You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘Genesis 19’ tag.
“Thus both the daughters of Lot were with child by their father. The firstborn bore a son, and called his name Moab; he is the father of the Moabites to this day. As for the younger, she also bore a son, and called his name Ben-ammi; he is the father of the sons of Ammon to this day.” Gen. 19:36-38
First we must realize it would not at all be impossible for the two sisters to get pregnant at nearly the same time. It is quite common knowledge that when a woman spends a good amount of time around another woman, their monthly cycles often align.
As for the meanings of the names, Moab is likely a wordplay on “from my father” (Plaut) and Ben-ammi means “son of my people” or “son of my kinsmen” which is a little less obvious. This incestuous origin would affect how the peoples of Moab and Ammon were viewed by the Israelites with regard to their sexual morality.
The Moabites and the Ammonites became somewhat a thorn in the side of Israel, though not quite to the same degree of some of their neighbors. In Judges 3 we see that the Moabites gathered with the Ammonites and fought against Israel and defeated them, and Israel served the king of Moab 18 years. However, Israel later defeated the Moabites. In Ezra 9 we see that the Moabites intermarry with the Israelites, of which God did not approve.
Interestingly, God allowed the Moabites and Ammonites to keep their land rather than give it to the Israelites. This may well be due to God’s promise to Abraham concerning the land, then, by extension, to Lot. We know God promised the land to Abraham; then in Genesis 13:9-11, Abraham suggests he and Lot separate due to the land required by their herds, and implies that Lot should go and take whatever land he sees fit as his own, which he does. As we see in these verses, Lot’s daughters sleep with him, and this ultimately gives rise to the peoples of Moab and Ammon. In Deuteronomy 2:9 God says to Moses “Do not harass Moab or contend with them in battle, for I will not give you any of their land for a possession, because I have given Ar to the sons of Lot for a possession.” and in Deut. 2:19 “…when you approach the frontier of the sons of Ammon, do not harass them or contend with them, for I will not give you any of the land of the sons of Ammon as a possession, because I have given it to the sons of Lot for a possession.”
Ultimately things do not end well for the Moabites and Ammonites however, according to Zephaniah 2:9:
“Therefore, as I live,” declares the LORD of hosts, The God of Israel, “Surely Moab will be like Sodom And the sons of Ammon like Gomorrah– A place possessed by nettles and salt pits, And a perpetual desolation. The remnant of My people will plunder them And the remainder of My nation will inherit them.”
The Moabites get an honorable mention however, as Ruth was a Moabitess and was ultimately an ancestor of Jesus the Messiah.
“Then the firstborn said to the younger, “Our father is old, and there is not a man on earth to come in to us after the manner of the earth. “Come, let us make our father drink wine, and let us lie with him that we may preserve our family through our father.” So they made their father drink wine that night, and the firstborn went in and lay with her father; and he did not know when she lay down or when she arose. On the following day, the firstborn said to the younger, “Behold, I lay last night with my father; let us make him drink wine tonight also; then you go in and lie with him, that we may preserve our family through our father.” So they made their father drink wine that night also, and the younger arose and lay with him; and he did not know when she lay down or when she arose.” Gen. 19:31-35
In our modern time, it is in our nature to be appalled by such things as incest, however the scriptures do not condemn or applaud the fact that Lot’s daughters sleep with him. Instead the text remains neutral, merely offering an explanation as to why it happened, and attempting to absolve all of guilt.
First we must consider that in their culture at that time, continuing the family line was very important, much more so than today. This explains, at least in part, why Lot’s daughters would even consider such a plot.
Second, surely all involved were familiar with the story of Noah and how from just a few persons the earth’s population had to be replenished. So great and sudden was this destruction that Lot’s daughters did not know the extent of it and expected the worst. Verse 31 informs us that Lot’s daughters thought Lot may have been the only male left alive, and as such the only path through which procreation could occur. We see in verse 14 that their husbands did not believe destruction was coming and thus they were left behind and destroyed.
Third, they enticed Lot to drink and become drunk. This at the very least tells us that Lot would not have willingly taken part in their plan while sober. Scripture seems to do its best to preserve Lot’s innocence. Though we do observe that the scenario happens twice – two nights in a row his daughters get him drunk and one of them sleeps with him. This seems to leave a moral gray area, as if Lot had any suspicion of the previous night’s happenings, he would have likely avoided drinking wine the next eve. Also note that Lot likely understood the destruction was not global (v. 13), so Lot would know he was not the only male left, though his daughters did not know this.
A popular teaching in Christian circles is that Lot was “backslidden” in his faith and thus his morals were compromised. I find this curious because the scriptures do not teach this; in fact, despite what potential evidence is in the Hebrew scriptures to this effect, 2 Peter in the New Testament specifically refers to Lot as being righteous, and even distressed about the wickedness around him while in Sodom. Though even if someone is called “righteous”, it does not mean they have never sinned, but I am not sure the lesson here is about Lot being backslidden.
Perhaps the lesson to be gleaned is to be careful with your words. It Lot’s case, he offered his own daughters to the town mob. Whether he was jesting or not, we do not know, however we do know that Lot himself ended up sleeping with his own daughters.
“Thus it came about, when God destroyed the cities of the valley, that God remembered Abraham, and sent Lot out of the midst of the overthrow, when He overthrew the cities in which Lot lived.” Gen. 19:29
Popular Jewish opinion seems to be that this verse means Lot was saved because of Abraham. If so, it means that Lot may not have been saved by his own righteousness. However this seems at odds with 2 Peter 2:7 in the New Testament which refers to “righteous Lot”.
One may take the Cavlinistic view that Lot was among the chosen since before the foundation of the world, and the others living in Sodom and Gomorrah were not.
One may also take the view that this statement by Peter was merely his opinion and his own interpretation of who Lot was from the scriptures as he understood them. This would be difficult however, for those who hold that all of scripture is inspired of the Holy Spirit and is therefore infallible.
Lot is not the only person in scripture shown favor by God though they were sinful. Consider Moses, a murderer. Consider King David, an adulterer and a murderer. Consider Paul, a persecutor of the church.
Perhaps Lot is innocent even. Of we would have against him, all could arguably be explained away.
- First in Gen. 13 Lot chooses the best land, described like “the garden of the LORD” (Gen. 13:10). We could see this as covetous, but what if Lot is merely choosing the land closer to the cities because he knows Abraham is older, and likely prefers to live away from the cities?
- Lot chose to move to Sodom. Was he tempted by wickedness, or was he trying to be a witness of God in that dark place?
- In chapter 20, Lot drinks wine and becomes drunk, to which one could respond that A) his daughters gave him the wine, he did not seek it himself, and B) Lot may have allowed himself to become drunk because of the terrible ordeal he was just through, which includes losing his wife. Note that after the flood, Noah became drunk from wine as well. (Gen. 9:21).
- Lastly we see Lot’s daughters plotted to sleep with him while drunk, to become pregnant (Gen. 19:31-32). Perhaps Lot was truly so drunk that he is without guilt in his actions. However scripture does tell us the same happened again with his other daughter the very next night.
The answer may simply be that Lot was not unrighteous, but Abraham was considered more righteous than Lot. Consider that we see the people of Zoar, who were unrighteous, are saved on account of Lot (19:21), who would be considered more righteous than they. And so it is not inconceivable that Lot was saved on account of Abraham, if by degrees, Abraham were more righteous.
“But his wife, from behind him, looked back, and she became a pillar of salt.” – Gen. 19:26
Lot’s wife turns back and becomes a pillar of salt. Josephus (Antiquities, Book 1 Chapter 11) wrote that this very pillar was still present in his time, around 100 AD. In Israel today there is are many salt formations around the dead sea (the area that was believed to be home to Sodom and Gomorrah).
The angels instructed Lot’s family not to look behind them (v. 17) but Lot’s wife did, hence her fate. We do not know why she turned back. Perhaps out of concern for her future sons-in-law, or other townspeople she knew who were perishing. Some would say she would not have shared the same fate unless she were guilty in her heart, being desirous of the type of living that was happening in Sodom.
“Now behold, your servant has found favor in your sight, and you have magnified your lovingkindness, which you have shown me by saving my life; but I cannot escape to the mountains, for the disaster will overtake me and I will die; now behold, this town is near enough to flee to, and it is small. Please, let me escape there (is it not small?) that my life may be saved.” Gen. 19:19-20
Previously called Bela (Gen. 14:2), Zoar was the smallest of the five towns of the plain. Lot may have thought he could not have made it any further by the time destruction would come. The angels spare Zoar from destruction on account of Lot (v. 21) though Lot ultimately heads to the mountains.
Robert Alter notes that Lot was not up for attempting to live in the wilderness having become accustomed to the city life, and only ultimately heads to the mountains for fear of destruction.
“But he hesitated. So the men seized his hand and the hand of his wife and the hands of his two daughters, for the compassion of the LORD was upon him; and they brought him out, and put him outside the city.” Gen. 19:16
Lot hesitated when the angels told him to leave. Lot’s sons in law thought he was joking, and they were left behind. Lot’s wife turned back while escaping, and was killed. Lot hesitated, but was spared. Why? “…the compassion of the LORD was upon him.”
“Before they lay down, the men of the city, the men of Sodom, surrounded the house, both young and old, all the people from every quarter;” Gen. 19:4
The people in the mob are referred to as “young and old”, “from every quarter” and even “small and great” in 19:11. This suggests a wide demographic of people from the city are involved in the ordeal. It is possible that it is a crowd that gathered out of curiosity for the spectacle, not unlike a public hanging or similar. However, this is likely highlighted in scripture to enforce to us that the whole place was wicked, and thus deserving of judgment to soon come.
“Lot went outside to meet them and shut the door behind him and said, “No, my friends. Don’t do this wicked thing. Look, I have two daughters who have never slept with a man. Let me bring them out to you, and you can do what you like with them. But don’t do anything to these men, for they have come under the protection of my roof.”” Gen. 19:6-8
One moment Lot seems righteous and then the next moment wicked. Ironically he is admonishing the mob outside his door not to act wickedly. This could be hypocritical, or it could be that the place is so wicked, that what Lot is offering, comparatively, is not as wicked as the men wanting to have relations with the angels.
One view is that the homosexual act was merely a punishment against unwanted visitors to Sodom. If so, perhaps Lot could call their bluff, believing the townspeople were not actually interested in his daughters in the slightest, but rather a brief diversion to get the townspeople to calm down and consider their request with some rationale. Unfortunately it only further incited them. Without this view, it is somewhat difficult to reconcile this passage with 2 Peter 2:7 in the New Testament which refers to Lot as being righteous.
Even so, the mob is not interested in Lot’s daughters, or Lot himself, which infers that the issue is directly with the town’s visitors. When the mob stopped and reflected however, they turned on Lot, as he was a stranger not long ago himself (v. 9).
In verse 8 note the reference to hospitality (“they have come under the protection of my roof”). Hospitality is a theme in chapters 18 and 19, as well as an illustration in contrasts; Abraham provided wonderful hospitality to these same angels in Gen. 18, but we see the terrible treatment they receive in Sodom.
“…they made war with Bera king of Sodom, and with Birsha, king of Gomorrah…” Gen. 14:2
Even though the Sodomites were a proud and wealthy people (see Ezek. 16:49), they knew what it meant to be in subjection. In Genesis, 14, four Assyrian kings made war with the kings of the five cities of the plain, including Sodom and Gomorrah. They served Chedorlaomer, king of Elam for 12 years.
Pondering Scripture 
Genesis 24:17-19 – Watering the Camels
March 17, 2011 in Bible, Genesis Commentary | Tags: Abraham, camel, Eliezer, Genesis, Genesis 19, hospitality, Rebekah, stranger, ten camels, water | by jhonse | 1 comment
“Then the servant ran to meet her, and said, “Please let me drink a little water from your jar.” She said, “Drink, my lord”; and she quickly lowered her jar to her hand, and gave him a drink. Now when she had finished giving him a drink, she said, “I will draw also for your camels until they have finished drinking.”” Gen. 24:17-19
This passage contains an oft-overlooked theme which is central not only to this story, but a theme that is critical to our lives as believers in God.
In response to the his request, Rebekah offers a drink to Abraham’s servant. She then offers to get water for the camels to drink. It is at this point that most of us who are reading forget: camels are known for drinking vast quantities of water, and further, there are ten camels (v. 10). In short, Rebekah volunteered for a momentous task for a complete stranger. The watering of the camels was a gesture that went far beyond the social expectation. (Nelson’s)
Ten camels will drink somewhere between 140 and 250 gallons by the time they are through (R’Hirsch; Plaut) and the scripture does read “until they have finished drinking” so this is not just a first sip. Also, the text tells us that Rebekah ‘descended’ to get the water, so there may have even been steps to climb down to the spring. If the spring or well had been easily accessible, they could simply lead the camels to the water, but instead a trough was used. It likely took her hours to perform all this work.
In short, Rebekah volunteered for a momentous task for a complete stranger, but soon she will be richly rewarded for it. The watering of the camels in and of itself is a sign to the servant for certain, however even more so, the practice of such excellent hospitality is what undoubtedly shows Abraham’s servant that Rebekah has the characteristics of Abraham’s family. Consider how Abraham served the three traveling strangers in Gen. 18, and how Abraham likely raised Lot to do the same (Genesis 19). Hospitality was a huge part of Abraham’s family, and Rebekah was the embodiment of that hospitality.