I've noticed that we oftentimes feel free to judge the motives of men in the Bible in an evil light. Sometimes it is obvious that they are evil, but other times it goes against what the Bible says. Such with "righteous Lot". Although I agree that Lot lost out in material possessions, that is as far as I can go. For, first, the Scriptures specifically say Lot was righteous, and, second, God Himself also indirectly testified about Lot's righteousness at this time by listening to the unspoken prayers of Abraham (Gen 18) and saving Lot from death. Third, we are all included with Lot by Jesus. "Remember Lot's wife" implies that we should be like Lot and his daughters instead. Finally, the details in the story of the happenings in Sodom argue strongly for the righteousness of Lot.

=======================

"Lot, must you?"

"Mother," came the shocked exclamation of her youngest daughter. Then more humbly, "Please pardon me, honorable mother, for gainsaying."

Her mother gave her a slight nod then a deeper bow to her husband. "And please pardon me, O my lord, for gainsaying also. Yet, I cannot help but worry about the harm we are calling down upon us by standing in the way of the inhospitable."

"Father," this from the eldest daughter, "We have spoken much on this subject. I can only repeat that, though I cannot take arms against the city to enforce goodness, I can at least place my body between the benighted stranger. The rumors and glimpse my sister and I had of the men's so-called hospitality is frightening, yes, but we stand agreed to honor your wishes -- your honorable wishes -- of protecting the stranger."

======================

Gen 19:1 Now the two angels came to Sodom in the evening...
    Evening was a crucial time. Travelers will now be seeking a place of safety from wild animals or bandits for the night, and the nearest town usually had a square within the gate where they could find a camping area, if they are poor, or a nearby inn, if they are wealthy. Hospitality was usually practiced by the inhabitants -- one never knew when they would be out in the wilderness themselves. Besides, there was always a possibility of selling something to the stranger. It was good business, but bad business could also make money.

...And Lot sat by the gate of Sodom,...
    Although this was where the judges commonly sat, it wasn't exclusively for judges. Idle hanger-ons, people seeking the judges, or even vendors could spend time there. Lot was not a judge. The taunt aimed at him in verse 9 makes that clear. They had no respect for his way of thinking, and therefore wouldn't accept him as a judge.
    Lot had other reasons to be there. Lot had lived there for some time and knew or had a shrewd guess what was going on. He was sitting there, obviously, because travelers were still stopping at Sodom for protection at night. If Sodom had a reputation, as implied in the previous chapter of Genesis, why would this happen? This argues that what could happen to the stranger wasn't well known yet, though the stink of it had drawn the attention of God. What could be some reasons that travelers were still stopping?
   
    There are three possibilities that I can see:
    1) The trade route that Sodom was on was so large that there were always groups that did not know what was going on. However, groups that have been roughed up will spread the news further on in their journey. At least their disheveled appearance (dust on their head, at the very least, for their dishonor) would cause a lot of talk.
    2) This was the first time this happened. However, the whole tenor of the story is that it has happened time and again.
    3) The victims were murdered. This is very likely. Dead men tell no tales, and torture and death for 'thrills' is not unusual for men of this type. Beside, dead men do not care to hold on to their possessions. Would it be wrong to assume that murder was the natural outcome of the perversions here and why people would not know to stop coming?

...When Lot saw them, he rose to meet them and bowed down with his face to the ground.
Gen 19:2 And he said, "Now behold, my lords, please turn aside into your servant's house, and spend the night, and wash your feet; then you may rise early and go on your way."
    Lot had no idea where these men came from. (Heb 13:2) The bowing and "my lords" was a common way of honorably addressing others. Though mere strangers to him, Lot probably knew something of what happened to the helpless travelers before this and had pity, a form of love, on them. How often did he save other men's lives? How much did it rankle the souls of the perverts?
    It has come to my attention that some would use this as evidence against Lot because he mentioned washing of feet last. But if we are going to go strictly on that basis, let us be consistent -- Lot was insinuating that they would have their feet washed in the morning before they got out of bed? To me, this speech could be from someone who is half-scared out of his wits.

...They said however, "No, but we shall spend the night in the square."
    A common place of safety in an ordinary town.
   
Gen 19:3 Yet he urged them strongly,...
    He was willing to spend time convincing them that this is what they wanted, though they didn't realize the danger. Interesting that Lot didn't bring up the danger to scare them into his house. Lot wasn't a backbiter. This argues for his righteousness.

...so they turned aside to him...
    How many were suspicious of Lot or so self-reliant that they refused his offer? Apparently Lot could be pretty persuasive when other people's safety was at stake. Do we evangelize as well as Lot did?

...and entered his house; and he prepared a feast for them, and baked unleavened bread, and they ate.
    Lot played the generous host for them, just as God our Father plays the generous host continually for us. This, again, argues for his righteousness.

Gen 19:4 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;
    This is probably the first time this happened -- otherwise Lot would have been dead or maimed and this story would not have happened. Lot had rescued men before in all probability, and it was upsetting and the talk of the taverns. They could have had their 'thrills' and a bit of extra money and Lot took their fun away! Note that Scripture is pretty clear that every man was there. Did that include his sons-in-law? They were men of the city too. (Lot was in the city, but not 'of' the city.) If so, Lot will step outside again later to try to get his sons-in-law to escape from the destruction of the city.
    "Every quarter" shows that all classes of men were involved. Merchants, tradesmen, laborers, rich, poor, priests, judges, the idle, and whatever else.

Gen 19:5 and they called to Lot and said to him, "Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us that we may have relations with them."
    Lot had possibly seen what was left of people that had been with the men of the city.

Gen 19:6 But Lot went out to them at the doorway, and shut the door behind him,
    Lot was more than generous in his hospitality. He would face death for them also. Don't think that he didn't know the danger. He had seen the corpses of previous victims, possibly, and knew that the men before him were habitual murderers. They were also probably a bit drunk and a bit out of control --note the detail of closing the door to keep the strangers safe. Would we even step outside in the same circumstances? Again, note the detail of closing the door. Didn't this effectively cut Lot off from safety?

Gen 19:7 and said, "Please, my brothers, do not act wickedly.
    Lot spoke kindly to them though they were reprobates. Yet he had the courage to speak the truth. Do we "speak the truth in love" like that?

Gen 19:8 "Now behold, I have two daughters who have not had relations with man; please let me bring them out to you, and do to them whatever you like; only do nothing to these men, inasmuch as they have come under the shelter of my roof."
    This is were most people would blame Lot. What assumptions do they have? The first assumption seems that Scripture threw in, "they have come under the shelter of my roof." gratuitously. We may have forgotten what that phrase meant, but Scripture has a much higher view of hospitality than we do. Let's keep that thought in mind.
    So, what was on Lot's mind? One possibility is that the sons-in-laws (in that culture an engagement was practically a marriage) were outside and Lot thought they would protect their fiances.

    That argument aside, remember these facts:

    First, that Lot was already himself out in the midst of (possibly drunken, probably murderous) sodomites and therefore was already risking his own life for the helpless strangers. He also was in danger of being raped, wasn't he.
    Second, the dishonor to his daughters would be nothing compared to the dishonor and, note well, the certain death of the strangers.

    Still, Lot's offer can argue one of two things.
        Either Lot did not love his daughters rightly,
        or he did and this shows how much he was willing to go through for the sake of the helpless.
    We often judge the first, as if we know his heart. Is there any good reason that we cannot judge that Lot was righteous instead? Put yourself in the place of those strangers "under his roof".

    Is it always bad to place your child in danger like this? Don't we praise another in the Bible for doing this? There is another place in the Bible that speaks of someone who was willing to put his only child in the hands of raving men to save the helpless stranger. See John 3:16. We were pretty helpless in the face of sin, were we not? We would perish, would we not? Do we blame the Father for sending His Son, but not Himself? Don't we acknowledge that everything that was done to His Son sent a pang of agony into His own Heart? Can we not then accept that Lot could also feel for his daughters' agony?

    But there is another angle here. Lot merely said that he would send them out. Why do we get the idea that Lot was in the house and was going to grab them and force them out? Did he know his daughters' character -- that like himself they would stand between the stranger and the evil outside. Why do we assume that his daughters were a couple of self-centered cowards? I'm speaking ironically, but do we teach our sons and daughters that they should never go into the mission field because their lives and honor are more important than those heathens? If we are not willing to measure up to the gospel, then we should blame Lot, for he is exposing our own self-centered wickedness. But if we can encourage our children to reach out to others even in the midst of danger, then let us accept Lot as one of the righteous.

The last three verses of this part of the story only illuminate the bravery of Lot.
Gen 19:9: But they said, "Stand aside." Furthermore, they said, "This one came in as an alien, and already he is acting like a judge; now we will treat you worse than them." So they pressed hard against Lot and came near to break the door.
    Lot took a stand even when they commanded him otherwise and called him an alien, which says that they didn't consider him under their protection. Furthermore, they sneered at his admonishment and threatened him greatly. Yet, he stood even when they were pushing him back. Do we stand for the helpless sinner the same way?

Gen 19:10: But the men reached out their hands and brought Lot into the house with them, and shut the door.
    Lot was taking such a stand that it was only supernatural intervention that brought him back.

Gen 19:11: They struck the men who were at the doorway of the house with blindness, both small and great, so that they wearied themselves trying to find the doorway.
    Lot knew what type of men these were -- so bound up in their sins that they cannot stop their striving even when it proves useless. Yet he still sought to protect the strangers.

So is Scripture right in saying that Lot was righteous? This part of the story, I think, argues that the Scriptures once again got it right.

--
joy, grace, love and peace from God our Father and in our Savior, Jesus
Christ,
David L. Smith

Has understanding of giving left us?

What did the tithe mean in the O.T.? We know that many of the O.T. laws were types of things to come. Tithes seem to be a good instance of that.

First, the meaning of the number ten. Ten is often used as a figurative round number, just as it is used today. So when Daniel is described as ten times wiser, or an Israelite tribe is given in the the hundreds, we don't need to expect that the Holy Spirit cares for picky details. He's communicating concepts, not trying to impress the IRS. Occasionally the ten is broken down to two numbers like three and seven, so you know it is exactly ten. Otherwise you can only speculate. One-tenth, on the other hand, seems to always be figurative (any exceptions?) It means a part that describes the whole. That is, a tithe is a picture of giving your all by giving part.

Are we finished yet? Does tithes merely mean that all that we have is the Lord's?

No.

One of the regulations of the tithe is that you tithe of your produce. That is the extent of it. Note that this doesn't touch the thousand talent profit that the clay jar manufacturer made last year. That is not required to be tithed and for a very good reason, and that is the same reason that altars were to be made of undressed stone. Undressed stone means that man couldn't brag about what he did for the Lord. It's all grace. The same with tithing produce instead of money from, say, practicing law -- the produce was from the Lord. One could only scatter the seed, but it is always the Lord that brought the increase. Any hint that we should be giving of our salaries is hit by a double legalism call, isn't it?

Finished now?

No.

What kind of produce do we have now? Surely the Lord doesn't want grass-clippings! Well, we are no longer living under the O.T. types, so can we set our minds above rather than on the things of this earth? What kind of produce do our souls produce? Isn't it the fruit of the Spirit? And isn't the fruit of the Spirit, well, of the Spirit and not-of-ourselves? Grace.

Yes, the O.T. tithe is a picture of grace, isn't it. Everything we have spiritually is of grace and we give the Lord a "tithe" which is now, truly, everything that we are. We are given crowns, but, in turn, cast them at Christ's feet.

Ahhh. So I don't have to give. Right?

Umm. When you give to your brother, aren't you giving to the Lord? Isn't the gift of giving a gift of the Spirit? If you have the love of Christ in you (after all, you are abiding in Him, and He in you) don't you also have the mind of Christ? And isn't the fruit of the Spirit simply the character of God? And isn't the Lord simply generous of what He has? You know. Grace?

That is, if you are truly in Christ, you will "need" to give in love. Just part of your godly character, eh?

--
grace from God our Father and in our Savior, Jesus Christ,