For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but cast them into hell and committed them to chains of gloomy darkness to be kept until the judgment; if he did not spare the ancient world, but preserved Noah, a herald of righteousness, with seven others, when he brought a flood upon the world of the ungodly; if by turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to ashes he condemned them to extinction, making them an example of what is going to happen to the ungodly; and if he rescued righteous Lot, greatly distressed by the sensual conduct of the wicked (for as that righteous man lived among them day after day, he was tormenting his righteous soul over their lawless deeds that he saw and heard); then the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from trials, and to keep the unrighteous under punishment until the day of judgment, and especially those who indulge in the lust of defiling passion and despise authority.

-2 Peter 2:4-10a, ESV

Martyn Lloyd-Jones referred to 2 Peter 2 one of the most terrifying chapters in the Bible.[1]  It includes some of the strongest condemnation in the New Testament—and it refers to people inside the church!  Peter’s condemnation of false teachers basically begins by recounting the most infamous tales of God’s judgment: the Flood and the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, emphasizing how in these events God both destroyed the wicked and rescued the righteous—namely Noah and Lot.  Anyone familiar with the story of Lot would be right to wonder how Lot could be called righteous.  We will see how Lot could be righteous and how that displays the Gospel, giving all who are in Christ reason for hope.

The Tragic Tale of Lot

Peter refers to Lot as righteous not once but three times: “and if he rescued righteous Lot, greatly distressed by the sensual conduct of the wicked (for as that righteous man lived among them day after day, he was tormenting his righteous soul over their lawless deeds that he saw and heard)” (2 Peter 2:7-8).  Since the Holy Spirit inspired him to write that, it must be true.  But what we see of Lot in Genesis is complicated and tragic.[2]  When Lot’s father Haran died young, his uncle Abraham took him in, so Lot sojourned with Abraham into Canaan and therefore experienced the blessing of being with God’s people (Genesis 11:27-12:5).[3]  But he was not adopted by Abraham, so he maintained his own property.  This created a problem as both men grew so prosperous that the land couldn’t support them.  To prevent the conflict from escalating, Abraham proposed that they separate and graciously gave Lot the first choice.  Based solely on worldly criteria, Lot chose the area near Sodom, which was fertile enough to maintain his earthly prosperity but would be detrimental to his spiritual prosperity (Genesis 13:5-13).[4]   

Though it was out of necessity, Lot was moving away from God’s people.  He started by dwelling near Sodom but ultimately moved into the city itself.  Then, he was captured when Sodom and its allies were defeated by a coalition from Mesopotamia then saved when Abraham and his allies defeated that coalition (Genesis 14:1-16).  In large part because of this, Lot rose in status in Sodom until he was “sitting in the gate”, which is where prominent men would govern.  That is where two angels found him to whom he showed extraordinary hospitality (Genesis 19:1-3).[5]  At his house, the full wickedness of Sodom was displayed when all of the men and boys of Sodom came demanding to do unspeakable things to Lot’s guests.  Lot recognized this as evil and tried to dissuade them, yet Lot’s proposed solution has baffled and sickened saints ever since: he offered to let the mob do those unspeakable things to his own daughters!  In doing so, Lot showed that he had been negatively influenced by living in Sodom.[6]  It was only by the intervention of the angels that Lot and his daughters were spared from the mob (Genesis 19:4-11).  Then the angels revealed their purpose: to rescue Lot and his family because Sodom was about to be destroyed.  When Lot offered that rescue to his daughters’ fiancés, they thought Lot was joking and refused to leave (Genesis 19:12-14).[7]  Lot and his family then lingered in Sodom until morning.  Finally, the angels seized the hands of Lot, his wife, and his two daughters and dragged them out of Sodom.  Even then, they didn’t flee to the mountains as the angels said but bargained with the angels to stay in a smaller town nearby (Genesis 19:15-22).[8]  As soon as they reached it, the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah began.  Lot’s wife disobeyed the angels and turned back toward Sodom, which resulted in her perishing and becoming a pillar of salt (Genesis 19:23-26).[9]  Following that cataclysmic event, Lot was afraid to stay in the town, so he fled with his daughters into the hills and dwelt there (Genesis 19:30). 

At this point, we must ask the obvious question: why didn’t Lot rejoin Abraham?  His plan to prosper near Sodom had backfired, so he should have gone to Abraham and asked to sojourn with him again.   But for whatever reason he did not, so his story ends even more tragically than it began.  Though he had maintained some semblance of morality and honor for God, he had failed in his role as pastor of his family.  His wife was likely a Sodomite and raised their daughters accordingly. |Now, she was gone and Lot had failed to provide godly husbands for his daughters—a failure shared by many fathers and pastors today.  With the prospect of their lineage ending, the daughters concoct a twisted plot to conceive through incest (Genesis 19:31-36).  That this even entered their minds shows their Sodomite upbringing that glorified sex and cheapened marriage (much like our culture): they didn’t want husbands but sperm donors.[10]  Still, they are actually more virtuous than those who slaughter their children in the wombso they can have sex without consequences.  Nevertheless, the Ammonites who descended from the younger daughter worshipped Molech by sacrificing their children for sex and prosperity.  The worship of Chemosh by the Moabites who descended from the older daughter was similar.[11]  So the biblical account of Lot ends with him unknowingly fathering his grandsons who would ultimately become the Moabites and Ammonites who antagonized God’s people (Genesis 19:37-38).  This account gives scant evidence for how Peter could possibly call Lot righteous.

We Are No Better than Lot

Based on the Genesis account, it is easy to write Lot off as wicked, but Peter calling him righteous reminds us that we cannot divide the people of Scripture into categories of good and bad.  As we saw with Job’s wife, such generalizations are unhelpful.  Even those we consider virtuous in Scripture, such as Judah, David, and the “hall of faith”, committed great sins.  And while some like Eli’s worthless sons and Haman were thoroughly wicked, some that we often look down upon turn out to be more righteous than we supposed.  Such is the case with Lot, so we must reject the generational arrogance that assumes we are so much better, smarter, and holier than those who went before us.  It is easy to be armchair quarterbacks and declare what Lot should have done, but upon closer examination, we will find that we are no better than Lot or his daughters.

First, we have to recognize that while Lot is often maligned in pulpits and Christian homes throughout the West, his deeds are far more righteous than many “Christians” today.  Though he dwelt in Sodom, he never assimilated into their wickedness but recognized and avoided it.[12]  Despite his position of prominence, the mob still recognized him as an outsider and maligned him for not joining them.  The “alphabet abomination” I discussed here and here bears many similarities to the mob in Sodom and likewise maligns the saints who refuse to join them.  In his earlier letter, Peter said we should expect this: “With respect to this they are surprised when you do not join them in the same flood of debauchery, and they malign you; but they will give account to him who is ready to judge the living and the dead” (1 Peter 4:4-5).  Yet many “Christians” today do not realize this.  Instead of confronting the wickedness of the alphabet abomination as Lot did, they declare with the “yard sign creed” that “love is love” and shrug off any twinge of conscience with “who am I to judge?”.  Lot was also hospitable, which is virtually unheard of in our culture. Some use this to claim lack of hospitality not homosexuality brought God’s wrath on Sodom. This is disingenuous eisegesis that arrogantly disregards Scripture. Even if it was true, the hospitality of Sodom exceeds our own, so we deserve the same condemnation. Indeed, Lot and his daughters are much closer to modern Christian culture than anyone would admit.  Lot is seen throughout Genesis 19 as passive like Adam, just as society teaches men to be.  Conversely, his daughters are strong and independent women who take matters into their own hands, just as society teaches women to be.  We are hypocritical if we malign them while training our children to be just like them.

Additionally, while Lot failed to lead his family to worship God and forsake the evil of Sodom, he taught his daughters well enough that they understood the importance of their heritage, the Cultural Mandate, and children.  Our culture and many churches have forgotten that.  We may be repulsed by their twisted plan to conceive by incest, but they would be repulsed by our abortion, feminism, careerism, blurring of gender distinction, parental abdication of education responsibilities to godless schools, and generational shortsightedness.  Furthermore, many “Christian” homes are not teaching their daughters any better.  Like Lot’s wife, they have raised their daughters to be no different than pagans, accepting or even fully embracing the modern godless and sex-filled approach to relationships.  We rightly cringe at how Lot offered his daughters to the mob, but he would cringe at how so many “Christian” parents likewise offer their children to the mob by sending them without hesitation or oversight into a dating scene filled with promiscuity. He would likewise cringe at how they allow the mob inside their homes by letting their children use the internet and social media unrestricted.  Even those who are raising their daughters to be virtuous often fail like Lot to help them find godly husbands.  They have likewise failed to raise their sons to be godly husbands.  And rather than fulfilling their responsibility of preparing men and women for marriage and helping them find godly spouses, many churches simply ignore their singles and justify themselves by saying their singles have “the gift of singleness” when most do not.  The dismal state of modern relationships is therefore similar to what Lot’s daughters faced.  Women look around and see no godly men worth marrying, so they consider desperate measures like pursuing unbelieving men or giving up on marriage altogether.  Men likewise see no godly women worth marrying, giving up on marriage when faced with the high risk of losing everything in divorce. Fathers and pastors must repent of this failure.

In some ways we are no different than Lot and his daughters, and in others we are much worse.  Lot and his daughters will stand up at the Judgment with this generation and condemn it, for Lot was greatly tormented and distressed by the evil around him (2 Peter 2:7-8) while so many in this generation have either embraced or become apathetic to the wickedness.[13]  Clearly, this generation is in no position to judge Lot or his daughters.

The Righteousness of Lot

Nevertheless, while Lot’s righteousness far exceeds that of the Sodomites and many “Christians” today, he certainly didn’t deserve to be rescued as he was.  Genesis gives us a clear reason why Lot was rescued: “So it was that, when God destroyed the cities of the valley, God remembered Abraham and sent Lot out of the midst of the overthrow when he overthrew the cities in which Lot had lived” (Genesis 19:29).  Just as David showed extraordinary kindness to Mephibosheth for the sake of Jonathan, God showed extraordinary grace to Lot for the sake of Abraham.  But Abraham had his own failings.  In the time since he and Lot separated, Abraham had given in to Sarah’s suggestion and fathered a child by human means (Genesis 16).  After Sodom was destroyed, his cowardice would put Sarah in jeopardy for a second time (Genesis 20).  Scripture is clear that Abraham was not righteous by any merit of his own, but he believed in God’s promises to him and that faith was credited to him by God as righteousness (Romans 4).  God continually repeated that promise throughout Abraham’s life, starting right after he and Lot separated.  Essentially, Abraham was righteous because God declared him to be righteous and then caused him to endure in faith despite his many failures.  The same can be said of Lot: God determined to rescue him from Sodom and brought that plan to fruition despite resistance from Lot.  God also would not allow the angels to destroy Sodom before Lot and his daughters were safe, just as the master in the parable of the weeds would not allow the reapers to remove the weeds (the wicked) until the wheat (the righteous) had been harvested completely (Matthew 13:24-30).  In other words, Lot was declared righteous for the same reason Abraham was—and all of us are as well—because God ordained it and then brought about saving faith.  God declared Lot righteous for His own Name’s sake.

What we see in Lot is a righteousness declared and maintained by God despite compromise, failure, worldly-mindedness, and backsliding.[14]  But the Spirit inspired Peter to identify Lot not by his failures but by his faith that can only be attributed to God.[15]  Therefore, Lot like all saints was predestined, called, justified, sustained, and ultimately glorified by God alone apart from his own merits (Romans 8:29-30).  This should be incredibly encouraging for us because it means that genuine faith can—and often does—coexist with doubt, backsliding, and compromise.  It is God who saves and keeps us, which is a point that Peter stresses.  His statement about Lot comes as the last of five conditional statements about how God judged the wicked but rescued the righteous followed by this: “then the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from trials, and to keep the unrighteous under punishment until the day of judgment, and especially those who indulge in the lust of defiling passion and despise authority” (2 Peter 2:9-10a).  God has proven Himself in the past by sustaining those of stronger faith like Noah and those of weaker faith like Lot.

Even if we experience periods of doubt or backsliding, while we still have breath it isn’t too late to repent, resting in the knowledge that like Lot we are declared righteous because we are saved and kept by Christ.  Those who fall away without repentance, whom Peter and others warn against (Hebrews 6), were never saved to begin with.  They are marked by misplaced confidence rather than doubt.  So when we doubt, let the imputed righteousness of Lot drive us back to the cross to rely on Christ who saved us and keeps us:

When we read Genesis 19 we only see [Lot] as a greedy and selfish man, who treated…his daughters abominably (Genesis 19:8). Yet the Lord said in effect, ‘Lot trusts in me, and also Abraham has prayed for him.’…We could say that Lot did not deserve to be rescued, but do any of us? That is what grace is: God’s love to undeserving sinners.

-Michael Bentley, Living for Christ in a Pagan World: 1 and 2 Peter Simply Explained, Welwyn Commentary Series, Darlington, England: Evangelical Press: 1990: 215.

NOTES:

[1] Michael Bentley, Living for Christ in a Pagan World: 1 and 2 Peter Simply Explained, Welwyn Commentary Series: Darlington, England: Evangelical Press, 1990: 210, cited from Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Sermons on 2 Peter, p. 134.

[2] David D. Pettus, “Lot, Son of Haran,” ed. John D. Barry et al., The Lexham Bible Dictionary, Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press: 2016.

[3] Philip H. Eveson, The Book of Origins: Genesis Simply Explained, Welwyn Commentary Series, Darlington, England: Evangelical Press: 2001: 245.

[4] Philip H. Eveson, The Book of Origins: Genesis Simply Explained, Welwyn Commentary Series, Darlington, England: Evangelical Press: 2001: 264-66; David Brown, A. R. Fausset, and Robert Jamieson, A Commentary, Critical, Experimental, and Practical, on the Old and New Testaments: Genesis–Deuteronomy, vol. I: London; Glasgow: William Collins, Sons, & Company, Limited: n.d.: 134.

[5] Philip H. Eveson, The Book of Origins: Genesis Simply Explained, Welwyn Commentary Series, Darlington, England: Evangelical Press: 2001: 335.

[6] John Calvin and John King, Commentary on the First Book of Moses Called Genesis, vol. 1, Bellingham, WA: Logos: 2010: 499–500.

[7] Ibid: 505-506.

[8] Ibid: 508-510.

[9] Ibid: 514-515.

[10] Philip H. Eveson, The Book of Origins: Genesis Simply Explained, Welwyn Commentary Series, Darlington, England: Evangelical Press: 2001: 340; David Brown, A. R. Fausset, and Robert Jamieson, A Commentary, Critical, Experimental, and Practical, on the Old and New Testaments: Genesis–Deuteronomy, vol. I: London; Glasgow: William Collins, Sons, & Company, Limited: n.d.: 164-165.

[11] R. H. Kennett, “Moab,” ed. James Hastings, John A. Selbie, and Louis H. Gray, Encyclopædia of Religion and Ethics, Edinburgh; New York: T. & T. Clark; Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1908–1926: 761.

[12] Lewis R. Donelson, I & II Peter and Jude: A Commentary, First edition., The New Testament Library, Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press: 2010: 244–245.

[13] John Calvin and John Owen, Commentaries on the Catholic Epistles,Bellingham, WA: Logos: 2010: 399.

[14] Philip H. Eveson, The Book of Origins: Genesis Simply Explained, Welwyn Commentary Series, Darlington, England: Evangelical Press: 2001: 339.

[15] David Brown, A. R. Fausset, and Robert Jamieson, A Commentary, Critical, Experimental, and Practical, on the Old and New Testaments: Acts–Revelation, vol. VI, London; Glasgow: William Collins, Sons, & Company, Limited, n.d.: 624.