-
†. Gen 18:23a . . Abraham came forward
Abraham "came forward" in that he became somewhat assertive in this next
scene. He was sort of like a godfather to the Sodomites, in spite of their
decadence. That is amazing; yet, is so typical of the really holy men in the
Bible to intercede for people who certainly didn't deserve it. (e.g. Ex 32:30
35)
There's nothing intrinsically wrong in taking the initiative to speak with God.
After all, if people always waited for God to speak first before they ever said
a word in prayer, hardly anybody would talk to God at all. Not that God is
shy, it's just that He rarely ever says anything out loud, so a normal person
would tend to think The Almighty was indifferent to His creations. But that
just isn't true. We know from the Bible that God desires a rapport with
everyone.
Some people wait until they're desperate and out of options before turning
to God. But it is so insulting to treat God like a spare tire or a First Aid kit.
It's better to begin a rapport with Him early, now, before a crisis occurs. (cf.
Pro 1:24-33)
†. Gen 18:23b . . and said: Will You sweep away the innocent along
with the guilty?
The answer to that is of course a resounding YES!
"I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers
on the children, and on the third and the fourth generations of those who
hate Me." (Deut 5:9)
Q: How is that fair: holding children responsible for what their parents do?
A: Ex 20:5-- along with Ex 34:7, Num 14:18, and Deut 5:9 --is often
construed to mean that children are held responsible for their parents' sins;
but that isn't it. What we're looking at here is collateral damage. It is
apparently God's prerogative to get back at people by going after their
posterity and/or the people they govern.
There's a horrific example of collateral damage located at Num 16:25-34.
Another is the Flood. No doubt quite a few underage children drowned in
that event due to their parents' wickedness. The same no doubt happened to
the children in Sodom and Gomorrah. Ham's punishment for humiliating
Noah was a curse upon his son Canaan. And during Moses' face-off with
Pharaoh, God moved against the man's firstborn son along with all those of
his subjects.
There are times when God chooses to punish people by going after not only
themselves; but also the things that pertain to them; including, but not
limited to, their progeny. I don't quite understand the logic of that kind of
justice; but then again: I don't try; I just go along with it; primarily because
it's futile to find fault with God.
Although Lot was living in a very bad environment, and among very bad
people who caused him much mental and emotional stress (2Pet 2:4-9) it
didn't eo ipso make Lot himself a bad man. In the final analysis, when it was
time to make an end of Sodom, God made a difference between Lot and
Sodom and got him out before it was too late. It's horrible to contemplate
that some civilizations are so far gone that it's necessary to nuke 'em from
orbit and start all over from scratch.
†. Gen 18:24-25 . . What if there should be fifty innocent within the
city; will You then wipe out the place and not forgive it for the sake
of the innocent fifty who are in it? Far be it from You to do such a
thing, to bring death upon the innocent as well as the guilty, so that
innocent and guilty fare alike. Far be it from You! Shall not the Judge
of all the earth deal justly?
I think Abraham's question was more rhetorical than anything else. Of
course the Judge of all the earth deals justly; no true man of faith would
ever seriously question his maker's integrity.
†. Gen 18:26-29 . . And the Lord answered: If I find within the city of
Sodom fifty innocent ones, I will forgive the whole place for their
sake. Abraham spoke up, saying: Here I venture to speak to my
Lord, I who am but dust and ashes: What if the fifty innocent should
lack five? Will You destroy the whole city for want of the five? And
He answered: I will not destroy if I find forty-five there. But he
spoke to Him again, and said: What if forty should be found there?
And He answered: I will not do it, for the sake of the forty.
†. Gen 18:30-33 . . And he said: Let not my Lord be angry if I go on;
what if thirty should be found there? And He answered: I will not do
it if I find thirty there. And he said: I venture again to speak to my
Lord; what if twenty should be found there? And He answered: I will
not destroy, for the sake of the twenty. And he said: Let not my Lord
be angry if I speak but this last time; what if ten should be found
there? And He answered: I will not destroy, for the sake of the ten.
When the Lord had finished speaking to Abraham, He departed; and
Abraham returned to his place.
I'm guessing Abraham stopped at ten because he assumed there had to be
at least that many righteous in Sodom who didn't deserve to die; but
according to Peter; he was wrong. There was only one: and that's all there
was in Noah's day too. (Gen 7:1)
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
†. Gen 18:23a . . Abraham came forward
Abraham "came forward" in that he became somewhat assertive in this next
scene. He was sort of like a godfather to the Sodomites, in spite of their
decadence. That is amazing; yet, is so typical of the really holy men in the
Bible to intercede for people who certainly didn't deserve it. (e.g. Ex 32:30
35)
There's nothing intrinsically wrong in taking the initiative to speak with God.
After all, if people always waited for God to speak first before they ever said
a word in prayer, hardly anybody would talk to God at all. Not that God is
shy, it's just that He rarely ever says anything out loud, so a normal person
would tend to think The Almighty was indifferent to His creations. But that
just isn't true. We know from the Bible that God desires a rapport with
everyone.
Some people wait until they're desperate and out of options before turning
to God. But it is so insulting to treat God like a spare tire or a First Aid kit.
It's better to begin a rapport with Him early, now, before a crisis occurs. (cf.
Pro 1:24-33)
†. Gen 18:23b . . and said: Will You sweep away the innocent along
with the guilty?
The answer to that is of course a resounding YES!
"I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers
on the children, and on the third and the fourth generations of those who
hate Me." (Deut 5:9)
Q: How is that fair: holding children responsible for what their parents do?
A: Ex 20:5-- along with Ex 34:7, Num 14:18, and Deut 5:9 --is often
construed to mean that children are held responsible for their parents' sins;
but that isn't it. What we're looking at here is collateral damage. It is
apparently God's prerogative to get back at people by going after their
posterity and/or the people they govern.
There's a horrific example of collateral damage located at Num 16:25-34.
Another is the Flood. No doubt quite a few underage children drowned in
that event due to their parents' wickedness. The same no doubt happened to
the children in Sodom and Gomorrah. Ham's punishment for humiliating
Noah was a curse upon his son Canaan. And during Moses' face-off with
Pharaoh, God moved against the man's firstborn son along with all those of
his subjects.
There are times when God chooses to punish people by going after not only
themselves; but also the things that pertain to them; including, but not
limited to, their progeny. I don't quite understand the logic of that kind of
justice; but then again: I don't try; I just go along with it; primarily because
it's futile to find fault with God.
Although Lot was living in a very bad environment, and among very bad
people who caused him much mental and emotional stress (2Pet 2:4-9) it
didn't eo ipso make Lot himself a bad man. In the final analysis, when it was
time to make an end of Sodom, God made a difference between Lot and
Sodom and got him out before it was too late. It's horrible to contemplate
that some civilizations are so far gone that it's necessary to nuke 'em from
orbit and start all over from scratch.
†. Gen 18:24-25 . . What if there should be fifty innocent within the
city; will You then wipe out the place and not forgive it for the sake
of the innocent fifty who are in it? Far be it from You to do such a
thing, to bring death upon the innocent as well as the guilty, so that
innocent and guilty fare alike. Far be it from You! Shall not the Judge
of all the earth deal justly?
I think Abraham's question was more rhetorical than anything else. Of
course the Judge of all the earth deals justly; no true man of faith would
ever seriously question his maker's integrity.
†. Gen 18:26-29 . . And the Lord answered: If I find within the city of
Sodom fifty innocent ones, I will forgive the whole place for their
sake. Abraham spoke up, saying: Here I venture to speak to my
Lord, I who am but dust and ashes: What if the fifty innocent should
lack five? Will You destroy the whole city for want of the five? And
He answered: I will not destroy if I find forty-five there. But he
spoke to Him again, and said: What if forty should be found there?
And He answered: I will not do it, for the sake of the forty.
†. Gen 18:30-33 . . And he said: Let not my Lord be angry if I go on;
what if thirty should be found there? And He answered: I will not do
it if I find thirty there. And he said: I venture again to speak to my
Lord; what if twenty should be found there? And He answered: I will
not destroy, for the sake of the twenty. And he said: Let not my Lord
be angry if I speak but this last time; what if ten should be found
there? And He answered: I will not destroy, for the sake of the ten.
When the Lord had finished speaking to Abraham, He departed; and
Abraham returned to his place.
I'm guessing Abraham stopped at ten because he assumed there had to be
at least that many righteous in Sodom who didn't deserve to die; but
according to Peter; he was wrong. There was only one: and that's all there
was in Noah's day too. (Gen 7:1)
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=