Remember Lot's Wife
- Thread starter posthuman
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Because being supernaturally removed from the impending doom of the wicked city is such a clear typology of salvation from sin and the judgement to come of the world, this becomes a debate over the security of our salvation.
If we, having been saved, glance back once and stumble, are we forever irrevocably damned?
That is the theological position that the interpretation my brother @oyster67 is presenting has to arrive at: for some people, like Mrs Lot, they lose their salvation immediately and can never regain it because of one single mistake. for others, they can sin and stumble over and over and over their whole lives and stay saved. God apparently plays favorites or isn't otherwise consistent in judgment.
Is this orthodoxy??
No, it is not.
I do not agree with the common superficial account and understanding of this text.
If we, having been saved, glance back once and stumble, are we forever irrevocably damned?
That is the theological position that the interpretation my brother @oyster67 is presenting has to arrive at: for some people, like Mrs Lot, they lose their salvation immediately and can never regain it because of one single mistake. for others, they can sin and stumble over and over and over their whole lives and stay saved. God apparently plays favorites or isn't otherwise consistent in judgment.
Is this orthodoxy??
No, it is not.
I do not agree with the common superficial account and understanding of this text.
unfortunately only between 1 and 6 of these 10 were righteous. God kept His word. ((duh!))
The sons in law were not - scoffing at Lot.
The sons were not - the text says "all the men of the city, young and old" surrounded Lot's house. I have no basis to believe his sons and sons-in-law were not complicit.
possibly his daughters, both married and unmarried.
potentially his wife - that appears to be a matter of heated discussion lol
perhaps the best argument is that there were only 4 - the 4 who were indeed saved from the fate of the city.
even if Mrs. Lot did not physically survive, she emphatically did not share the same fate as the city. she had a very, very special fate: being made a pillar of a purifying, preserving, fireproof substance. to be remembered, to be a sign of remembrance at the end of the age.
curiouser & curiouser!
The sons in law were not - scoffing at Lot.
The sons were not - the text says "all the men of the city, young and old" surrounded Lot's house. I have no basis to believe his sons and sons-in-law were not complicit.
possibly his daughters, both married and unmarried.
potentially his wife - that appears to be a matter of heated discussion lol
perhaps the best argument is that there were only 4 - the 4 who were indeed saved from the fate of the city.
even if Mrs. Lot did not physically survive, she emphatically did not share the same fate as the city. she had a very, very special fate: being made a pillar of a purifying, preserving, fireproof substance. to be remembered, to be a sign of remembrance at the end of the age.
curiouser & curiouser!
-
1
- Show all
i think he was stalling for time. his uncle Abraham is the most powerful man in the whole region, and Lot is no doubt a rich man himself, with servants in the fields who will see the mob and react.
2 Peter 2 specifically calls Lot righteous, and that is AMAZING because yeah, at face value, he seems to do everything absolutely wrong. why is he constantly arguing with the angels? what in the world is he doing offering his daughters to the mob? why is he hesitating? why does he disobey their command to go to the mountains? and he's righteous?? wait, wut??
That should stop us in our tracks immediately and make us completely reconsider Genesis 19, and that's essentially what i hope for this thread to be about.
you've got a knack for cutting to the heart of things bro =]
2 Peter 2 specifically calls Lot righteous, and that is AMAZING because yeah, at face value, he seems to do everything absolutely wrong. why is he constantly arguing with the angels? what in the world is he doing offering his daughters to the mob? why is he hesitating? why does he disobey their command to go to the mountains? and he's righteous?? wait, wut??
That should stop us in our tracks immediately and make us completely reconsider Genesis 19, and that's essentially what i hope for this thread to be about.
you've got a knack for cutting to the heart of things bro =]
-
1
- Show all
i think we should back up, slow down and look at what Peter says:
2 Peter 2:7-9 (nkjv)
. .. and delivered righteous Lot, [who was] oppressed by the filthy conduct of the wicked (for that righteous man, dwelling among them, tormented [his] righteous soul from day to day by seeing and hearing [their] lawless deeds)— [then] the Lord knows how to deliver the godly out of temptations and to reserve the unjust under punishment for the day of judgment
Peter doesn’t pull this out of thin air.
he says Lot is righteous, that Lot was oppressed by the filthy conduct of the men of Sodom, and that his soul was tormented/vexed by seeing and hearing of the vile things they practiced.
Peter gets this from the OT.
What is it Peter reads and understands that leads him to these conclusions?
Do we dare tell him 'the text doesn't say that!' lol
The text leaves a lot of things out. Hebrew literature presumes that the one reading it is intelligent enough to put 2 and 2 together into 4. she something in the narrative should be supporting Peter's conclusions, and I think that figuring that out is going to give us a big advantage in figuring out how to rightly interpret the rest of it.
2 Peter 2:7-9 (nkjv)
. .. and delivered righteous Lot, [who was] oppressed by the filthy conduct of the wicked (for that righteous man, dwelling among them, tormented [his] righteous soul from day to day by seeing and hearing [their] lawless deeds)— [then] the Lord knows how to deliver the godly out of temptations and to reserve the unjust under punishment for the day of judgment
Peter doesn’t pull this out of thin air.
he says Lot is righteous, that Lot was oppressed by the filthy conduct of the men of Sodom, and that his soul was tormented/vexed by seeing and hearing of the vile things they practiced.
Peter gets this from the OT.
What is it Peter reads and understands that leads him to these conclusions?
Do we dare tell him 'the text doesn't say that!' lol
The text leaves a lot of things out. Hebrew literature presumes that the one reading it is intelligent enough to put 2 and 2 together into 4. she something in the narrative should be supporting Peter's conclusions, and I think that figuring that out is going to give us a big advantage in figuring out how to rightly interpret the rest of it.
-
1
- Show all
If that's the case i think that his wife and daughters are no less righteous than he is. God's mercy was on them for Abraham's sake, and His lovingkindness is everlasting. He sent His angels to take them out of the city, and He prevented them from returning.
He saved them.
Yes, if that is the case, i think judging any of them over their actions is moot.
By grace, apart from works - no one may boast
He saved them.
Yes, if that is the case, i think judging any of them over their actions is moot.
By grace, apart from works - no one may boast
-
1
- Show all
@Magenta dear sister thank you for keeping me honest. my reply is that i think i can support these things by logical inference from the plain text, and that the view i am opposing, i think cannot do the same.
i love you
@oyster67 dear brother thank you for opposing me and making me watch where my foot steps and what my mouth says, that i can back up what i say. there are no hard feelings here; it is why we joined a discussion forum, so we could grow in knowledge and sharpen each other.
thank you also for listening!
i hope you will give these things real consideration.
i love you, too - whether i can convince you or not. you are valuable to me =]
i love you
@oyster67 dear brother thank you for opposing me and making me watch where my foot steps and what my mouth says, that i can back up what i say. there are no hard feelings here; it is why we joined a discussion forum, so we could grow in knowledge and sharpen each other.
thank you also for listening!
i hope you will give these things real consideration.
i love you, too - whether i can convince you or not. you are valuable to me =]
-
3
- Show all
