the very occasion of this first fatal choice. He saw Sodom in the plain, but he said within himself, I need not go into the city, I can always keep myself secluded, and promising this to himself he pitched toward Sodom. But after a time he became accustomed to the men of the place. He saw many advantages in the protection of their walls, as compared with his defenceless nomad life. Thus the temptation to go into the city, which he would at first have repelled from him with scorn, was entertained, and concerning it also the old argument was used–No doubt the city is wicked, but I need not mingle with the inhabitants, and when I come to balance the matter I must not let a little thing like that prejudice blind me to my own interests; and in this way he went into Sodom. In a similar manner he came to allow intermarriages between the families of the city and his own. All this illustrates the deceitfulness of sin. No one ever became very wicked all at once. The descent of the road that leadeth to destruction is made in single steps, and these not on a clear and well-marked staircase, but on an incline which seems to be but little out of the horizontal line. Be on your guard against the first temptation, and whenever an evil pleads with you, saying, Am I not a little one?
III. THE NECESSITY OF WATCHFULNESS AGAINST SIN THROUGHOUT ONES EARTHLY LIFE. Every time of life has its peculiar dangers. There are, as medical men will attest, certain critical ages at which the bodily constitution seems to pass through a severe ordeal, so that it either yields in death, or comes out unharmed; and what the issue shall be depends, under God, very much on what the persons daily habits have been. If he have been what is called a fast, free liver, there is little likelihood that he will weather the storm; but if he have been moderate in all things, there is the greater probability that he will round the cape. Now it is similar in spiritual life. There are seasons of greater danger than others to the best interests of the soul. Youth is a perilous season, but the noon and afternoon of life are beset with dangers as great as its morning, and our only safety lies in perpetual vigilance. It is pitiful to think how often character deteriorates in later life. You cannot read of Noah without reflecting that the glorious reputation of a long career may be thrown into shadow at the last by a besetting sin. You cannot study the life of David without remarking how the purity of his character is eclipsed by the darkness of a sin which was that, not of a youth, but of a man past the meridian of his age. Ye men of middle life, and you who are verging toward old age, be on your guard. Remember Lot! and beware of allowing your conscience to be blunted with iniquity. Above all, beware of that seductive sin which is the parent of so many more–intemperance. (W. M. Taylor, D. D.)
Lots loss
Lot lost–
1. The society of his best friend.
2. His intense hatred toward wickedness.
3. A due regard for the spiritual welfare of his family.
4. Religious influence over men.
5. His property.
6. Influence over his own children.
7. His children.
8. His wife.
9. His good name. (John A. Ewalt.)
Lots lot
A rough shell may hold a pearl, remarks Dean Law. There may be silver amongst much dross. Life may exist within the stem when leaves are seared and branches dry. The spring may yet be deep, while waters trickle scantily. A spark may live beneath much rubbish. So many heirs of glory live ingloriously. Heaven is their purchased rest, but their footsteps seem to be downward. In their hearts there is incorruptible seed, but sorry weeds are intermixed. They are translated into the kingdom of grace, but still the flesh is weak. (W. Adamson.)
Godless gain
1. A godly man in a rural village in Suffolk, where for generations the people had been highly favoured with a succession of earnest winners of souls to Christ, tempted by the offer of higher wages and greater scope in London, left his home and took up his residence in an ungodly neighbourhood in the East End. But the higher wages and greater scope were very quickly outweighed by the corruption of his children, etc.
2. Even religious men, says Robertson, sometimes settle in a foreign country, notoriously licentious, merely that they may increase their wealth. But very soon they find to their cost that God has terrible modes of retribution. In the choice of homes, of friends, and in alliances, he who selects according to the desires of the flesh lays up in store for himself many troubles and anxieties. Such was Lots experience.
3. How frequently, remarks Blunt, have men found that their greatest disquietudes and troubles have been the fruits of their own selfish selectings. Often that vale of Siddim which they have most anxiously coveted, has been the wellspring from whence has flowed the bitter waters of sorrow and distress. Far better, if God tries us by putting a blank paper into our hands, to fill in our free choice, humbly to refer the choice back to Him. (W. Adamson.)
A commendable choice
Mahomet, the false prophet, on viewing the pleasurable and delicious situation of Damascus, would not enter the city, but turned away from it with this exclamation: There is but one paradise for man; and I am determined to have mine in the other world. Mutatis mutandis–making the necessary changes of our position–how becoming for a Christian is such language in time of temptation. (Bishop Horne.)
The great mistake of Lots life
He is the type of that very large class of men who have but one rule for determining them at the turning points of life. He was swayed solely by the consideration of worldly advantage. He has nothing deep, nothing high in him. He recognizes no duty to Abram, no gratitude, no modesty; he has no perception of spiritual relations, no sense that God should have something to say in the partition of the land. Lot may be acquitted of a good deal which at first sight one is prompted to lay to his charge, but he cannot be acquitted of showing an eagerness to better himself, regardless of all considerations but the promise of wealth afforded by the fertility of the Jordan valley. He saw a quick though dangerous road to wealth. There seemed a certainty of success in his earthly calling, a risk only of moral disaster. He shut his eyes to the risk that he might grasp the wealth; and so doing, ruined both himself and his family. The situation is one which is ceaselessly repeated. To men in business or in the cultivation of literature or art, or in one of the professions, there are presented opportunities of attaining a better position by cultivating the friendship or identifying oneself with the practice of men whose society is not in itself desirable. We fancy perhaps that to refuse the companionship of any class of men is pharisaic; that we have no business to condemn the attitude towards the Church, or the morality, or the style of living adopted by any class of men among us. This is the mere cant of liberalism. We do not condemn persons who suffer from smallpox, but a smallpox hospital would be about the last place we should choose for a residence. Or possibly we imagine we shall be able to carry some better influences into the society we enter. A vain imagination; the motive for choosing the society has already sapped our power for good. Many of the errors of worldly men only reveal their most disastrous consequences in the second generation. Like some virulent diseases they have a period of incubation. Lots family grew up in a very different atmosphere from that which had nourished his own youth in Abrams tents. An adult and robust Englishman can withstand the climate of India; but his children who are born in it cannot. And the position in society which has been gained in middle life by the carefully and hardily trained child of a God-fearing household, may not very visibly damage his own character, but may yet be absolutely fatal to the morality of his children. Lot may have persuaded himself he chose the dangerous prosperity of Sodom mainly for the sake of his children; but in point of fact he had better have seen them die of starvation in the most barren and parched desolation. And the parent who disregards conscience and chooses wealth or position, fancying that thus he benefits his children, will find to his life-long sorrow that he has entangled them in unimagined temptations. But the man who makes Lots choice not only does a great injury to his children, but cuts himself off from all that is best in life. We are safe to say that after leaving Abrams tents Lot never again enjoyed unconstrainedly happy days. The men born and brought up in Sodom were possibly happy after their kind and in their fashion; but Lot was not. His soul was daily vexed. You cannot forget the thoughts you once had, the friendships you once delighted in, the hopes that shed brightness through all your life. You cannot blot out the ideal that once you cherished as the most animating element of your life. Every day there will be that rising in your mind which is in the sharpest contrast to the thoughts of those with whom you are associated. You will despise them for their shallow, worldly ideas and ways; but you will despise yourself still more, being conscious that what they are through ignorance and upbringing, you are in virtue of your own foolish and mean choice. There is that in you which rebels against the superficial and external measure by which they judge things, and yet you have deliberately chosen these as your associates, and can only think with heart-broken regret of the high thoughts that once visited you and the hopes you have now no means of fulfilling. (M. Dods, D. D.)
Lot the self-seeker
I. LOTS EARLY YEARS were spent in Ur of Chaldea, northeast of Damascus. His father, Haran, died while he was yet a youth of tender years, and he was placed in the family of his uncle Abraham, who appears ever to have acted towards him the part of an affectionate father; while Sarah, the wife of Abraham, is supposed to have been the sister of Lot. To have been the foster son and companion of so royal a man as Abraham was a privilege which ought to have left a stamp of distinction on the young man that no after-years could efface.
II. Let us look at LOTS CHOICE in its nature and results, and learn the character and end of the self-seeker; remembering, meanwhile, the representative character of Lot, and gathering lessons of wisdom from the ashes of his ruined hopes.
1. First, then, there was in that choice, as there ever is in the conduct of the self-seeker, a disregard of delicate moral obligations and the interests of others involved.
2. But in this choice of Lot was also a disregard of his own highest interests. He seems not to have paused to consider the effect of his decision upon his own character and future well-being. The material good in that tempting scene blinded his eyes to every other good, and to the dangers of the choice. It is related in ancient history that the inhabitants of Oenoe, a town upon a dry island in the vicinity of Athens, bestowed much labour to draw into it a river to water it and make it more fruitful. But when the work was completed and the passages were all opened, the water came rushing in so furiously that it overflowed the whole island and drowned all the people. So, in the accomplishment of their ambitious ends, men do not pause to consider contingent results: and when the channels of desire are fully open and the long looked for tide of prosperity rises, lo! its streams come rushing in with a fearful, fatal force, whelming the soul in ruin and destruction.
3. Lot may have flattered himself that he had made a capital choice; let us see what it involved.
(1) Separation from a devoted friend and benefactor. He might have remained in such proximity to Abraham as to have shared his companionship and counsel. It is a critical day for a young man when he severs his connection with the friends of his early years.
(2) He not only separated himself far from Abraham, but became the companion of the wicked Sodomites. (C. H. Payne, D. D.)
Pitching our tents towards Sodom
Alypius, a friend of St. Augustine, had a great horror of the bloody combats of gladiators, one of the favourite amusements of that age. Being urged by his companions to be a spectator of these brutal sports, he obstinately refused, and they drew him to the amphitheatre against his will. All took their seats, and the games began. Alypius resolutely shut his eyes that he might not witness the horrible spectacle. Would to God, said Augustine, he had also stopped his ears! Hearing a piercing cry, curiosity got the better of him, and he incautiously opened his eyes to see what had happened. One of the gladiators had received a dreadful wound; but no sooner had Alypius discovered the bloody stream issuing from the wretchs side, than his finer sensibilities were blunted, and he joined in the shouts and exclamations of the noisy mob about him. From that moment he was a changed man–changed for the worse; not only attending such sports himself, but urging others to do likewise. Very trifling circumstances show the bent and bias of our minds. A feather, floating on the breeze, may indicate the direction of the wind which is to determine the fate of a squadron, and involve the downfall of an empire. Something closely allied to this may be observed in the moral world. Traits of character, and prevailing tendencies of mind and heart, are distinctly marked by actions which, in themselves, are the merest trifles. When the sacred penman tells us that after Lots unwise separation from Abraham he pitched his tent toward Sodom, we discover much more in the simple statement than appears on the surface. It would be simply absurd to pass a sweeping censure upon the world, and its pursuits and pleasures; for these, within lawful limits, are well and right. No one in his senses, however, will deny that there is such a sin as worldliness, and it is one which all consistent Christians will strive to keep clear of. Worldliness, be it remembered, is determined by the spirit of our lives, rather than by the objects which occupy us. There may be much apparent conformity to the world, without any real violation of the Divine law or neglect of duty. The Lord Mayor of London, who, while presiding over the festivities of Guildhall, withdrew long enough from the scene of gaiety and splendour that he might attend family worship in his own house, was an example of a good man living in the world without yielding to evil influences or forgetting his higher obligations to God. Our daily papers often contain advertisements like this: Wanted, a boy to attend bar! It might as well read, Wanted, a boy to be ruined, body and soul. Let the bright, earnest lad, standing on the threshold of life, shun such tempting offers as this! Even the innocent pleasures of the world, if found amongst evil associations are not as the waters of the Nile, leaving, when they are gone, the germs of fertility and beauty to bud and blossom, and causing the heart to rejoice; but like those unwholesome streams, polluted by the washings of poisonous minerals, depositing the seeds of disease and death for all who taste them. It may be a question of life, or death, with us–the life, or death, of the soul–whether, in any of these ways, we have pitched our tent toward Sodom. (J. N. Norton, D. D.)
Lots choice
The well-watered plain of Jordan is a great prize for any man, and Lot has made sure of it. His estate is large, and is favoured by the sun and the clouds. Is there, then, any drawback? Read: But the men of Sodom were wicked and sinners before the Lord exceedingly. A great estate, but bad neighbours! Material glory, but moral shame! Noble landscapes, but mean men! But Lot did just what men are doing today. He made choice of a home, without making any inquiry as to the religious state of the neighbourhood. Men do not care how poor the Church is, if the farm be good. They will give up the most inspiring ministry in the world for ten feet more garden, or a paddock to feed an ass in. They will tell you that the house is roomy, the garden is large, the air is balmy, the district is genteel, and if you ask them what religious teaching they will have there, they tell you they really do not know, but must inquire! They will take away six children into a moral desert for the sake of a garden to play in: they will leave Paul or Apollos for six feet of greenhouse! Others again fix their tent where they can get the best food for the hearts life; and they sacrifice a summer house that they may now and again get a peep of heaven. (J. Parker, D. D.)
Self-choice
Lot chose for himself. He took things into his own hands, and put himself at the head of his own affairs. What became of his management we shall see presently. He asked no blessing; will the feast choke him? He sought no advice; will his wisdom mock him and torment him bitterly? He snatched at good luck; will he fall into a pit which he did not see? O my soul, make no model of this fool for thine own guidance. Perhaps his honour is but for a moment. Commit thy way unto the Lord, and choose nothing for thyself. In all thy ways acknowledge Him and He will direct thy paths. Oh rest in the Lord and wait patiently for Him. Seek not high things for thyself, nor take thy life into thine own keeping. O my soul, I charge thee live in the secret of Christs love. Walk in the way of the Lord: seek Him always with eager heart, and whether the road be long or short, rugged or plain, it will lead thee into the city where the angels are, and the Firstborn, and the loved ones who left thee long ago. (J. Parker, D. D.)
Riches or heaven?
Mrs. Jameson gives a very pretty apologue relating to St. John, which is sometimes included in a series of subjects from his life. Two young men, who had sold all their possessions to follow him, afterwards repented. He, perceiving their thoughts, sent them to gather pebbles and faggots, and on their return changed these into money and ingots of gold, saying to them, Take back your riches, and enjoy them on earth, as you regret having exchanged them for heaven! This story is represented on one of the windows of the cathedral at Bourges. The two young men stand before St. John, with a heap of gold on one side and a heap of stones and faggots on the other.
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 10. Like the land of Egypt, as thou comest unto Zoar.] There is an obscurity in this verse which Houbigant has removed by the following translation: Ea autem, priusquam Sodomam Gornorrhamque Do minus delerit, erat, qua itur Segor, tota irrigua, quasi hortus Domini, et quasi terra AEgypti. “But before the Lord had destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, it was, as thou goest to Zoar, well watered, like the garden of the Lord, and like the land of Egypt.” As paradise was watered by the four neighbouring streams, and as Egypt was watered by the annual overflowing of the Nile; so were the plains of the Jordan, and all the land on the way to Zoar, well watered and fertilized by the overflowing of the Jordan.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
The plain of Jordan, a great plain so called, because there the pleasant river Jordan divided itself into divers little streams or rivulets, which having no visible outlet into the sea, by degrees, and in several places, insinuated themselves into the earth, which made it very fruitful and excellent for Lots purpose. But this lovely plain was afterwards transformed by Divine vengeance into a filthy lake or dead sea, Gen 19:24.
Even as the garden of the Lord; i.e. either,
1. Like that famous garden of Eden which God himself planted, Gen 2:8. The like comparison we meet with Isa 51:3; Eze 28:13; 31:8. Or,
2. Like some excellent garden; for excellent things are thus expressed, as, the host of God, 1Ch 12:22, i.e. a great host; cedars of God, Psa 80:10.
Like the land of Egypt, a land of eminent fertility by the influence of that great river Nilus, anciently celebrated as the granary of other countries. See Eze 31:1-18.
Unto Zoar, i.e. to Bela, Gen 14:2, afterwards called Zoar, Gen 19:22, and here so called by a prolepsis. But these words are not to be joined with the words immediately going before, as if Egypt was commended for its fertility in that part of it from which men go to Zoar, but with the more remote words, and the sense is, as the words of the text are transplaced and rendered by some, that the plain of Jordan was (before the Lord destroyed it and its cities Sodom and Gomorrah) watered every where, even to Zoar; or, even until thou comest, i.e. till a man come, to Zoar, i.e. all the way which leads from the place where Abram then was to Zoar. And such transpositions are not unusual, as we shall see hereafter.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
10. Lot lifted up hiseyesTravellers say that from the top of this hill, a little”to the east of Beth-el” [Ge12:8], they can see the Jordan, the broad meadows on either bank,and the waving line of verdure which marks the course of the stream.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And Lot lifted up his eyes,…. He immediately fell in with Abram’s proposal, but had not the ingenuity to return back the choice to Abram which he gave him, but took the advantage of it; nor did he show any uneasiness or unwillingness to part from Abram, though so near a relation, and so wise and good a man, and by whose means greatly he had obtained his riches; but without giving himself any concern about this, he at once cast about in his mind where to make his choice; he considered within himself which was the best part of the country, and most convenient for his flocks and herds, and where he was most likely to increase his substance; for this phrase chiefly has respect to the eyes of the understanding, he made use of, consulted with himself with his rational powers what was fittest to be done; unless we can suppose him situated on some considerable eminence, from whence he could have a view of the whole country he made choice of, as follows:
and beheld all the plain of Jordan, that it [was] well watered every where; a large plain, full of rich pasturage, which had its name from the river Jordan, which by various windings and turnings ran through it, and which at harvest time overflowed its banks, and greatly contributed to the richness of the soil:
before the Lord destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah: as he afterwards did by fire from heaven, and then that part of the plain on which those cities stood was turned into a sulphurous lake:
[even] as the garden of the Lord, like the land of Egypt; as any most excellent garden that is full of plants and trees, well watered, and well cultivated, and taken care of; as things most excellent are sometimes expressed by having the name of God, or the Lord, added to them, as the “cedars of God”, c. or as the garden of Eden, which was planted by the Lord, abounding with all kind of trees, and was well watered by a river running through it: and some think that the plain of Jordan, and the parts thereabout, were the real garden of Eden wherefore one learned w man takes the “as” here not to be a note of similitude, but of reality, and not merely comparative but causal, giving a reason why it was so watered, being the garden God; so that the plain was not like unto, but really was the garden of Eden: and another observes x, that the words should be rendered, “so was the garden of the Lord, as the land of Egypt”, and that the repetition of the similitude only makes one comparison, and not two; not that the plain of Jordan is first compared with the garden of the Lord, and then with the land of Egypt; but the plain of Jordan, or garden of the Lord, is only compared with the land of Egypt; and with that undoubtedly it is compared, it being once a year overflowed by the river Jordan, as the land of Egypt was with the Nile, and was a most delightful and fruitful spot like that:
as thou comest unto Zoar; which is not to be connected with the land of Egypt, for Zoar was at a great distance from Egypt, but with the plain of Jordan, well watered everywhere till you come to Zoar, at the skirts of it, and which is by an anticipation called Zoar; for at this time, when Abram and Lot parted, it was called Bela, and afterwards, on another account, had the name of Zoar; see Ge 14:2.
w Nic. Abram. Pharus Ver. Test. p. 59. x Texelii Phoenix, l. 3. c. 7. p. 262.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Lot chose what was apparently the best portion of the land, the whole district of the Jordan, or the valley on both sides of the Jordan from the Lake of Gennesareth to what was then the vale of Siddim. For previous to the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, this whole country was well watered, “ as the garden of Jehovah, ” the garden planted by Jehovah in paradise, and “ as Egypt, ” the land rendered so fertile by the overflowing of the Nile, “ in the direction of Zoar.” Abram therefore remained in the land of Canaan, whilst Lot settled in the cities of the plain of the Jordan, and tented (pitched his tents) as far as Sodom. In anticipation of the succeeding history (Gen 19), it is mentioned here (Gen 13:13), that the inhabitants of Sodom were very wicked, and sinful before Jehovah.
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
| Lot’s Removal to Sodom. | B. C. 1917. |
10 And Lot lifted up his eyes, and beheld all the plain of Jordan, that it was well watered every where, before the LORD destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, even as the garden of the LORD, like the land of Egypt, as thou comest unto Zoar. 11 Then Lot chose him all the plain of Jordan; and Lot journeyed east: and they separated themselves the one from the other. 12 Abram dwelled in the land of Canaan, and Lot dwelled in the cities of the plain, and pitched his tent toward Sodom. 13 But the men of Sodom were wicked and sinners before the LORD exceedingly.
We have here the choice that Lot made when he parted from Abram. Upon this occasion, one would have expected, 1. That he should have expressed an unwillingness to part from Abram, and that, at least, he should have done it with reluctancy. 2. That he should have been so civil as to have remitted the choice back again to Abram. But we find not any instance of deference or respect to his uncle in the whole management. Abram having offered him the choice, without compliment he accepted it, and made his election. Passion and selfishness make men rude. Now, in the choice which Lot made, we may observe,
I. How much he had an eye to the goodness of the land. He beheld all the plain of Jordan, the flat country in which Sodom stood, that it was admirably well watered every where (and perhaps the strife had been about water, which made him particularly fond of that convenience), and so Lot chose all that plain,Gen 13:10; Gen 13:11. That valley, which was like the garden of Eden itself, now yielded him a most pleasant prospect. It was, in his eye, beautiful for situation, the joy of the whole earth; and therefore he doubted not but that it would yield him a comfortable settlement, and that in such a fruitful soil he should certainly thrive, and grow very rich: and this was all he looked at. But what came of it? Why, the next news we hear of him is that he is in the briars among them, he and his carried captive. While he lived among them, he vexed his righteous soul with their conversation, and never had a good day with them, till, at last, God fired the town over his head, and forced him to the mountain for safety who chose the plain for wealth and pleasure. Note, Sensual choices are sinful choices, and seldom speed well. Those who in choosing relations, callings, dwellings, or settlements are guided and governed by the lusts of the flesh, the lusts of the eye, or the pride of life, and consult not the interests of their souls and their religion, cannot expect God’s presence with them, nor his blessing upon them, but are commonly disappointed even in that which they principally aimed at, and miss of that which they promised themselves satisfaction in. In all our choices this principle should overrule us, That that is best for us which is best for our souls.
II. How little he considered the wickedness of the inhabitants: But the men of Sodom were wicked, v. 13. Note, 1. Though all are sinners, yet some are greater sinners than others. The men of Sodom were sinners of the first magnitude, sinners before the Lord, that is, impudent daring sinners; they were so to a proverb. Hence we read of those that declare their sin as Sodom, they hide it not, Isa. iii. 9. 2. That some sinners are the worse for living in a good land. So the Sodomites were: for this was the iniquity of Sodom, pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness; and all these were supported by the great plenty their country afforded, Ezek. xvi. 49. Thus the prosperity of fools destroys them. 3. That God often gives great plenty to great sinners. Filthy Sodomites dwell in a city, in a fruitful plain, while faithful Abram and his pious family dwell in tents upon the barren mountains. 4. When wickedness has come to the height, ruin is not far off. Abounding sins are sure presages of approaching judgments. Now Lot’s coming to dwell among the Sodomites may be considered, (1.) As a great mercy to them, and a likely means of bringing them to repentance; for now they had a prophet among them and a preacher of righteousness, and, if they had hearkened to him, they might have been reformed, and the ruin prevented. Note, God sends preachers, before he sends destroyers; for he is not willing that any should perish. (2.) As a great affliction to Lot, who was not only grieved to see their wickedness (2Pe 2:7; 2Pe 2:8), but was molested and persecuted by them, because he would not do as they did. Note, It has often been the vexatious lot of good men to live among wicked neighbours, to sojourn in Mesech (Ps. cxx. 5), and it cannot but be the more grievous, if, as Lot here, they have brought it upon themselves by an unadvised choice.
Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary
10. And Lot lifted up his eyes. As the equity of Abram was worthy of no little praise; so the inconsideration of Lot, which Moses here describes, is deserving of censure. He ought rather to have contended with his uncle for the palm of modesty; and this the very order of nature suggested; but just as if he had been, in every respect, the superior, he usurps for himself the better portion; and makes choice of that region which seemed the more fertile and agreeable. And indeed it necessarily follows, that whosoever is too eagerly intent upon his own advantage, is wanting in humanity towards others. There can be no doubt that this injustice would pierce the mind of Abram; but he silently bore it, lest by any means, he should give occasion of new offense. And thus ought we entirely to act, whenever we perceive those with whom we are connected, to be not sufficiently mindful of their duty: otherwise there will be no end of tumults. When the neighboring plain of Sodom is compared to the paradise of God, many interpreters explain it as simply meaning, that it was excellent, and in the highest degree fertile; because the Hebrews call anything excellent, divine. I however think, that the place where Adam resided at the beginning, is pointed out. For Moses does not propose a general similitude, but says, ‘that region was watered;’ just as he related the same thing respecting the first abode of man; namely, that a river, divided into four parts, watered it; he also adds the same thing respecting a part of Egypt. Whence it more clearly appears, that in one particular only, this place is compared with two others.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
CRITICAL NOTES.
Gen. 13:10. Jordan] The first reference to this riverthe only one in the country which flows through the entire summer.Plain of Jordan] Lit. the circle of Jordanthe environs. He saw not, indeed, the tropical fertility and copious streams along its course. But he knew of its fame as the garden of Eden, as of the valley of the Nile. No crust of salt, no volcanic convulsions had as yet blasted its verdure, or touched the secure civilisation of the early Phnician settlements which had struck root within its deep abyss (Stanley).Before the Lord destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah] The face of the country was altered by the destruction of these cities.Garden of the Lord] Heb. Garden of Jehovah, i.e., Eden.Like the land of Egypt as thou comest unto Zoar] Houbigant translates, Before the Lord destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, it was all, as thou goest to Zoar, well watered, even as the garden of the Lord, and as the land of Egypt. The name of the city at this time was Bela, and was called Zoar by anticipation.
Gen. 13:11. Journeyed east] By this we might suppose that he took the right hand, according to the offer (Gen. 13:9); but the Hebrews, in naming the points of the compass, supposed the face to be turned towards sun-rising; and the right hand would be the south.And they separated themselves one from the other] Heb. A man from his brother.
Gen. 13:12. Land of Canaan] That portion of Palestine between the Jordan and the Mediterranean sea, excluding the valley of the Jordan.Pitched his tent toward Sodom] He advanced towards it till he came near, but was probably prevented from entering by the well-known character of its inhabitants.
Gen. 13:13. Wicked sinners before the Lord exceedingly] Onkelos reads, But the men of Sodom were unrighteous with their riches, and most vile in their bodies before the Lord exceedingly.
MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.Gen. 13:10-13
A WORLDLY CHOICE
The character of Lot, though it has many faults, has a bright side. He was unquestionably a righteous man, in whom conscience had been awakened to a sense of what was pure and just, for he was vexed with the filthy conversation of the wicked. He, too, had left his fathers house, and clave to Abram in his faith during all their wanderings through the land, and in the journey to Egypt and the return. But Lots besetting sin was worldliness. This great evil lies as a dark shade upon his character and spreads itself throughout the whole of his history. It is probable that the worldly spirit grew stronger within him during his sojourn amidst the luxury and pride of Egypt, for those forms of temptation are the most dangerous which answer to our dispositions. In accordance with the prevailing fault in his character we find that Lot makes a worldly choice. That such was its nature is clear from the following facts
I. It was determined by external advantages. He lifted up his eyes, and beheld all the plain of Jordan, even as the garden of the Lord, like the land of Egypt (Gen. 13:10). The beauty and luxuriance of the place have become proverbial. It drew together vast numbers of men who had grown rich upon its productions, and built themselves into prosperous nations. Here was a strong temptation to such a man as Lot, whose chief desire was to increase his wealth, little heeding how he might thereby place his spiritual character in peril. The best and purest motives were weak in him. He was guided by no spiritual principle, and therefore shaped his course by external advantages. Such conduct is condemned by religion.
1. External advantages are not the chief end of life. Lot was guided in his choice by the beauty of the country, the richness of the pasturage, and the prosperity of the inhabitants. It is not wrong to employ means for increasing our wealth, or to take delight in the natural beauties of the world. Religion does not oblige us to seek the leanest pastures and to content ourselves with desolation and barrenness. But when we make worldly profit, comfort, and external beauty our chief aim, we sin against Godwe miss what is the great end of life. Wealth is not the one thing needful; and he cannot be a religious man who makes this his great aim in life, having no regard to what is of far higher importance, the peace of his conscience arising from a sense of duty done towards God and man. The chief end of life is to glorify God, and to prepare our souls for the future state. All else should be subordinated to this. We are placed here, not to serve our own selfish interests at any cost, but to do our duty and to look for our place and reward from God.
2. External advantages are not the true happiness of life. True happiness is the very life of life, which all human experience teaches us does not consist in the abundance of the things which a man possesseth. How many are unhappy in the midst of outward splendour and the means of enjoyment! Some faults of disposition, the selfishness which has grown up with increasing wealth, or a sad burden resting upon the conscience, have dulled all enjoyment, and things that were made to give delight languish in the eye. The greatest happiness in life is found in doing deeds of kindness and good will to others, and in serving God. He who, for the sake of growing rich, refuses to follow that course of life which is most in accordance with his natural ability and tastes, and where he could be most useful to his fellow-men, cannot expect to have any real happiness. He is out of frame with his circumstances, and true enjoyment is impossible. Peace of conscience, too, must be considered. If that makes a void in the heart, all the good things in this world cannot fill it up. How little does the true joy of life depend upon what is outward! Good men, even in the midst of privation and suffering, have felt a peace above all earthly dignities.
3. External advantages, when considered by themselves, tend to corrupt the soul. If we choose our path in life by these and not from higher motives, we nourish our selfishness, we weaken the moral principle, and our spiritual sensibility becomes dull. We come under the influence of a base materialism, which tends to efface the true glory of life and to degrade man to the level of the brute.
II. It was ungenerous. With a noble generosity, Abram offered to Lot his choice of the whole land. If Lots finer feelings had not been blunted by his selfishness, he would have passed the compliment to Abram, and declined the offer. But he grasps eagerly at the chance of wealth. In his own opinion he may have regarded himself as a shrewd man, one who would not let the main chance slip out of any weak compliance with the claims of his moral nature. But it showed a mean spirit to take advantage thus of the generosity of a friend. There are many such who take delight in generous natures only for the sake of what they can gain. Lot ought to have caught the spirit of his kinsman, and to have answered in the same dignified and noble manner. But he had too mean a soul for this. Such selfish men are the most unsatisfactory of friends. They fail us in the hour of trial. Such intense worldliness unfits men for all the duties of friendship.
III. It showed too little regard for spiritual interests. The men of Sodom were wicked, and sinners before the Lord exceedingly. As this is mentioned in connection with Lots choice, it is most likely that he was aware of the fact. The wickedness of this people was known to him, yet he determines to run the risk. The sins of the people of Sodom were of more than common vileness and grossness, and they were nourished to that moral rankness by the very luxuriance of the soil, which formed so attractive a feature in the eyes of Lot. The prophet Ezekiel tells us how the vices of Sodom were to be traced to three causespride, fulness of head, and abundance of idleness (Eze. 16:49). All these evils were fully known to Lot when he made his choice; yet, blinded by the love of gain, he rushed into their midst. How great the evil to which he was exposing himself!
1. The loss of religious privileges. No worship of God was established in Sodom. No faith which had any claim to be called a religion was possible in the midst of such sensuality. It was a dangerous experiment to enter a community having no religious privileges, and where there was not even the chance of introducing them. It must be a hardy plant of piety which can thrive in such a soil. Lot may have quieted his conscience by the thought that he could be a means of blessing to the inhabitants of Sodom. But his selfishness, which would only have been increased by his dwelling among such people, would have enfeebled every effort to do good. No man intent only on worldly gain can be a missionary.
2. The contagion of evil example. The moral atmosphere of Sodom was so tainted as to expose weak virtue to the risk of the foulest infection. Dangerous it was even to the strong. He who goes into such a society without a sufficient call of duty and great strength of principle, runs the risk of being himself turned to ungodliness.
SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS ON THE VERSES
Gen. 13:10. If Lot had possessed a higher moral instinct he would have replied to Abrams proposal at once. He would have no need to look round upon the land. His was the cautious deliberation of a selfish man, who was determined to secure his own profit.
Lot judged by sight and sense, according to the worlds judgment. The worldly man is under the tyranny of appearances.
But how does young Lot conduct himself on this occasion? He did not, nor could he object to the generous proposal that was made to him; nor did he choose Abrams situation, which though lovely in the one to offer, would have been very unlovely in the other to have accepted. In the choice he made he appears to have regarded temporal advantages only, and entirely to have overlooked the danger of his situation with regard to religion. He lifted up his eyes, and beheld a well-watered plain; and on this he fixed his choice, though it led him to take up his abode in Sodom. He viewed it, as we should say, merely with a graziers eye. He had better have been in a wilderness than there. Yet many professors of religion, in choosing situations for themselves, and for their children, continue to follow his example. We shall perceive in the sequel of this story what kind of harvest his well-watered plain produced him.(Fuller.)
The grasping worldly spirit is associated with meanness of soul, which blunts the perceptions of moral beauty.
No outward conditions, however fair and promising, will prove a paradise for a man as long as he makes it his highest good to seek his own profit. Selfishness will at length eat out the very core of his happiness. There is only one supreme good for man. To remove from the region of the means of grace for the purpose of carrying Gods truth to those who are in darkness is to be commended, and he who undertakes that work in a right spirit will find that God can make rivers to spring up in the desert. But he who wilfully leaves behind him the outward privileges of religion for the sake of gain exposes his soul to great peril. The loss of the outward ordinances of religion is not easily compensated.
He can hardly be supposed to have been ignorant of the character of the people of Sodom, for they declared their sin in the most open and unblushing manner, as if in defiance of heaven and earth; nor could he but have been aware of the tendency of evil communications to corrupt good manners. But as he seems to have left them without regret, so it would appear that he approached Sodom without fear. What benefits he was likely to losewhat dangers to incur by the step, seem not to have entered his mind. His earthly prosperity was all that engaged his thoughts, and whether the welfare of his soul was promoted or impeded he did not care. This conduct no one hesitates to condemn, yet how many are there that practically pursue the same heedless and perilous course in their great movements in life! With the single view of bettering their worldly condition they often turn their backs upon the means of grace, and, reckless of consequences, plant themselves and their families in places where Sabbaths and sanctuaries are unknown, and where they are constantly exposed to the most pernicious influences. Alas, at how dear a price are such worldly advantages purchased! Well will it be for them if their goodly plains and fields do not finally yield such a harvest of sorrow as was gathered by hapless Lot.(Bush.)
In the most marked features of his sin, Lot is punished.
1. For his worldly-mindedness. He failed to gain that which he had set his heart on, for in the battle with the kings he suffered the loss of all his property. They took Lot and his goods. In the destruction of Sodom he had to leave all behind, and to flee for his life.
2. For his ungenerous conduct towards Abram he is brought under frequent obligations to him. Abram rescued him from the captivity of war, and made intercession for the city where he dwelt. He was a friend to him in his poverty.
3. For his disregard of the interests of his soul, the tone of his religious character became lowered. His moral principle was weakened by the pernicious atmosphere of ungodliness around him. Both himself and his family followed religion with but a languid interestwith so weak a devotion that they were overmastered by the influences of the world. So it comes to pass that men are punished in those very things from which they expected the highest worldly advantage. This is the solemn irony of Providence.
The memory of the Garden of Eden had not yet perished from among men. All nations have had their traditions of a Golden Age, some lost Paradise.
Gen. 13:11. The selfish spirit is prompt to secure its own ends. Lot begins to choose at once, and without delay proceeds to take possession of his rich portion.
How vile is the sin of covetousness, which so dulls the conscience as to permit a man to enjoy what he has gained by an ungracious action!
The words all the plain seem to hint at the grasping disposition of Lot. Nothing less than this will satisfy him. This lust of land, the inordinate desire to add house to house and lay field to field, till there be no place, that they may be placed alone in the midst of the earth, has given birth to deeds of tyranny and oppression.
It was better that Abram and Lot should part, for events were pointing to a possible separation in heart. It is well to secure peace, even at some pain and inconvenience to ourselves.
As nature, affection, religion, affliction, all conspired to unite them, no doubt the prospect of separation was a severe trial to the feelings of Abram; but it was a friendly parting, and whatever blank was made by it in his happiness, it was speedily and abundantly compensated by renewed manifestations of favour from that Almighty Friend who sticketh closer than a brother.(Bush).
Thus, for awhile, is the path of faith more lonely. The true believer is more than ever cast on God. The Lots choose according to the sight of their eyes, and so, by degrees, get from communion with the godly to communion with the godless. Unlike souls, sooner or later, must separate. If there be not one spirit, no bond or arrangement can keep men long together. Each is gravitating to his place by a law which none can gainsaydust to dust, and the spirit to God who is a spirit. Let us not forget the steps of Lot. First he saw; then he chose; then he journeyed from the east, like some before him; then he pitched towards Sodom; then he dwelt there. In a word, he walked by sight, then by self-will, then away from the light, then towards the unclean world, at last to make his home in it. This is the path of Lots in every age. And such, though righteous and saved, are only saved so as by fire.(Jukes: Types of Genesis.)
Gen. 13:12. The children of faith are content with their promised portion. Their present temporal condition does not disturb their hope and confidence in God.
It is possible, after all, that Lots principle fault lay in pitching his tent in the place he did. If he could have lived on the plain, and preserved a sufficient distance from that infamous place, there might have been nothing the matter; but perhaps he did not like to live alone, and therefore dwelt in the cities of the plain and pitched his tent towards Sodom. The love of society, like all other natural principles, may prove a blessing or a curse; and we may see by this example the danger of leaving religious connections; for as man feels it not good to be alone, if he forego these, he will be in a manner impelled by his inclinations to take up with others of a contrary description.(Fuller.)
He who sets his face towards the tents of sin will soon become the victim of the dangerous fascination of the enchanted ground, and unless the grace of God prevails over his weakness, be drawn onwards, step by step, to his destruction.
How dangerous it is to commit ourselves to a course of sin, even where the motions of it are scarcely perceptible! This is like venturing on the outer edge of the whirlpool, until we are carried faster and faster through the giddy round and at last swallowed up in the terrible vortex!
Now that the covenant head has fairly a footing in the promised land in his own covenant right, let us look back from this point at the covenant thread in the history of the nations and persons. We find the general table of nations in Genesis 10, leaving us with Shems line, so as to trace the covenant lineage. And in Genesis 11 accordingly, after the narration of the event which led to the dispersion of nations and peopling of the earth, Shems line is resumed so as to trace it to Terah, where we are introduced to Abram, the covenant head. Accordingly, of the sons of Terah, we find Lot and his posterity dropped, and Abram left alone in the list, as he in whom the promises descendthe conveyancer of blessings to all the nations.(Jacobus.)
Gen. 13:13. The greatest depravity is often found amongst the inhabitants of the most fertile lands. Such is the ingratitude of human nature that where the gifts of God are most lavish there men most forget Him.
It is one of the moral dangers of prosperity that men become so satisfied with this present world that they think they have no need of God.
We may purchase worldly prosperity too dearly.
1. If it nourishes our selfishness and pride.
2. If it deprives of the benefit of religious ordinances.
3. If it exposes us to the contagion of evil examples.
4. If the spirit of the world so increases upon us that we forget God and our duty.
As a bar of iron has its breaking strain, so for every man there is a certain strength of temptation which his moral nature is not able to withstand. It is dangerous for us willingly to expose ourselves to the power of evil acting with its greatest force.
The grace of God will support a man in the ordinary temptations of life, but to rush into the midst of the most tainted atmosphere of sin is daring presumption.
Sinners before the Lord exceedingly. Men are to be estimated as they stand in the sight of God. Crime has reference to the evils inflicted upon society, but sin has reference to mans moral accountability to God.
The higher blessings of good society were wanting in the choice of Lot. It is probable he was a single man when he parted from Abram; and, therefore, that he married a woman of Sodom. He has in that case fallen into the snare of matching, or, at all events, mingling with the ungodly. This was the damning sin of the antediluvians (Gen. 6:1-7). Sinners before the Lord exceedingly. Their country was as the garden of the Lord. But the beauty of the landscape, and the superabundance of the luxuries it afforded, did not abate the sinful disposition of the inhabitants. Their moral corruption only broke forth into greater vileness of lust, and more daring defiance of heaven. They sinned exceedingly, and before the Lord. Lot has fallen into the very vortex of vice and blasphemy(Murphy).
It is an awful character which is here given of Lots new neighbours. All men are sinners; but they were wicked, and sinners before the Lord exceedingly. When Abram went to a new place it was usual for him to rear an altar to the Lord; but there is no mention of anything like this when Lot settled in or near to Sodom(Fuller).
ILLUSTRATIONS
BY THE
REV. WM. ADAMSON
Abram and Lot! Gen. 13:1-18. We have hereI. The Contention, which was
(1) unseemly,
(2) untimely, and
(3) unnecessary. II. The Consolation, which was
(1) unbounded,
(2) undoubted, and
(3) unearthly. Or, we have hereI. The Churlishness of the herdsmen. II. The Selfishness of Lot. III. The Unselfishness of Abram, and IV. The Graciousness of God. Or, we have hereI. The Return of Abram,
(1) forgiven and
(2) favoured. II. The Request of Abram,
(1) forbearing, and
(2) foregoing. III. The Reward of Abram (l) forgetting the earthly and
(2) foreshadowing the heavenly inheritance. The Lesson-Links or Truth-Thoughts are
1. Wealth means
(1) strife,
(2) sorrow, and
(3) separation.
2. Abram manifests
(1) faith,
(2) forbearance, and
(3) forgetfulness of self.
3. Worldly love means
(1) stupidity,
(2) suffering, and
(3) sinfulness.
4. God manifests
(1) favour,
(2) fulness, and
(3) faithfulness to Abram.
The pilgrims step in vain,
Seeks Edens sacred ground!
But in Hopes heavnly joys again,
An Eden may be found.Bowring.
Returns and Reviews! Gen. 13:1-3.
(1) The poet has immortalised the Swiss patriots sentiments on returning to the Alpine crags and peaks after strange and perilous experiences in exile. The historian has inscribed on the tablet of Church history the devout emotions of Arnaud on his return from danger and exile to the Vaudois Valleys. The litterateur has depicted on the page of his tale the joyful sensations of the emigrant, returning in safety and wealth to the home from which he had gone forth in peril and poverty.
(2) Abram had been driven by famine into the fruitful fields of Egypt, where he had narrowly escaped reaping death as the fruit of his fears and folly. God had in His wise and merciful Providence brought him back again to Hebron. He, therefore, calls on the name of the Lord. He, no doubt, received with thankfulness the Lords intimations of mercy as connected with his previous sojourn; and he, doubtless, acknowledged with gratitude Gods loving interposition with Pharaoh in his behalf.
(3) It is well to go back in review of old spots and past experiences in order to call up instrumentally thereby, says Doudney, the gracious acts, interposing goodness, and boundless benefits of our covenant-God in Christ. The light so shining upon the past prompts us to take down our harp from the willows, and to sing
His love in times past forbids me to think,
Hell leave me at last in trouble to sink.
Flocks and Herds! Gen. 13:2.
(1) In a very old Egyptian tomb near the Pyramids the flocks and herds of the principal occupant are pourtrayed. The numbers of them are told as 800 oxen, 200 cows, 2,000 goats, and 1,000 sheep. Job at first had 7,000 sheep, 500 yoke of oxen, 3,000 camels, etc. We can thus form some idea of the number and magnitude of the patriarchal flocks and herds.
(2) At the present day these are no exaggeration, however startling the figures sound. In an Australian sheep-run one grazier has nearly 20,000 sheep. Not long ago an American sheepowner had as many as 9,000 browsing on the heights of Omaha, so that when a traveller looked forth at daybreak the mountains seemed like waves of the sea. In Zululand the flocks and herds of Cetewayo were immense.
Abrams well was fannd by the breeze,
Whose murmur invited to sleep;
His altar was shaded with trees,
And his hills were white over with sheep.Shenstone.
Patriarchal Wealth! Gen. 13:2.
(1) Dr. Russell tells us that the people of Aleppo are supplied with the greater part of their butter, cheese, and flesh by the Arabs, Rushmans, or Turcomans, who travel about the country with their flocks and herds, as the patriarchs did of old. Before America became so thickly peopled, its primitive white patriarchs wandered with flocks over the richly-clothed savannahs and prairies. Having collected vast stores of cheese, honey, skins, etc., they would repair to the townships and dispose of them.
(2) The Hebrew patriarchs no doubt supplied the cities of Canaan in like manner. Hamor, in Gen. 34:21, expressly speaks of the patriarchs thus trading with his princes and people. La Rogue says that in the time of Pliny the riches both of the Parthians and Romans were melted down by the Arabs, who thus amassed large treasures of the precious metals. This probably explains how Abraham was rich, not only in cattle, but in silver and gold. Not that Abram trusted in his riches.
Oh! give me the riches that fade not, nor fly!
A treasure up yonder! a home in the sky!
Where beautiful things in their beauty still stay,
And where riches neer fly from the blessed away.Hunter.
Communion! Gen. 13:4.
(1) Watson says, that he knows of no pleasure so richno pleasure so hallowing in its influences, and no pleasure so constant in its supply of solace and strength, as that which springs from the true and spiritual worship of God. Pleasant as the cool water brooks are to a thirsty hart, so pleasant is it for the soul to live in communion with God.
(2) Rutherford wrote to his friend from the prison of Aberdeen, The king dineth with his prisoners, and his spikenard casteth a smell; he hath led me to such a pitch and degree of joyful communion with himself as I never before knew. This reminds us of Trapps quaint speech, that a good Christian is ever praying or praising: he drives a constant trade betwixt earth and heaven.
(3) Abram built his altar while the Canaanites looked on. He lifted up a testimony for God, and God honoured him; so that Abimelech was constrained to say, God is with thee in all that thou doest. Reader, in Greenland, the salutation of a visitor, when the door is opened, is this, Is God in this house? Remember that the home which has no family altar has no Divine delight.
Tis that which makes my treasure,
Tis that which brings my gain;
Converting woe to pleasure,
And reaping joy for pain.Guyon.
Lots Survey! Gen. 13:10, etc.
(1) Apparently the two patriarchs stood on a lofty summit, from which a wide survey could be obtained. To the east, says Stanley, would rise in the foreground the jagged range of the hills above Jericho, and in the distance the dark wall of Moab. Between them would lie the Valley of the Jordan, its course marked by the tract of forest in which its rushing stream is enveloped. Down to this valley would be a long and deep ravine, the main line of communication by which it is approached from the central hills of Palestinea ravine rich with wine, olive, and fig. In the south and west Lots view would command a survey of the bleak hills of Judea, varied by the heights crowned with what were afterwards the cities of Benjamin.
(2) An American writer, anxious to give a local impression of Lots prospect, says that it was like standing at the Catskill Mountain House, and looking down through a broad cleft in the hills to the Hudson Valley below. But there is one element to be introduced into the calculation, viz., the remarkable transparency of the Syrian sky. In that country the air is so exceedingly clear, the light so very bright, and the atmosphere is so free from vapours that the optic vision pierces a great distance with absolute ease. Thus Lot could see the whole country, as Moses afterwards did from Mount Pizgah.
To Lot, who lookd from upper air,
Oer all th enchanted regions there,
How beauteous must have been the glow,
The life, the sparkling far below.Moore.
Lot Leaving! Gen. 13:11.
(1) Of some of those who followed the Master whithersoever He went up and down Judea and Galilee, we know that it is written, they left Him, and went their way. It was with sad heart that the Apostle of the Gentiles announced the lapse of one of His chosen companions: Demas hath forsaken mehaving loved this present world. And it was with tear-filled eye that one of Europes noble Reformers told to his flock that his trusted fellow-soldier had yielded to the attractions of wealth.
(2) Lots first days were bright with hope, as the near kinsman of Abram. Together they left Chaldea,entered Canaan. But though the school of piety, in which he was trained, was most pure, Lot went astray. Caring only about this worlds wealth, Lot sees the lovely plains of Sodom, and decides to go away. Of him, the patriarch might sadly whisper to his own heart, Lot hath forsaken me, having loved this present world.
Seek not the world!
Tis a vain show at best;
Bow not before its idol shrine; in God
Find thou thy joy and rest.Bonar.
Lots Lot! Gen. 13:12.
(1) A rough shell may hold a pearl, remarks Law. There may be silver amongst much dross. Life may exist within the stem, when leaves are seared and branches dry. The spring may yet be deep, while waters trickle scantily. A spark may live beneath much rubbish.
(2) So many heirs of glory live ingloriously. Heaven is their purchased rest, but their footsteps seem to be downward. In their hearts there is incorruptible seed, but sorry weeds are intermixed. They are translated into the kingdom of grace, but still the flesh is weak.
(3) Such is the gloomy preface to Lots story. Yet the Holy Spirit, who by the pen of Moses records his tottering walk, by Peters lips announces him as just. Thrice in short compass, a glorious title enshrines him among the saved. The voice of truth proclaims him righteous: 2Pe. 2:7.
For his clothing is the Sun
The bright Sun of Righteousness;
He hath put salvation on
Jesus is his beauteous dress.Wesley.
Godless Gain! Gen. 13:13.
(1) A godly man in a rural village in Suffolk, where for generations the people had been highly favoured with a succession of earnest winners of souls to Christ, tempted by the offer of higher wages and greater scope in London, left his home and took up his residence in an ungodly neighbourhood in the East-end. But the higher wages and greater scope were very quickly outweighed by the corruption of his children, etc.
(2) Even religious men, says Robertson, sometimes settle in a foreign country, notoriously licentious, merely that they may increase their wealth. But very soon they find to their cost that God has terrible modes of retribution. In the choice of homes, of friends, and in alliances, he who selects according to the desires of the flesh lays up in store for himself many troubles and anxieties. Such was Lots experience.
(3) How frequently, remarks Blunt, have men found that their greatest disquietudes and troubles have been the fruits of their own selfish selectings. Often that vale of Siddim, which they have most anxiously coveted, has been the wellspring from whence has flowed the bitter waters of sorrow and distress. Far better, if God tries us by putting a blank paper into our hands, to fill in our free choice, humbly refer the choice back to Him and say,
Thy way, not mine, O Lord,
However dark it be;
Lead me by Thine own hand,
Choose out the path for me.Bonar.
Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell
(10) The plain of Jordan.This word, Ciccar, literally means the circuit, or, as it is translated in St. Mat. 3:5, the region round about Jordan, and, according to Mr. Conder (Tent Work, ii., p. 14), is the proper name of the Jordan valley, and especially of the plain of Jericho. It is now called the Gnor, or depression, and is one of the most remarkable districts in the world, being a deep crack or fissure, with chalk rocks upon the western and sandstone on the eastern side, over which lies limestone, geologically of the age of our green-sand formation. It is thus what is technically called by miners a fault, the formations on the two sides having been displaced by some tremendous convulsion of nature. Most of the valley lies below the level of the Mediterranean, the Sea of Galilee being, by Mr. Conders observations, about 682 feet below it, and the Dead Sea no less than 1,292 feet. As the watershed to the south rises to a level of 200 feet above the Mediterranean, al) egress for the waters is thereby cut off, and there are numerous proofs that at some distant period the whole valley, about 150 miles in length, was a succession of large lakes. But even in Abrams days the Jordan poured down a far larger volume of water than at present; for by the loss of its forests the climate of Palestine has become much more dry than of old, and regions once fertile are now barren. And as the supply of water has become less than that lost by evaporation, the Dead Sea has gradually receded, and left around it arid wastes covered over with incrustations of salt.
As the garden of the Lord.Mr. Palmer (Desert of the Exodus. p. 465) describes the fertility of the Jordan valley as follows:Although the immediate vicinity of the Dead Sea is barren enough, the Ghor, or deep depression at the northern and southern extremities, teems with life and vegetation; and even where the cliffs rise sheer up from the waters edge, streams of fresh water dash down the ravines, and bring the verdure with them almost to the Salt Seas brink. The same writer (p. 480) has also shown conclusively, with Mr. Grove, Dr. Tristram, and others, that Sodom and Gomorrha were at the northern end of the lake, and not, as was previously supposed, at the southern. For the Ciccar is strictly the part of the Ghor near Jericho, and as the Dead Sea is forty-six miles in length, its southern extremity was far away out of sight. Moreover, Lot was standing some miles away to the north-west, on the high ground between Beth-el and Ai, whence the northern end of the Dead Sea, and the barren tract which extends from the oasis of Jericho to it and the Jordan, are distinctly visible (Dr. Tristram, Sunday at Home, 1872, p. 215). This barren tract was once the Ciccar, and the traces of ancient irrigation and aqueducts attest its former fertility. It was upon this district, well watered everywhere, that Lot gazed so covetously, and its richness is indicated by a double comparison: for, first, it was like Jehovahs garden in Eden, watered by its four rivers; and next, it was like Egypt, rendered fertile by artificial means.
As thou comest unto Zoar.This makes no sense whatsoever. No person on the route to Egypt could possibly take Zoar in his way; and of the five cities of the plain this was the least like Paradise. The Syriac has preserved the right reading, namely, Zoan. This city, however, was called Zor, or Zar, by the Egyptians (Records of the Past, viii. 147), and was situated on the eastern side of the Tanaitic branch of the Nile, at the head of a fertile plain, called the field of Zoan in Psa. 78:12. Through this rich and well-watered region Lot had lately travelled in Abrams company, and the luxuriant vegetation there made it not unworthy to be compared with Paradise.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
10. Lot beheld all the plain of Jordan , here rendered plain, means the region around, or circuit; , Mat 3:5. “At the time when Abram and Lot looked down from the mountain of Beth-el on the deep descent beneath them, and Lot chose for himself the circle of the Jordan, that circle was different from any thing that we now see .
It was well watered everywhere as the garden of the Lord, like the land of Egypt And this description is filled out in detail by subsequent allusions. It is described as a deep valley, distinguished from the surrounding desert by its fertile fields. If any credence is to be attached to the geological conclusions of the last fifty years, there must have been already a lake at its extremity, such as that which terminates the course of the Barada at Damascus, or of the Kouik at Aleppo. Then, as now, it must have received in some form or other the fresh streams of the Jordan, of the Arnon, of En-gedi, of Callirrhoe, and at the southern end, as Dr. Robinson has observed, more living brooks than are to be found in all the rest of Palestine. On the banks of one or some of these streams there seems to have been an oasis, or collection of oases, like that which is still, from the same causes, to be found on a smaller scale in the groves of En-gedi and of Jericho, and in the plain of Gennesareth, or, on a larger scale, in the paradise of Damascus. Along the edge of this lake or valley Gentile and Jewish records combine in placing the earliest seat of Phoenician civilization. Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, Zeboim, are (with Lasha [probably Laish] by the sources of the Jordan, and Sidon on the seashore) mentioned as the first settlements of the Canaanites. Gen 10:19. When Lot descended from Beth-el, ‘the cities of the round’ of the Jordan formed a nucleus of civilized life before any city, except Hebron, had sprung up in Central Palestine . ” STANLEY: Sinai and Palestine, p . 281 . The mention of the garden of the Lord shows how the traditions of Eden still lingered in the thoughts of men, and Lot’s recent sojourn in the valley of the Nile would naturally prompt the comparison of the well-watered Jordan valley to the land of Egypt. The words, as thou comest unto Zoar, are not to be connected, grammatically, with land of Egypt, but with plain of Jordan, from which they are separated by the intervening description of the Jordan plain.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘And Lot lifted up his eyes and saw all the Circle of Jordan, that it was well watered everywhere before Yahweh destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, like the garden of Yahweh, like the land of Egypt as you go to Zoar.’
Lot carries out his research carefully (he could not do this by literally just ‘looking up’). He travelled around and weighed up the opportunities. And as he stood in the hills and looked down over the Jordan and its surrounds and saw how well-watered and fruitful the plain was, the Circle of Jordan, with the Jordan running through it, and fed by other rivers, he was impressed. Later this area would become spoiled by salt and bitumen, but at this time it was fair to look at and enticing. He did not take anything else into consideration, especially the fact that he was leaving Canaan the land of promise.
“As you go to Zoar”, that is in the direction of Zoar, which is at the tip of the Dead Sea as it is after the destruction of the cities.
There is a link in this verse with Genesis 2, 3, for it is ‘like the garden of Yahweh’ with its great lifegiving river; also with Genesis 19, where we learn of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah; and with the land of Egypt, watered by the Nile, and fruitful. The reference to Egypt refers us back to the previous chapter. They have just seen the wonder of that land abundantly watered by so great a river. Here is a land that appears its equal.
The other two references show that this chapter is to be seen in a wider setting. The land that Lot covets is almost a return to Eden, thus the writer knows about Eden, but there is the ominous shadow of temptation because of the two evil cities. It is beautiful, but there is sin in the land. And Lot does not realise it, for he is not specifically under the protection of Yahweh or thoughtful about His covenants. He thinks only in terms of increasing wealth.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Lot Chooses His Own Lot In Gen 13:10-13 Lot chooses the plain of Jordon. Having been given the opportunity to choose his portion of land, Lot took what appeared to be the best. The narrative plot of this passage of Scripture introduces irony by comparing Sodom and Gomorrah to the Garden of Eden. Lot believed he was choosing prosperity, not knowing this will cause much loss and grief in his life. It will cost him the life of his wife and all but two of his children, of whom will bear his descendants. The irony of this narrative is that this was a place of destruction, and not prosperity.
This story reveals Lot’s lack of judgment and righteous before God. Lot had not learned to depend upon the Lord as Abraham had now learned. Therefore, he made his decision by sight and not by faith (2Co 5:7). Now, he will encounter grief and vexation of spirit the rest of his life (2Pe 2:7-8). This story foreshadows impending judgment upon Lot’s poor decision.
2Co 5:7, “(For we walk by faith, not by sight:)”
2Pe 2:7-8, “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;)”
Abraham trusted the Lord God to place him wherever Lot did not choose. Note the wisdom of Abraham in this situation.
Lot is figurative of a believer who suffers the loss of all things on the Day of Judgment, yet he himself is saved (1Co 3:12-15).
1Co 3:12-15, “Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble; Every man’s work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man’s work of what sort it is. If any man’s work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. If any man’s work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.”
The Bible says that God considered Lot to be a righteous man (2Pe 2:7).
2Pe 2:7, “And delivered just Lot , vexed with the filthy conversation of the wicked:”
Yet, in his decision to choose the pleasant land of the plain of Jordan, he eventually suffered all loss. This chapter shows that he was a wealthy man. But, when God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, he lost everything that he possessed, save his soul only. In contrast, Abraham put his trust in God’s divine intervention in his life (Heb 11:9-10).
Heb 11:9-10, “By faith he sojourned in the land of promise, as in a strange country, dwelling in tabernacles with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him of the same promise: For he looked for a city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God.”
He is an example of a believer who is faithful and obedient to serve the Lord, and who does not seek the goods of this world. The rewards of this type of believer will be great. Both of these types of believers will go to heaven. One will receive great rewards, while the other will have few, if any, rewards.
Gen 13:10 And Lot lifted up his eyes, and beheld all the plain of Jordan, that it was well watered every where, before the LORD destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, even as the garden of the LORD, like the land of Egypt, as thou comest unto Zoar.
Gen 13:11 Gen 13:12 Gen 13:13 Gen 13:13
Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures
Lot’s Choice; the Separation
v. 10. And Lot lifted up his eyes and beheld all the plain of Jordan, that it was well watered everywhere, before the Lord destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, even as the garden of the Lord, like the land of Egypt, as thou comest unto Zoar. v. 11. Then Lot chose him all the plain of Jordan; and Lot journeyed east; and they separated themselves the one from the other.
v. 12. Abram dwelled in the land of Canaan; and Lot dwelled in the cities of the plain, and pitched his tent toward Sodom. v. 13. But the men of Sodom were wicked and sinners before the Lord exceedingly.
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
EXPOSITION
Gen 13:10
And Lot lifted up his eyes. Circumspexit; with a look of eager, lustful greed (cf. Gen 3:6). The same expression is afterwards used of Abram (Gen 13:14), where perhaps also the element of satisfaction, though in a good sense, is designed to be included. And beheld all the plain. Literally, all the circle, or surrounding region (, from , to move in a circle; cf. arrondissement, Fr.; kreis or bezirk, Ger.); (LXX; Mat 3:5); now called El Ghor, the low country (Gesenius). Of Jordan. Compounded of Jordan, the names of the two river sources (Josephus, Jerome); but, according to modern etymologists, derived from , to go down, and signifying the Descender, like the German Rhine, from rinnen, to run. The largest river of Palestine, rising at the foot of Antilibanus, and passing, in its course of 200 miles, over twenty-seven rapids, it pours its waters first into the lake of Merom, and then into the sea of Galilee, 653 feet, and finally into the Lacus Asphaltites, 1316 feet below the level of the Mediterranean. It is now called Esh-Sheri’ah, i.e. the ford, as having been of old crossed by the Israelites (Gesenius). That it was well-watered everywhere. Not by canals and trenches, as old interpreters imagined, but by copious streams along its course, descending chiefly from the mountains of Moab. Before the Lord destroyedthe same word is used for the destruction of all flesh in what is styled the Elohistic account of the DelugeSodom and Gomorrha (vide Gen 14:2). Even as the garden of the Lord. Paradise in Eden, with its four streams (Genesis if. 10; Calvin, Lange, Keil); though by some this is deemed unsatisfactory (Quarry), and the phrase taken ashortus amaenissimus (Rosenmller), and in particular Mesopotamia, which was a land of rare re. cundity. Like the land of Egyptwhich was irrigated by the Nile and by canals from it as well as by machines (Deu 11:10, Deu 11:11)as thou comest unto Zoarat the south-east corner of the Dead Sea (vide Gen 14:3).
Gen 13:11
Then Lot chose him all the plain of Jordan. Allured by its beauty and fertility, and heedless of other or higher considerations. And Lot journeyed east, = versus orientem (cf. Gen 11:2). And they separated themselves the one from the other. Literally, a man from his brother.
Gen 13:12
Abram dwelled in the land of Canaan. Strictly so called; in its larger sense Canaan included the circle of the Jordan. And Lot dwelled in the cities of the plain. Being desirous of a permanent settlement within the gates, or at least in the immediate neighborhood, of the wealthy cities of the laud; in contrast to his uncle, who remained a wanderer throughout its borders, sojourning as in a strange country (Heb 11:9). And (with this purpose in contemplation), he pitched his tent toward (i.e. in the direction of, and as far as to) Sodom.
Gen 13:13
But (literally, and) the men of Sodom were wicked and sinners their wickedness is more specifically detailed in Gen 19:1-38; q.v.)before the Lordliterally, to Jehovah = before the face of Jehovah; (LXX.), vide Gen 10:9; an aggravation of the wickedness of the Sodomitesexceedingly. Their vileness was restrained neither in quantity nor quality. As it passed all height in arrogance; so it burst all bounds in prevalence.
HOMILETICS
Gen 13:10
The choice of Lot.
I. THE EXCELLENCE OF LOT‘S CHOICE.
1. Beautiful. Viewed from the Bethel plateau, at the moment perhaps gilded with the shimmering radiance of the morning sun, the Jordan circle was a scene of enchanting loveliness; and in yielding to the fascinations of the gorgeous panorama that spread itself out on the distant horizon it cannot be affirmed that Lot committed sin. The Almighty Maker of the universe loves beauty, as his works attest (Ecc 3:11), and hath implanted the like instinct in the soul of man. Hence, so far from being a signal of depravity, the capacity of admiring and appreciating mere physical and external grace and symmetry betokens a nature not yet completely disempowered by sin; and so far from its being wrong to surround oneself with objects that are pleasing to the eye, it is rather incumbent so to do, provided always it can be accomplished without sin.
2. Productive. As there is no sin in having elegant mansions, fair gardens, and fine pictures to look upon, so neither is there evil in desiring fertile fields instead of barren rocks to cultivate. Sentenced to eat bread in the sweat of his brow, the Christian is not thereby required to prefer a tract of moorland to a farm of rich alluvial soil. Monkish asceticism may enjoin such self-mortification on its devotees; Christianity invites men to enjoy the good things which have been freely given to them by God. The well-watered fields of the Jordan circle were as open to the choice of Lot as were the bleak Judaean hills.
3. Suggestive. Already it had recalled to his memory the luxuriant plains of Egypt which he had lately visited, and to his imagination the resplendent Eden of man’s primeval days; and doubtless it was such a region as could scarcely fail to inspire a devout mind with lofty thoughts, pure emotions, and holy aspirations, so leading the entranced worshipper from nature up to nature’s God. Since the human soul cannot choose but be insensibly affected for good or evil by its material as well as moral environment, it is well, when Divine providence gives us the election, that we select for our abodes scenes and places that shall elevate and refine rather than deteriorate and depress.
II. THE DRAWBACKS OF LOT‘S CHOICE.
1. Bad neighbors. The inhabitants of the Jordanic Pentapolis were sinners of an aggravated type. And while it may not be possible to avoid all contact with wicked men (1Co 5:10), it becomes God’s people to keep as far aloof as possible from the ungodly; and especially from transgressors like the Sodomites. Mingling with and marrying into the families of the ungodly ruined the antediluvian world. The chief injury clone to the Church of Christ arises from a throwing down of the wall of separation between it and the world. Separation from and nonconformity to the world, and much more the wicked portion of it, is the duty of believers (Rom 12:2; 1Co 6:17).
2. Moral contamination. Though Lot was a good man, his piety would not prevent the gradual deterioration of his nature through the evil influence of his neighbors. There is a contagion, for good or evil, in example which is well nigh irresistible. “He that walketh with wise men shall be wise; but the companion of fools shall be destroyed.”
3. Bitter sorrow. Precisely in proportion to the eminence of his religious character would this be inevitable. The immoralities and infidelities of the Sodomites would plunge him into grief, if they did not cause “rivers of water” to run down his eyes. And so it eventually came to pass (2Pe 2:8).
III. THE SINFULNESS OF LOT‘S CHOICE.
1. Avaricious in its origin. Thus it was a sin against God. Had no drawbacks attended it, had it in all other respects been commendable and prudent, the lust of cupidity out of which it sprang would have condemned it. Few things are more frequently and emphatically reprehended in the word of God than the inordinate desire of possession (Luk 12:15; Eph 5:3; Col 3:5; Heb 13:5).
2. Selfish in its character. Thus, besides being a sin against God, it was an offence against his uncle. Had Abram and Lot stood upon a platform of equality, religious principle should have dictated to Lot the propriety of either returning the right of choice to Abram, or himself selecting what he believed to be the inferior quarter (Rom 12:10; Php 2:3); but Abram was Lot’s superior in age, and therefore entitled to take precedence of one who was younger; Lot’s uncle, and, in virtue of that relationship, deserving of his nephew’s honor; Lot’s guardian and benefactor, and, as a consequence, worthy of acknowledgment and gratitude at the hands of one whom he had enriched; and, what was more important for the settlement of the question, the actual heir and owner of the land, to whom accordingly belonged the prerogative of claiming not its fattest portion only, but its entire domain. All these considerations rendered Lot’s choice offensive in the extreme.
3. Dangerous in its issues. As such it was a sin against himself as well as against God. Even though evil should not come of it, it was not open to Lot, as a good man, to establish himself where injury to his spiritual interests was possible. That he did not reckon the moral bearings of his choice was an aggravation rather than an extenuation of his sin. He had time to calculate the chances of material prosperity; he should also have counted up the moral hazards before he elected to drive his flocks and herds to Sodom.
Lessons:
1. All is not gold that glitters; hence the supreme unwisdom of judging either things or persons according to appearance.
2. In every man’s lot there is a crook; hence the propriety of moderating our desires concerning everything.
3. It is possible to pay too dear a price for material prosperity. “What shall it profit a man if he shall gain the whole world and lose his own soul?”
4. It is a poor outcome of piety which prefers self-interest to the claims either of affection or religion; the man who loves himself better than his neighbor is still devoid of the spirit of Christ
5. In the long run the spirit of selfishness is certain to overreach itself and accomplish its own ruin.
HOMILIES BY W. ROBERTS
Gen 13:10-13
The choice of Lot.
I. WHAT LOT TOOK INTO ACCOUNT.
1. His own worldly circumstances; and,
2. The suitability of the Jordan circle to advance them.
II. WHAT LOT DID NOT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT.
1. The reverence due to his uncle.
2. The greater right which Abram had to the soil of Canaan.
3. The danger, in parting with Abram, of separating himself from Abram’s God.
4. The risk of damage to his spiritual interests in settling in the Jordan circle.
Learn
1. That while it may be right, in life’s actions, to take our worldly interests into account, it is wrong and dangerous to take nothing else.
2. That no amount of purely worldly advantage can either justify or recompense the disregard of the higher interests of the soul.
3. That though good men may oftentimes find reasons for neglecting the soul’s interests, they cannot do so with impunity.W.
Gen 13:10, Gen 13:13
Sodom and the Sodomites, or the place and the people.
1. The physical beauty of the Jordan valley.
2. The moral corruption of its inhabitants.
Lessons:
1. The weakness of nature as a moral educator.
2. The true design of nature as a moral educator.W.
Gen 13:11
The parting off friends.
I. The SADNESS Of this parting. It was a parting
1. Of kinsmen (men, brethren).
2. Of kinsmen in a foreign land.
3. Of kinsmen by their own hand.
II. The CAUSE of this parting.
1. The difficulty of finding sustenance together.
2. The danger of collision if they kept together.
III. The MANNER of this parting.
1. After prayer.
2. In peace.
3. With magnanimity on the part of Abram.
4. With meanness on that of Lot.
Lessons:
1. It is sad when brethren cannot dwell together in unity.
2. It is better that brethren should separate than quarrel.W.
HOMILIES BY J.F. MONTGOMERY
Gen 13:11
Lot’s unwise choice.
“Then Lot chose him all the plain of Jordan.” To Lot no doubt this seemed but a matter of prudence, a, choice of pastures, yet it stamped his after life. He was a godly man. We miss the point if we think of him as careless. The lesson is for God’s people. At first guided by his uncle, but time came when he must act alone. Pastures of Bethel not sufficient. Strife between the herdsmen. God uses little things to work his will. In every life times when choice must be made. Perhaps definite and distinct, e.g. leaving home, or choice of a profession; perhaps less marked, as in the choice of friends and associates, or the habits imperceptibly formed. We must be thus tried; needful for our training (Jas 1:12). A sevenfold blessing “to him that overcometh” (Rev 2:1-29; Rev 3:1-22.).
I. EVIL OF LOT‘S CHOICE. He chose the best pasture. Why should he not? The fault lay in the motive, the want of spiritual thought in a secular matter. He broke no positive law, but looked only to worldly good. The evil of Sodom was disregarded. No prayer for guidance; no thought how he could best serve God (cf. Jas 1:14).
II. EFFECT OF LOT‘S CHOICE.
1. No real happiness. His soul vexed (2Pe 2:8). His life; fretting at evil which he had not resolution to escape from.
2. Real injury. His character enervated. From dwelling in plain came into the city; formed connections there. Irresolute and lingering when warned to flee. His prayer for himself only. Was saved “as by fire” (1Co 3:15). We are tried daily, in the valley or on the mountain. We cannot avoid trials; not good for us if we could. The one way of safety: “Seek first the kingdom of God.” There is an evil terribly widespreadof seeking first the world; thinking not to neglect God, but putting Christianity into corners of the life. What saith the world? Haste to be rich, or great; take thine ease; assert thyself; be high-spirited. And the customs of society and much of education repeat the lesson. But what saith Christ? Look unto me. Not at stated times, but always. The cause of much dispeace, of many spiritual sorrows (1Ti 6:10), is want of thoroughness in taking Christ as our guide. Lot was preserved. Will any say, “I ask no more”? “Remember Lot’s wife.” How narrow the line between his hesitation and her looking back! The grain may sprout through thorns (Mat 13:22), but the thorns are ever growing.M.
HOMILIES BY W. ROBERTS
Gen 13:12
Going to Sodom.
I. How IT MAY HAVE LOOKED TO LOT.
1. As a matter of business it was good.
2. In its moral aspects the step was dangerous. But
3. Doubtless at first Lot did not intend entering the city. And perhaps
4. Lot may have justified his doubtful conduct by hoping that he would have opportunities of doing good to the Sodomites.
II. How IT MUST HAVE LOOKED TO THE SODOMITES. It must have
1. Surprised them to see a good man like Lot coming to a neighborhood so bad.
2. Led them to think adversely of a religion that preferred worldly advantage to spiritual interest.
3. Rendered them impervious to any influence for good from Lot’s example.
Lessons:
1. It is perilous to go towards Sodom if one wants to keep out of Sodom.
2. It is useless preaching to Sodomites while gathering wealth in Sodom. W.
Going towards Sodom.
1. An inviting journey.
2. A gradual journey.
3. A sinful journey.
4. A dangerous journey.W.
Fuente: The Complete Pulpit Commentary
Gen 13:10. And Lot lifted up, &c. This verse has much perplexed the Commentators, especially as it stands in our version: where the words as thou comest unto Zoar are joined to the land AEgypt, when the first inspection of a map will shew, that they cannot refer to the land of AEgypt.
Houbigant therefore translates it thus: Then Lot lifted up his eyes, and beheld all the plain of Jordan: but before the Lord had destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, it was all, as thou goest to Zoar, well watered, even as the garden of the Lord, and as the land of AEgypt. Le Clerc gives a very similar translation; But Lot lifting up his eyes, beheld all the plain of Jordan, when the Lord had not yet destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, as thou goest to Zoar, and saw it all to be well watered like the paradise of Jehovah, or the land of AEgypt. The whole difficulty vanishes, if you only unite the last clause, as thou comest unto Zoar, with well watered, &c. and read, before the Lord, &c. in a parenthesis: he beheld the plain “that it was well watered every where from the entrance [or beginning of the plain] at Zoar, (before the Lord destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah,) even as well watered as the garden of Eden, or the land of AEgypt, fertilized as it was by the Nile.”
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
And Lot lifted up his eyes, and beheld all the plain of Jordan, that it was well watered everywhere, before the LORD destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, even as the garden of the LORD, like the land of Egypt, as thou comest unto Zoar.
See the cause of this mistaken choice, 1Jn 2:16 ; Eze 16:49 .
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Gen 13:10 And Lot lifted up his eyes, and beheld all the plain of Jordan, that it [was] well watered every where, before the LORD destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, [even] as the garden of the LORD, like the land of Egypt, as thou comest unto Zoar.
Ver. 10. And Lot lifted up his eyes. ] This was “the lust of the eye” St John speaketh of, 1Jn 2:16 as he afterwards fell into “the lust of the flesh,” Gen 19:33 a his incestuous posterity into “the pride of life.” We have heard of the pride of Moab, and the ambition of Ammon,. Jer 48:1-47 ; Jer 49:1-39 Lot might not be suffered so much as to look at Sodom while it was burning, as Abram might. God knew his weakness, and so prevented the temptation. He should have had the good manners to let his uncle choose first; but the dust of covetousness had put out his eyes, that he saw not what beseemed him for the present, as afterwards he did, when God so crossed him Psa 66:12 in that which he chose, and so blessed Abram in that which was left him. Psa 107:33 ; Psa 107:35 Lot was a good man, but this, , somewhat obscured his virtues. b
That it was well watered everywhere,
Like the land of Egypt.
a The leper shaved his eyebrows, to teach us to mortify the lust of the eyes.
b De Triboniano, Procopius .
c Una est ex tetrapoli Attica . – Steph.
d . Ita immergunt, ut in aquae summitate cursus non ebuliiant .
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
well watered. Great contrast with Palestine after the famine; and likeness to the fertility of Egypt.
the LORD. Hebrew. Jehovah. App-4.
Sodom = flaming, burning.
Gomorrah = people of fear: already mixed up in the sins of the Nephilim. 2Pe 2:4. Jud 1:6.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
and beheld: Gen 3:6, Gen 6:2, Num 32:1-42, 1Jo 2:15, 1Jo 2:16
the plain: Gen 19:17, Gen 19:24, Gen 19:25, Deu 34:3, 1Ki 7:46, Psa 107:34, 1Jo 2:15
the garden: Gen 2:9, Gen 2:10, Isa 51:3, Eze 28:13, Eze 31:8, Joe 2:3
Zoar: Gen 14:2, Gen 14:8, Gen 19:20, Gen 19:22-30, Deu 34:3, Isa 15:5, Jer 48:34, Instead of “Zoar,” which was situated at the extremity of the plain of Jordan, the Syriac reads “Zoan,” which was situated in the south of Egypt, and in a well-watered country.
Reciprocal: Gen 2:8 – a garden Gen 10:19 – as thou comest Gen 13:14 – Lift Gen 19:30 – Zoar Gen 25:18 – as thou Num 24:6 – as gardens Num 32:19 – we will Num 34:12 – the salt sea Deu 3:17 – the sea Jdg 6:4 – till thou come Job 40:23 – Jordan Pro 24:1 – neither Pro 28:22 – and Eze 16:49 – fulness Eze 36:35 – like the Eze 47:18 – Jordan Hab 2:9 – that coveteth an evil covetousness Mat 13:22 – the care 1Ti 6:9 – they
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
THE WORLDLY CHOICE
And Lot lifted up his eyes, and beheld all the plain of Jordan, that it was well watered every where. Then Lot chose him all the plain of Jordan.
Gen 13:10-11
The lesson to be gained from the history of Abraham and Lot is obviously this: that nothing but a clear apprehension of things unseen, a simple trust in Gods promises, and the greatness of mind thence arising, can make us act above the worldindifferent, or almost so, to its comforts, enjoyments, and friendships; or, in other words, that its goods corrupt the common run even of religious men who possess them.
I. Abraham and Lot had given up this world at the word of God, but a more difficult trial remained.Though never easy, yet it is easier to set our hearts on religion or to take some one decided step, which throws us out of our line of life and in a manner forces upon us what we should naturally shrink from, than to possess in good measure the goods of this world and yet love God supremely. The wealth which Lot had hitherto enjoyed had been given him as a pledge of Gods favour, and had its chief value as coming from Him. But surely he forgot this, and esteemed it for its own sake, when he allowed himself to be attracted by the riches and beauty of a guilty and devoted country.
II. God is so merciful that He suffers not His favoured servants to wander from Him without repeated warnings.Lot had chosen the habitation of sinners; still he was not left to himself. A calamity was sent to warn and chasten him: he and his property fell into the hands of the five kings. This was an opportunity of breaking off his connection with the people of Sodom, but he did not take it as such.
III. The gain of this world is but transitory; faith reaps a late but lasting recompense.Soon the angels of God descended to fulfil in one and the same mission a double purpose: to take from Lot his earthly portion, and to prepare for the accomplishment of the everlasting blessings promised to Abraham; to destroy Sodom, while they foretold the approaching birth of Isaac.
Illustration
As in the simple pastoral age of Abram and Lot, so in this modern complex age, the relation between riches and righteousness remains a great question to be prayerfully considered and settled in accordance with Gods word. Not money but the love of money is the root of all evil. It is a serious question, however, whether the inordinate love of money, either for its own sake or more often for that success which it seems to bring, is not becoming the peculiar fault and folly of this period. Abram and Lot are still making their choice, though nowadays they speak English; and Sodom with its glittering prizes and its seductive Vanity Fairs still attracts the morally unstable and earthly minded. The choice must be made between God and mammon.
SECOND OUTLINE
The way in which Lots character develops, as shown by his history, is an impressive illustration of a wrong choice.
Show how Lot came to emigrate from Ur (Gen 11:31), and to come into Canaan (Gen 12:4). You find in his history these three facts, which have a special meaning for every young person looking forward to independent life:
I. A choice is necessary of place, aim, occupation. Up to this time Lot had made no independent choice. He had gone with his uncle, and had become rich by keeping the same position as though he were a son in Abrams house. But the crisis came, and with a mans responsibilities he had to choose a mans life.
Think of the different ways in which life-choices are made. Sometimes it is the result of studied prayerful consideration of fitness, of greatest usefulness, of determinatiom to do worthy service at any cost. Oftener circumstances seem to settle it. The lad needs work, opportunity is offered, the first step opens the door to another, till the man finds his place and work decided, and hardly knows that he has made a choice. But in every case the man himself has made the decisions which fix his life and destiny. All his past life enters into his choice. What Lot is will decide where he will go; and what Lot is, he has been deciding by hourly choices through all the years.
II. An opportunity is open for good or evil choice. It was unrestricted on the moral side. Lot might have sought Abrams good first, as Abram sought Lots good. He might have looked for a place to build an altar instead of a place to feed his cattle, and might have found both. But he had the opportunity to ignore religion, kinship, courtesy, gratitude, and he chose it. What was in him expressed itself. In Haran, in his journeyings, in Egypt, he had been preparing for his choice.
Many complain that in these days youths have no chance in life. As a rule, they never had greater ranges of choice than now. When a lad compares his possessions with those of his playmates, wishing he could add theirs to his: when a girl frets because her companions, whose parents are richer than hers, wear more fashionable dresses than she, both are preparing to make Lots choice. When a young man thinks much of what he can do with what he has to make others nobler and happier, he is preparing to make Abrams choice.
III. A selfish choice has its consequences. Lot chose the best fields, and was willing to take with them the worst associations. In consequence he so shrivelled up his soul that only force could save his life by separating him from his wealth. His children became so dead to all sense of danger from living in sin, that, when he pleaded with them to save themselves, he seemed to them as one that mocked. His wife became a monument to remind him of her sin. His children who remained with him disgraced him. Lot threw away his generosity, Abram enriched his. When Lot had lost everything, Abram fought for him, and won back for him his wealth. When Lot was in peril for his life, Abram wrestled in prayer for him, and prevailed. Which was gaining the most royal character?
Urge young people to choose the place, home, business, associations, that will most help them to serve God and their fellow-men. If then they can best serve God with wealth, He will give it to them. In any case they will have the blessing of His approval, of noble manhood or womanhood, and of everlasting life.
Illustration
(1) The lesson is rich in practical teaching. Wealth does not necessarily mean happiness. It commonly increases care and multiplies envy. Most certain is it, that wealth as the sole end of life ruins existence. Men grow hard. They lose their power to enjoy friendship, nature, art, literature. They lose their spirituality. Ignoring God, they grow careless about goodness, and plunge themselves and their children into society that tempts to evil, and frequently drags them down to sensuality and crime.
(2) Put God first and fee second, is Ruskins advice. To do the former is to be a friend of God, to do the latter is to be a friend of the devil. No young man will do his best work, and make a success of life, who is always looking out for his own advantage. If we serve God we can trust Him. He will look after us. If we serve others as in Gods sight, they too will come to honour us. Though sometimes the friendship of men must be sacrificed, if we are to retain the friendship of God. To choose a friend may be to choose a destiny.
Fuente: Church Pulpit Commentary
Gen 13:10. Lot beheld all the plain of Jordan, that it was well watered Lot seems to have had nothing in view but his temporal convenience and advantage. His flocks and herds were already too numerous, and his substance too great; and yet he wishes them to be still more enlarged, and therefore makes choice of this fertile and pleasant spot. He does not inquire into the character of the inhabitants, nor consider what sort of society he should find there; nor does he appear to express any reluctance at leaving Abrams family, and losing the benefit of his conversation, counsel, and instructions. God, however, in the course of his providence, disappointed his views and expectations, and he soon had cause to repent of his choice.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
13:10 And Lot lifted up his eyes, and beheld all the plain of Jordan, that it [was] well watered every where, before the LORD destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, [even] as the {g} garden of the LORD, like the land of Egypt, as thou comest unto Zoar.
(g) Which was in Eden, Gen 2:10.