CRITICAL NOTES.—
Genesis 19:37. Called his name Moab.] “From the father,” or “seed of the father.”
Genesis 19:38. Ben-Ammi. “Son of my people.”
MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.— Genesis 19:31-38
THE LESSONS OF LOT’S DISHONOUR
This chapter closes with the sad picture of a good man betrayed into sin, and thus covering his name with dishonour. It is a painful history, but there are some lessons of instruction to be learned.
I. That saints who have been, the subjects of extraordinary mercy may yet fall into sin. The temporal deliverance of Lot was a special act of Divine mercy. His conviction of it depended upon no mere emotion. There was the outward fact in which he could distinctly trace the hand of God. Yet, after so distinct a favour of Providence, he falls by an easy temptation into the foulest sin. Thus God’s mercy is no guarantee for human gratitude. Those who have been saved, yet so as by fire, are often the very first to forget God their Saviour. The picture which the Bible gives of man is faithful to the facts of human nature. God merciful, but man ungrateful. God just, but man unrighteous. God true, but every man a liar.
II. That it is difficult, even for the best, to escape the effect of evil associations. The conduct of Lot’s daughters shows how much they were imbued with the spirit of evil around them, notwithstanding their pious parentage. It is difficult for goodness to stand upright in the land of wickedness. Lot’s spiritual character suffered less injury than that of his family from their sojourn in Sodom; yet his moral sense was blunted, his moral fibre relaxed. As there is said to be virtue and healing in the shadow of goodness falling upon us, so the shadow of evil spreads nought but what is baneful.
III. The folly of a worldly choice. Lot had chosen this place with a view of promoting his temporal prosperity, but at what a cost! He had nearly perished in the terrible judgments which fell upon its population. He is scarcely saved. Mercy had to snatch him out of the fire. By choosing this world, against his best spiritual interests, he had exposed himself to bodily danger; and, what is worse than this, to great impairment of his spiritual health and vigour. We run the greatest risk to our souls when worldly considerations are uppermost in our minds in choosing our path in life.
IV. The wisdom of avoiding the occasions of sin. Lot gave way to strong drink, and then committed the sin of incest. There is a special danger in all sins of the flesh, for, when once indulged in, they render easier sins of deeper dye. They dull the intellect and the conscience until all moral perceptions are weakened and confused. If we allow the animal man the mastery, the spiritual man is threatened. How much of the sin, degradation, and misery of mankind is to be traced to strong drink! “Intoxication deceived Lot, who was not deceived in Sodom; the flames of lust burn him whom flames of sulphur did not burn.” (Gregory 1.) “Lot, who in Sodom, the very school of unchastity, had lived chastely, in the cave was guilty of incest, suffering shipwreck in the harbour.” (Lange.) The occasions of sin—especially those of a fleshly nature—should be avoided, or else we venture upon a current which will, in the end, become too strong for us.
V. The awful depths of human depravity. All sin is evil, but there are sins which defile the whole body and reveal depths of human depravity, from the very thought of which pure minds shrink with pain. There are fleshly sins of so deep a stain that the common fault and corruption of human nature is almost pure by comparison with them. This view of specially degrading sins is confirmed by the usages of language, by which the term “sinner” is applied to a special class. Such sins tend to hurry a man along that path which leads to infamy and shame.
VI. Fleshly sins cover even a fair name with dishonour. Lot is never mentioned in the history after this circumstance. He disappears under a cloud. A blot lies on his memory for all generations. He is now both outwardly and inwardly separated from Abraham, and is of no further importance in the history of salvation. His sin may have been forgiven, and his person accepted, but the deeds themselves are recorded in the iron page, where they remain. They are things done, and cannot be altered. They are happier and more blest who have not greatly fallen, even though the mercy of God is not overtasked by the worst sins of mankind.
VII. The danger of excitement. Lot had witnessed alarming scenes. It was a time of wild excitement when he knew not where to look for rest, and fears were in the way—destruction all around him, his wife stricken down at his side by an awful judgment, he himself a wanderer, having no certain dwelling-place, and not strong in the inspiration of hope. It is a time of great spiritual danger when a man is recovering from the extreme tension of his mind, produced by the excitement of violent and conflicting feelings.
VIII. The faithfulness of the Scripture record. Sacred history records the faults of its good men with a wonderful faithfulness. Here are no impossible characters, no ideal personages created by human imagination, but never seen in actual flesh and blood. The facts of human nature are accepted, though the contemplation of them may be painful and sad. We have men as they are, and not written up to by the devices of literary art. No human story-teller would have forged such a narrative as this. It has all the marks of a truthful record. The gravest sins and faults of the righteous are not concealed.
SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS ON THE VERSES
Genesis 19:32-36. The manners of Sodom here obtrude themselves upon our view. Lot’s daughters might seem to have been led to this unnatural project, first, because they thought the human race extinct with the exception of themselves, in which case their conduct may have seemed a work of justifiable necessity; and next, because the degrees of kindred within which it was unlawful to marry had not been determined by an express law. But they must have seen some of the inhabitants of Zoar after the destruction of the cities; and carnal intercourse between parent and offspring must have always been repugnant to nature.—(Murphy).
Kalisch well remarks, “No word is employed, no allusion made, in the whole of this tale to express disgust, aversion, or hatred: the laws concerning the allowed and forbidden degrees were not yet fixed: Abraham himself lived in a matrimony cursed as an abomination in the Mosaic code (Leviticus 18:9): the event is related with all the calmness of historical composition.” And it must also not be forgotten that in Deuteronomy 2:9-19, the possessions of the “children of Lot” in Ar and in the land of Ammon are recognised by God, and the Israelites are forbidden to distress or meddle with them. But at the same time the necessity which there was for bereaving Lot of his self-command, shows us beneath the surface that his “righteous soul,” even though it could brook much which nature now abhors (Genesis 19:8), could not have been brought to consent to that into which he was unconsciously betrayed.—(Alford.)
It is a moral duty to take care of our physical nature and to preserve it in its integrity. Whatever confuses the understanding, or weakens the will, exposes to moral danger. Hence drunkenness leads men into crimes from which, in their sober senses, they would shrink in abhorrence. All that which rouses the beast within us tends to destroy our better nature.
Those carnal devices by which morality is strained to meet circumstances show a practical distrust in Providence.
Genesis 19:37-38. Both these names justify the view that it was merely to preserve the family that the daughters of Lot had recourse to the expedient. Hence, as we do not find that they ever repeated the stratagem, so neither do they now appear to have been at all ashamed of it, both which would have been natural had their motives been more unworthy than they were. The offspring, however, of this incestuous connection, whatever may be said in behalf of the connection itself, was certainly a bad one. These Moabites soon fell from the faith of God, and became idolators, the worshippers of Chemosh and Baal-peor, and were enemies to the children of Abraham. The same is also true of the Ammonites. As both these make afterwards a considerable figure in the sacred history, the inspired writer takes care to introduce at this early period an account of their origin.—(Bush.)
In the worst races there is an element of hope. Ruth was a Moabitess, and was a member of that family through whom the Messiah came. The prophetic Scriptures give us a picture of the conversion of the Moabites to Christ. (Isaiah 11:14; Jeremiah 48:47; Daniel 11:41.) The golden age for mankind lies in the future, not in the past.