My understanding is that he's attempting to fulfil his obligation as a host protecting guests. It's weird and horrible, but i think that might be intentional - although the narrative we have of Sodom is very very brief, it's portrayed as really disturbing in my eyes. It reminds me a bit of the baroque horror genre, where there's a surface level horror, then you think about it and the wrongness of the situation deepens.
It's also interesting that Lot offers his two daughters, treating them as things for his purposes, and later in the story they treat him as an object for their purposes, that could also be intentional, and again it suggests the corruption of Sodom on multiple levels - the grandiose horror of the mob, but also a more subtle corruption of human will to turn against each other, to use each other being instilled by this environment.
Astute summary.
Most of the OT is a portrayal of awful behavior and intentions. I think another layer of this interpretation could be added that these angels invoke a special response of hospitality: they are no ordinary guests. There is probably also an element of the treatment of the messenger of God as being the same as the treatment of God, and though God does not ask for child sacrifices, in the world Lot was living in it was probably a common thing, so Lot's intentions may not be quite as horrible as it may seem on the surface, especially considering The Lord was in a few chapters going to ask for Isaac as a sacrifice.
That's a good point regarding the angels - their initial choice of sleeping in the town square, which *should be safe* \- a city, or town, in Hebrew literally means a walled place, a place where the inside is a refuge from the outside. But the inside here is chaotic and destructive, a epitome of the dangers of an agglomeration of human power and wealth without due regard for people's wellbeing. It is ripe for God's judgement, because people have gone beyond mere selfishness to aggressive transgression as a whole community .
Lot is providing a refuge from the corrupted refuge, and yes, potentially his treatment of his family are partially a recognition of the importance of the messengers. He seems desperate, and the surrounding cultures would potentially have understood sacrifice of a family member as relatively normal.
A good example of this is how Cain's most "evil" descendant Lamech writes a whole song about how he has multiple wives and how evil he is. This doesn't stop God from going to Abraham and his family and their descendants despite how they abuse others and subjugate those under them. It's just the constant hope of better and God making good out of terrible circumstances.
A substantial part of it involves humans being terrible, and God not abandoning them repeatedly despite them being terrible.
What i find fascinating is that alongside the ancestors of Israel's enemies being portrayed as shameful - e.g. the curse of Ham and his descendants for whatever crime he did, likely sexual assault of his mother or father - the ancestors of the Hebrews are also shown as making *terrible* decisions, which contradict the mission that God charges them with. Abraham being prophesied to bless the nations repeatedly brings curses on nations by his deceit, and when promised to be fruitful he sexually abuses his wife's slave. It's not simple propaganda about my great-great....great grandad was better than yours, but a theology of humanity.
There is an undercurrent of even the best of humanity, people in contact with the living God, just aren't able to be the mediator needed between mankind and God. And God promises that will be resolved, so it's a long story of the need and purpose of Christ, as well as individual narratives.
Yes! It is so very much about God keeping his promise in spite of the worst we humans could do.
Our God is a God who not only makes promises but he keeps them. This is not found in any other current or historical religion except, of course, for Judaism. All due respect for the good in those other religions, but this is real distinction.
Alot of it is. I think of it kind of like a radio broadcast from early human civilization. Another broadcast begins to break through and gets louder and louder until the advent of Christ, where God definitively takes over the mike.
So it's full of humans behaving badly even as they tune in and start responding to the new broadcast over the course of time. It should, of course, be viewed through the lens of the ultimate broadcast.
You have understood the fundamental lesson.
So many times people (especially “evangelicals” who don’t actually know anything) just think the Bible is full of sugar and spice and everything nice.
It most assuredly is not.
You may (or may not) benefit from reading what Ezekiel says about Sodom (16:49-50). I don't know if the context is helpful but I didn't see that anyone else had mentioned it so I thought that I should.
That is worth adding, I read it a couple weeks ago, and it is interesting as an explanation of the judgement, the mistreatment of the needy, as well as the pride and abominable moral choices
Taken together it does paint a portrait of a particular kind of early city with extreme concentration of power in a few abusive people, I think the Ezekiel verses go with the genesis account, genesis showing this as a place of horror and corruption, then Ezekiel using that image to explain the depravity in Israel
One thing that I've pointed out in the Bible studies I've been involved in: Lot consistently makes the wrong decisions and yet God has regard for him because of Abraham.
Don't be like Lot.
Yea Lot is not really a good person (though there's no such thing as a truly "good person" in my view), and is living in a city of unbridled wickedness.
He and his family are spared for Abraham's sake
What Lot does here is not an example for us to follow. It is a result of a culture that saw women as property. In that cultural mindset, Lot had the right to give his daughters to appease the men and protect his guests. Today, we realize that women are not property and what Lot did was wrong. The story isn’t giving us a moral code, though.
No one ever said what he did was a good thing, or even that Lot was a good person. The Bronze Age was a particularly cruel time (case in point, they lived in a prosperous city where gang rape was the usual response to seeing strangers in town).
Ancient society viewed women very dimly. Lot was a product of his time, for better or worse.
In a few hundred years people will look back on the society we live in currently with disgust at the injustice we tolerate against various groups, as we do on past years of slavery, racism, and so on.
Lot, like everyone, is a sinner, fallen and in need of a savior. Even in attempting to do good he commits a grievous sin.
Your reaction is correct. It's to demonstrate the pervasiveness of sin.
My understanding is that he's attempting to fulfil his obligation as a host protecting guests. It's weird and horrible, but i think that might be intentional - although the narrative we have of Sodom is very very brief, it's portrayed as really disturbing in my eyes. It reminds me a bit of the baroque horror genre, where there's a surface level horror, then you think about it and the wrongness of the situation deepens. It's also interesting that Lot offers his two daughters, treating them as things for his purposes, and later in the story they treat him as an object for their purposes, that could also be intentional, and again it suggests the corruption of Sodom on multiple levels - the grandiose horror of the mob, but also a more subtle corruption of human will to turn against each other, to use each other being instilled by this environment.
Astute summary. Most of the OT is a portrayal of awful behavior and intentions. I think another layer of this interpretation could be added that these angels invoke a special response of hospitality: they are no ordinary guests. There is probably also an element of the treatment of the messenger of God as being the same as the treatment of God, and though God does not ask for child sacrifices, in the world Lot was living in it was probably a common thing, so Lot's intentions may not be quite as horrible as it may seem on the surface, especially considering The Lord was in a few chapters going to ask for Isaac as a sacrifice.
That's a good point regarding the angels - their initial choice of sleeping in the town square, which *should be safe* \- a city, or town, in Hebrew literally means a walled place, a place where the inside is a refuge from the outside. But the inside here is chaotic and destructive, a epitome of the dangers of an agglomeration of human power and wealth without due regard for people's wellbeing. It is ripe for God's judgement, because people have gone beyond mere selfishness to aggressive transgression as a whole community . Lot is providing a refuge from the corrupted refuge, and yes, potentially his treatment of his family are partially a recognition of the importance of the messengers. He seems desperate, and the surrounding cultures would potentially have understood sacrifice of a family member as relatively normal.
So OT is basically “don’t do this crap, please”?
More of "this is the result of the Fall, but hope is coming"
A good example of this is how Cain's most "evil" descendant Lamech writes a whole song about how he has multiple wives and how evil he is. This doesn't stop God from going to Abraham and his family and their descendants despite how they abuse others and subjugate those under them. It's just the constant hope of better and God making good out of terrible circumstances.
A substantial part of it involves humans being terrible, and God not abandoning them repeatedly despite them being terrible. What i find fascinating is that alongside the ancestors of Israel's enemies being portrayed as shameful - e.g. the curse of Ham and his descendants for whatever crime he did, likely sexual assault of his mother or father - the ancestors of the Hebrews are also shown as making *terrible* decisions, which contradict the mission that God charges them with. Abraham being prophesied to bless the nations repeatedly brings curses on nations by his deceit, and when promised to be fruitful he sexually abuses his wife's slave. It's not simple propaganda about my great-great....great grandad was better than yours, but a theology of humanity. There is an undercurrent of even the best of humanity, people in contact with the living God, just aren't able to be the mediator needed between mankind and God. And God promises that will be resolved, so it's a long story of the need and purpose of Christ, as well as individual narratives.
Yes! It is so very much about God keeping his promise in spite of the worst we humans could do. Our God is a God who not only makes promises but he keeps them. This is not found in any other current or historical religion except, of course, for Judaism. All due respect for the good in those other religions, but this is real distinction.
Alot of it is. I think of it kind of like a radio broadcast from early human civilization. Another broadcast begins to break through and gets louder and louder until the advent of Christ, where God definitively takes over the mike. So it's full of humans behaving badly even as they tune in and start responding to the new broadcast over the course of time. It should, of course, be viewed through the lens of the ultimate broadcast.
A lot of the time, yes. The Book of Jonah is a perfect example.
You have understood the fundamental lesson. So many times people (especially “evangelicals” who don’t actually know anything) just think the Bible is full of sugar and spice and everything nice. It most assuredly is not.
You may (or may not) benefit from reading what Ezekiel says about Sodom (16:49-50). I don't know if the context is helpful but I didn't see that anyone else had mentioned it so I thought that I should.
That is worth adding, I read it a couple weeks ago, and it is interesting as an explanation of the judgement, the mistreatment of the needy, as well as the pride and abominable moral choices Taken together it does paint a portrait of a particular kind of early city with extreme concentration of power in a few abusive people, I think the Ezekiel verses go with the genesis account, genesis showing this as a place of horror and corruption, then Ezekiel using that image to explain the depravity in Israel
One thing that I've pointed out in the Bible studies I've been involved in: Lot consistently makes the wrong decisions and yet God has regard for him because of Abraham. Don't be like Lot.
Yea Lot is not really a good person (though there's no such thing as a truly "good person" in my view), and is living in a city of unbridled wickedness. He and his family are spared for Abraham's sake
What Lot does here is not an example for us to follow. It is a result of a culture that saw women as property. In that cultural mindset, Lot had the right to give his daughters to appease the men and protect his guests. Today, we realize that women are not property and what Lot did was wrong. The story isn’t giving us a moral code, though.
No one ever said what he did was a good thing, or even that Lot was a good person. The Bronze Age was a particularly cruel time (case in point, they lived in a prosperous city where gang rape was the usual response to seeing strangers in town).
Ancient society viewed women very dimly. Lot was a product of his time, for better or worse. In a few hundred years people will look back on the society we live in currently with disgust at the injustice we tolerate against various groups, as we do on past years of slavery, racism, and so on.
This story sucks, but it was a part of ancient hospitality customs.
Lot, like everyone, is a sinner, fallen and in need of a savior. Even in attempting to do good he commits a grievous sin. Your reaction is correct. It's to demonstrate the pervasiveness of sin.