Lot

LOT

The son of Haran, and nephew of Abraham, followed his uncle from Ur, and afterwards from Haran, to settle in Canaan, Gen 11:31 12:4-6 13:1. Abraham always had a great affection for him, and when they could not continue longer together in Canaan, because they both had large flocks and their shepherds sometimes quarreled, Gen 13:5-7, he gave Lot the choice of his abode. Lot chose the plain of Sodom, which appears then to have been the most fertile parts of the land. Here he continued to dwell till the destruction of Sodom and the adjacent cities. He was a righteous man even in Sodom, 2Pe 2:7 ; but the calamities consequent upon his choice of this residence-his capture by eastern marauders, the molestation caused by his ungodly and vicious neighbors, the loss of his property in the burning city, the destruction of his sons-in-law and of his wife-if they do not prove that he regarded ease and profit more than duty, show that the most beautiful and fruitful land is not always the best; the profligacy of its citizens may sink it into the abyss of perdition, and endanger all who have any concern with it. Lot’s wife, looking back with disobedient regrets, and arrested by the threatened judgment midway in her flight to the mountain, is an awful warning to all who turn their faces Zionward, but are unwilling to leave all for Christ, Gen 19:1-38 Luk 17:32 .

Fuente: American Tract Society Bible Dictionary

Lot

()

Lot, the nephew, and for a time the companion, of Abraham, is thrice over called righteous in 2Pe 2:7-8. With all his faults, of which the spirit of compromise was the most conspicuous, he was relatively , i.e. in comparison with the citizens of Sodom among whom he made his abode. The Vulgate and Erasmus assume that in v. 8 he is designated just in seeing and hearing-aspectu et auditu justus-but it is better to read, in seeing and hearing he vexed his righteous soul. The active voice () implies that while he was no doubt continually vexed beyond measure by the conduct of the people around him, his troubles were ultimately of his own making, It was precisely his dwelling there, which was his own deliberate choice, that became an active torment to his soul (H. von Soden in Handkom. zum NT, iii., Freiburg i. B., 1899, p. 203).

James Strahan.

Fuente: Dictionary of the Apostolic Church

LOT

Is a mutual agreement to determine an uncertain event, no other ways determinable, by an appeal to the providence of God, on casting or throwing something. This is a decisory lot, Pro 16:33; Pro 18:18. The matter, therefore, to be determined, in order to avoid guilt, should be important, and no other possible way left to determine it; and the manner of making the appeal solemn and grave, if we would escape the guilt of taking the name of God in vain. Wantonly, without necessity, and in a ludicrous manner, to make this appeal, must be therefore highly blameable. And if thus the decisory lot, when wantonly and unneccessarity employed, be criminal, equally, if not more so, must the divinatory lot be, which is employed for discovering the will of God: this being no mean of God’s appointment, must be superstitious, and the height of presumption.

Fuente: Theological Dictionary

Lot

Son of Aran and nephew of Abraham. He settled in Kikkar the fertile region about the Jordan, residing in Sodom. At the time of the pillage of the latter he was captured and carried away but was soon rescued by Abraham. He was saved by angels when Sodom and Gomorrha were destroyed for their immorality; his wife, however, was turned into a pillar of salt for her disobedience. It has been suggested that she may have been overtaken by the salty waters of the Dead Sea or that she became coated with salt released from the soil by the heat of the flame. Later Lot had two sons, Moab and Ammon, the fruits of incest, whose descendants were Israel’s most bitter enemies.

Fuente: New Catholic Dictionary

Lot

Son of Abraham’s brother Aran (Genesis 11:27), therefore Abraham’s nephew (his “brother”: xiii, 8, 11; xiv, 14, 16) and grandson of Thare, father of Abraham (xi, 31). Lot was among those whom Thare took with him out of Ur of the Chaldees, to go to the land of Chanaan. When Thare died in Haran, Lot continued the journey with Abraham. It may be inferred that Lot accompanied his uncle to Sichem, to the mountain between Bethel and Hai, and then to the south (xii, 6, 8, 9). Whether Lot went to Egypt with Abraham at the time of the famine (xii, 10-20) is not explicitly stated, but is implied in xiii, 1: “And Abraham went up out of Egypt, he and his wife, and all that he had, and Lot with him into the south.” After their return, they once more settled between Bethel and Hai (xiii, 3). Lot and Abraham had numerous flocks and herds, so numerous that the pasture and watering places proved insufficient for them. Strife ensued between the herdsmen of Abraham and of Lot. Abraham, in the interest of peace, proposed to his nephew that they should live apart, and even allowed Lot to take his choice of the surrounding country. Lot chose the watered and fertile region “about the Jordan” (Kikkar), and fixed his abode in the city of Sodom, whereas Abraham dwelt in the land of Chanaan (xiii, 6-12). The next incident in the life of Lot is related in connection with the expedition of Chodorlahomor against the five cities “about the Jordan”, including Sodom (xiv, 1 sqq.). The kings of the Pentapolis were defeated, their cities pillaged, and among those carried away by the victorious kings was Lot, who lost all his possessions (xiv, 12). Lot’s predicament was made known to Abraham, who at once chose three hundred and eighteen of his best men and set out in pursuit of the retreating victorious kings. He overtook them in Dan, where he surprised them at night, and routed them completely. Lot and his possessions were rescued by Abraham, who brought all back safely to Sodom (xiv, 13-16; see ABRAHAM).

Again we read of Lot in connection with the mission of the angels who had been sent by God to destroy the five cities in the valley of the Jordan. These angels, three in number, were first entertained by Abraham in the vale of Mambre (Genesis 18:2 sqq.), and then two of them made their way towards Sodom, where they arrived in the evening (xix, 1). Here they met Lot, who, sitting in the gateway of the city—a common place of meeting in the East—arose and greeted the strangers, at the same time offering them the hospitality of his house. The strangers at first refused, but finally accepted the pressing invitation of Lot, who then prepared a feast for them (xix, 2, 3). That night the men of Sodom revealed their degradation by attacking Lot’s house and demanding his two guests for their vile purpose (4, 5). Lot interceded in behalf of his guests in accordance with his duties as host, which are most sacred in the East, but made the mistake of placing them above his duties as a father by offering his two daughters to the wicked designs of the Sodomites (6-8). The latter, however, refused the substitution, and just as they were about to inflict violence upon Lot the two angels intervened, drawing Lot into the house and striking the men outside with blindness, thus preventing them from finding the door of the house (9-11). The angels then made known to Lot the object of their visit to Sodom, which they were sent to destroy, and advised him to leave the city at once with his family and belongings. Lot imparted the news to his prospective sons-in-law, who, however, refused to consider it seriously. The next morning, the angels once more admonished Lot to leave Sodom, and when he still hesitated they took him, his wife, and two daughters, and brought them out of the city, warning them not to look back nor to remain in the vicinity of the doomed city, but to flee into the mountains (12-17). The mountains, however, seemed too far distant to Lot, and he requested to seek shelter in a small city nearer by. The request was granted, and Lot fled to Segor (Heb. Zo’ar), which is also promised protection (18-23). Sodom, Gomorrha, and the other cities of the Pentapolis were then destroyed. Lot’s wife, disregarding the injunction of the angels, looked back, and was converted into a pillar of salt (24-26). Lot, seeing the terrible destruction of the five cities, feared for his own safety in Segor, and therefore fled with his two daughters into the mountains, where they dwelt in a cave (30). It was here, according to the Sacred Text, that Lot’s two daughters were guilty of incestuous intercourse with their father, the outcome of which was the birth of Moab and Ammon, the fathers of Israel’s future most bitter enemies (31-38). This last incident also closes the history of Lot. His name, however, occurs again in the expression “the children of Lot”, meaning the Moabites (Deuteronomy 2:9), and the Ammonites (Deuteronomy 2:19), and both (Ps. lxxxii, 9). In the New Testament, Christ refers to the destruction of Sodom “in the days of Lot” (Luke 17:28, 29), and St. Peter (2 Peter 2:6-8) speaks of the deliverance of the “just Lot”. The fate of Lot’s wife is referred to in Wis., x, 7; Luke, xvii, 32. According to Jewish and Christian tradition, the pillar of salt into which she was converted was preserved for some time (Josephus, “Antiq.”, I, xi, 4; Clement of Rome, “I Cor.”, xi, 2; Irenæus, “Adv. Haer.”, IV, xxxi). Various explanations are given of this phenomenon. According to von Hummelauer (“Comment. in Gen.”, Paris, 1895, 417), Lot’s wife could easily have been overtaken by the salty waters of the Dead Sea and literally covered with salt. Kaulen had already advanced a similar explanation, accounting for the coating of salt by the heat of the flames releasing the salt fumes from the soil.

———————————–

F. X. E. ALBERT Transcribed by Thomas J. Bress

The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume IXCopyright © 1910 by Robert Appleton CompanyOnline Edition Copyright © 2003 by K. KnightNihil Obstat, October 1, 1910. Remy Lafort, CensorImprimatur. +John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York

Fuente: Catholic Encyclopedia

Lot

(properly or , goral’, , literally a pebble, used anciently for balloting; other terms occasionally thus rendered are or , che’bel, a portion, Deu 32:9; 1Ch 16:18; Psa 105:11, referring to an inheritance; and , to obtain by lot, Luk 1:9; Joh 19:24), strictly a small stone, as used in casting lots (Lev 16:8; Num 33:54; Jos 19:1. Eze 24:6; Jon 1:7), hence also a method used to determine chances or preferences, or to decide a debate. The decision by lot was often resorted to among the Hebrews, but always with the strictest reference to the interposition of God. As to the precise manner of casting lots, we have no certain information; probably several modes were practiced. In Pro 16:33 we read that “the lot,” i.e., pebble, “is cast into the lap,” properly into the bosom of an urn or vase. It does not appear that the lap or bosom of a garment worn by a person was ever used to receive lots.

The use of lots among the ancients was very general (see Dale, Orac. ethn. c. 14; Potter, Greek Antiq. 1:730; Adams, Roman Ant. 1:540 sq.; Smith, Dict. of Class. Ant. s.v. Sors) and highly esteemed (Xenoph. Cyrop; 1:6, 46), as is natural in simple stages of society (Tacit. Germ. 10), ” recommending itself as a sort of appeal to the Almighty secure from all influence of passion or bias, and a sort of divination employed even by the gods themselves (Homer, Iliad, 22:209; Cicero, De Div. 1:34; 2:41). The word sors is thus used for an oracular response (Cicero, De Div., 2:56). So there was a mode of divination among heathens by means of arrows, two inscribed and one without mark, (Hos 4:12; Eze 21:21; Mauritius, De Sortitione, c. 14, 4; see also Est 3:7; Est 9:24-32 ; Mishna, Taanith, 2:10). SEE DIVINATLON. Among heathen instances the following additional may be cited:

1. Choice of a champion, or of priority in combat (Il. 3:316; 7:171; Herod. 3:108);

2. Decision of fate in battle (Il. 20:209);

3. Appointment of magistrates, jurymen, or other functionaries (Aristot. Pol. 4:16; Schol. On Aristoph. Plut. 277; Herod. 6:109; Xenoph. Cyrol). 4:5, 55: Demosth. c. Aristog. 1:778, 1; comp. Smith, Dict. of Class. Antiq. s.v. Dicastes);

4. Priests (AEsch. in Tim. page 188, Bekk.);

5. A German practice of deciding by marks on twigs, mentioned by Tacitus (Germ. 10);

6. Division of conquered or colonized land (Thucydides, 3:50; Plutarch, Pericles, 84; Bockh, Public Econ. of Ath. 2:170).”

The Israelites sometimes had recourse to lots as a method of ascertaining the divine will (Pro 16:33), and generally in cases of doubt regarding serious enterprises (Est 3:7; compare Rosenmller, Morgenl. 3:301), especially the following: (a.) In matters of partition or distribution. e.g. the location of the several tribes in Palestine (Num 26:55 sq.; Num 33:34; Num 34:13; Num 36:2; Jos 14:2; Jos 18:6 sq.; Jos 19:5), the assignment of the Levitical cities (Jos 21:4 sq.), and, after the return from the exile, the settlement in the homesteads at the capital (Neh 11:1; compare 1Ma 3:36). Prisoners of war were also disposed of by lot (Joe 3:3; Nah 3:10; Oba 1:11; compare Mat 27:35; Joh 19:24; compare Xenoph. Cyrop. 4:5, 55). (b.) In criminal investigations where doubt existed as to the real culprit (Jos 7:14; 1Sa 14:42). A notion prevailed among the Jewls that this detection was performed by observing the shining of the stones in the high-priest’s breastplate (Mauritius, c. 21, 4). The instance of the mariners casting lots to ascertain by the surrendering of what offender the sea could be appeased (Jon 1:7), is analogous; but it is not clear, from Pro 18:18, that lots were resorted to for the determination of civil disputes. (c.) In the election to an important office or undertaking foir which several persons appeared to have claims (1Sa 10:19; Act 1:26; comp. Herod. 3:128; Justin. 13:4; Cicero, Verr. 2:2, 51; Aristot. Polit. 4:16), as well as in the assignment of official duties among associates having a common right (Neh 10:34), as of the priestly offices in the Temple service among the sixteen of the family of Eleazar and the eight of that of Ithamar (1Ch 24:3; 1Ch 24:5; 1Ch 24:19; Luk 1:9), also of the Levites for similar purposes (1Ch 23:28; 1Ch 24:20-31; 1Ch 25:8; 1Ch 26:13; Mishna, Tamid, 1:2; 3:1.; 5:2; Jonut, 2:2. 3, 4; Shabb. 23:2; Lightfoot, Hor. Hebr. in Luk 1:8-9, volume 2, page 489). (d.) In military enterprises (Jdg 20:10; compare Val. Max. 1:5, 3).

In the sacred ritual of the Hebrews we find the use of lots but once prescribed, namely, in the selection of the scape-goat (Lev 16:8 sq.). The two inscribed tablets of boxwood, afterwards of gold, were put into an urns which was shaken, and the lots drawn out (Joma, 3:9; 4:1). SEE ATONEMENT, DAY OF. Eventually lots came into frequent usage (comp. the Mishna, Shabb. 23:2). In later times they even degenerated into a game of hazard, of which human life was the stakes (Josephus, War, 3:8, 7). Dice appear to have been usually employed for the lot ( , to “throw the die,” Jos 18:8; so , to cast, Jos 18:6; , to give, Act 1:26; , , to fall, Jon 1:7; Eze 24:7; Act 1:26), and were sometimes drawn from a vessel ( ,” the lot came forth,” Numbers 32:54, so , to “come up,” Lev 6:9; comp. the Mishna, Joma, 4:1). A different kind of lot is elsewhere indicated in the Mishna (Josna, 2:1; comp. Lightfoot, Hor. Hebr. page 714). A sacred species of lot was by means of the SEE URIM AND THUMMIM (q.v.) of the high-priest (Num 27:21; 1Sa 28:6), which appears to have had some connection with the divination by means of the sacerdotal EPHOD (1Sa 23:6; 1Sa 23:9). Stones were occasionally employed in prophetical or emblematical lots (Num 17:6 sq.; Zec 11:10; Zec 11:14). SEE PURIM. Election by lot appears to have prevailed in the Christian Church as late as the 7th century (Bingham, Eccles. Antiq. 4:1, 1, volume 1, page 426; Bruns, Conc. 2:66). Here also we may notice the use of words heard, or passages chosen at random from Scripture. Sortes Biblicae, like the Sortes Vigilance, prevailed among Jews, as they have also among Christians, though denounced by several councils (Johnson, “Life of Cowley,” Works, 9:8; Bingham, Eccl. Antiq. 16:5, 3; id., 6:53 sq.; Bruns, Conc. 2:145-154, 166; Mauritius, c. 15; Hofmann, Lex. s.v. Sortes).

On the subject generally, see Mauritius, De Sortitione ap. vet. Hebraeos (Basil, 1692); Chrysander, De Sortibus (Halle, 1740); Benzel, De Sortibus vet. in his Syntagma dissertat. 1:297-318; Winckler, Gedanken ber dl. Spuren gottl. Providenz in Loose (Hildesheim, 1750); Palaophili, Abhandl. v. Gebrauchs d. Looses in d. heil. Schr. in Semler’s Hall. Samml. 1:2, 79 sq.; Junius, De Sorte, remedio dubias caussas dirimendi (Lips. 1746); Eenberg, De Sortilegiis (Upsal. 1705) ; Hanovius, De electione per sortem (Gedan. 1743; in German by Tramhold, Hamb. 1751); Bauer, Vormitze Kunst, etc. (Hildesh. 1750).

The term “lot” is also used for that which falls to one by lot, especially a portion or inheritance (Jos 15:1; Jdg 1:3; Psa 125:3; Isa 17:14; Isa 47:6; Act 8:21). Lot is also used metaphorically for portion, or destiny, as assigned to men from God (Psa 16:5): “And arise to thy lot in the end of days” in the Messiah’s kingdom (Dan 12:13; comp. Rev 20:6). SEE HERITAGE.

Fuente: Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological and Ecclesiastical Literature

Lot (2)

SEE MYRRH.

Lot

(Heb. id., , a covering, as in Isa 25:7; Sept. and N.T. , Josephus ; occurs Gen 11:27; Gen 11:31; Gen 12:4-5; Gen 13:1-14; Gen 14:12; Gen 14:16; Gen 19:1-15; Gen 19:18; Gen 19:23; Gen 19:29-30; Gen 19:36; Deu 2:9; Deu 2:19; Psa 83:8; Luk 17:28-29; Luk 17:32; 2Pe 2:7), the son of Haran and nephew of Abraham (Gen 11:27). His sisters were Milcah, the wife of Nahor, and Iscah, by some identified with Sarah. [In our treatment of the history, we freely avail ourselves of the articles in Kitto and Smith.] The following genealogy exhibits the family relations:

By the early death of his father (Gen 11:28), he was left in charge of his grandfather Terah, with whom he migrated to Haran, B.C. 2089 (Gen 11:31), and the latter dying there, he had already come into possession of his property when he accompanied Abraham into the land of Canaan, B.C. 2088 (Gen 12:5), and thence into Egypt, B.C. 2087 (Gen 12:10), and back again, by the way of the Philistines, B.C. 2086 (Gen 20:1), to the southern part of Canaan again, B.C. 2085 (Gen 13:1). Their united substance, consisting chiefly in cattle, was not then too large to prevent them from living together in one encampment. Eventually, however, their possessions were so greatly increased that they were obliged to separate, and Abraham, with rare generosity, conceded the choice of pasture-grounds to his nephew. Lot availed himself of this liberality of his uncle, as he deemed most for his own advantage, by fixing his abode at Sodom, that his flocks might pasture in and around that fertile and well-watered neighborhood (Gen 13:5-13). He had soon very great reason to regret this choice; for although his flocks fed well, his soul was starved in that vile place, the inhabitants of which were sinners before the Lord exceedingly. There “he vexed his righteous soul from day to day with the filthy conversation of the wicked” (2Pe 2:7).

Not many years after his separation from Abraham (B.C. 2080), Lot was carried away prisoner by Chedorlaomer, along with the other inhabitants of Sodom, and was rescued and brought back by Abraham (Genesis 14), as related under other heads. SEE ABRAHAM; SEE CHEDORLAOMER.

This exploit procured for Abraham much celebrity in Canaan; and it ought to have procured for Lot respect and gratitude from the people of Sodom, who had been delivered from hard slavery and restored to their homes on his account. But this does not appear to have been the result.

At length (B.C. 2064) the guilt of “the cities of the plain” brought down the signal judgments of heaven (Gen 19:1-29). Lot is still living in Sodom (Genesis 19), a well-known resident, with wife, sons, and daughters married and marriageable. The rabbinical tradition is that he was actually “judge” of Sodom, and sat in the gate in that capacity. (See quotations in Otho, Lex. Rabbini. s.v. Loth and Sodomah.) But in the midst of the licentious corruption of Sodom the eating and drinking, the buying and selling, the planting and building (Luk 17:28), and of the darker evils exposed in the ancient narrative he still preserves some of the delightful characteristics of his wandering life, his fervent and chivalrous hospitality (Luk 19:2; Luk 19:8), the unleavened bread of the tent of the wilderness (Luk 19:3), the water for the feet of the wayfarers (Luk 19:2), affording his guests a reception identical with that which they had experienced that very morning in Abraham’s tent on the heights of Hebron (Gen 18:3; Gen 18:6).

It is this hospitality which receives the commendation of the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews in words that have passed into a familiar proverb, “Be not forgetful to entertain strangers, for thereby some have entertained angels unawares” (Heb 13:2). On the other hand, it is his deliverance from the guilty and condemned city the one just man in that mob of sensual, lawless wretches which points the allusion of St. Peter, to “the godly delivered out of temptations, the unjust reserved unto the day of judgment to be punished, an ensample to those that after should live ungodly” (2Pe 2:6-9). The avenging angels, after having been entertained by Abraham, repaired to Sodom, where they were received and entertained by Lot who was sitting in the gate of the town when they arrived. While they were at supper the house was beset by a number of men, who demanded that the strangers should be given up to them, for the unnatural purposes which have given a name of infamy to Sodom in all generations. Lot resisted this demand, and was loaded with abuse by the vile fellows outside on that account. They had nearly forced the door, when the angels, thus awfully by their own experience convinced of the righteousness of the doom they came to execute, smote them with instant blindness, by which their attempts were rendered abortive, and they were constrained to disperse. Towards morning the angels apprised Lot of the doom which hung over the place, and urged him to hasten thence with his family. He was allowed to extend the benefit of this deliverance to the families of his daughters who had married in Sodom; but the warning was received by those families with incredulity and insult, and he therefore left Sodom accompanied only by his wife and two daughters.

As they went, being hastened by the angels, the wife, anxious for those who had been left behind, or reluctant to remove from the place which had long been her home, and where much valuable property was necessarily left behind, lingered behind the rest, and was suddenly involved in the destruction by which smothered and stiffened as she stood by saline incrustations she became “a pillar of salt” (Gen 19:1-26). This narrative has often been regarded as one of the “difficulties” of the Bible. But it surely need not be so. Even under the above extreme view of the suddenness of the event, the circumstances appear to be all sufficiently accounted for. In the sacred record the words are simply these: “His wife looked back from behitnd him, and became a pillar of salt;” words which neither in themselves nor in their position in the narrative afford any serious difficulty, even without the supposition of a miracle. It is true that, when taken with want has gone before, they seem to imply (Gen 19:22-23) that the work of destruction by fire (did not commence till after Lot had entered Zoar. The storm, however, may have overtaken her in consequence of her delay. Later ages have not been satisfied to leave the matter, but have insisted on identifying the “Pillar” with some one of the fleeting forms which the perishable rock of the south end of the Dead Sea is constantly assuming in its process of decomposition and liquefaction (Anderson’s Off. Narr. page 180). The first allusion of this kind is perhaps that in Wis 10:7, where “a standing pillar of salt, the monument () of an unbelieving soul,” is mentioned with the “waste land that smoketh,” and the “plants bearing fruit that never come to ripeness,” as remaining to that day, a testimony to the wickedness of Sodom. This notion was regarded by the Roman Catholics as scriptural authority that might not be disputed. See the quotations from the fathers and others in Hofmann’s Lexikon (s.v. Lot), and in Mislin, Lieux Saints (3:224). Josephus also (Ant. 1:11, 4) says that he had seen it, and that it was then remaining. So, too, do Clemens Romanus (Epist. 1:11) and Irenaeus (4:51, 64). So does Benjamin of Tudela, whose account is more than usually circumstantial (ed. Asher, 1:72).

Rabbi Petachia, on the other hand, looked for it, but “did not see it; it no longer exists” (ed. Benisch, page 61). The same statement is to be found in travelers of every age, certainly of our own times (see Maundrell, March 30). The origin of these traditions relative to this pillar has lately been satisfactorily explained by the discovery by the American party under Lieut. Lynch of an actual column still standing on the south-western shore of the Dead Sea, at, a place retaining the traces of the name of Sodom in the form of Usdum, of which he gives a pictorial sketch, describing it as a round pillar, about forty feet high, on a lofty pedestal, standing detached from the general mass of the mountain, of solid salt, slightly decreasing in size upwards, and capped with carbonate of lime; but, although himself a Catholic, he admits, with scientific candor, that it is merely the result of the action of the winter rains upon the rock-salt hills, which the cap of limestone has here protected, leaving the surrounding parts to wash aways till a columnn has thus gradually been carved out (Narrative of Expedition, pages 307,308). Prof. Palmer also visited this singular object, called by the Arabs Bint Sheik Lot, or “Lot’s [daughter] wife.” He describes and gives a view of it as “a tall isolated needle of rock, which really does bear a curious resemblance to an Arab woman with a child upon her shoulder. The Arab legend of Lot’s wife differs from the Bible account only in the addition of a few frivolous details. They say that there were seven cities of the plain, and that they were all miraculously overwhelmed by the Dead Sea as a punishment for their crimes.

The prophet Lot and his family alone escaped the general destruction. He was divinely warned to take all that he had and flee eastward, a strict injunction being given that they should not look behind them. Lot’s wife, who had on previous occasions ridiculed her husband’s prophetic office, disobeyed the command, and, turning to gaze upon the scene of the disaster, was changed into this pillar of rock” (Desert of the Exodus [Harper’s], page 396 sq.). The expression of our Lord, “Remember Lot’s wife” (Luk 17:32), appears from the context to be solely intended as an illustration of the danger of going back or delaying in the day of God’s judgments. From this text, indeed, it would appear as if Lot’s wife had gone back or had tarried so long behind in the desire of saving some of their property. Then, as it would seem, she was struck dead, and became a stiffened corpse, fixed for the time to the soil by saline or bituminous incrustations. The particle of similitude must here, as in many other passages of Scripture, be understood, like a pillar of salt.” See Nagel, De culpa uxoris Loti (Altdorf; 1755); Distel, De salute uxoris Lothi (Altd. 1721); Waller, Diss. de statua sal. uxoris Loti (Lipsia, 1764); Wolle, De facto et fato uxoris Loti (Lips. 1730); Schwollmann, Comm. qua de uxore L. in statuam sal. conversa dubitatur (Hamburg, 1749); Milom, Sendschr. u. d. Salzsaule in die L.’s Weib vervandelt worden (Hamb. 1767); Clerici, Diss. de statua salina, in his Comment. in Gen.; Tieroff, De statua salis (Jen. 1657); Muller, idem (Helmstadt, 1764); Oedmann, Samml. 3:145; Bauer, Hebr. Geschichte, 1:131; Maii Observat. sacr. 1:168 sq.; H.v.d. Hardt, Ephem. philol. Page 67 sq.; Jenisch, Eriorter zweier wichtig. Schriftstellen (Hamb. 1761); Michaelis and Rosenmller on Gen 19:26; Gesenius, Thesaur. Heb. page 72.

Lot and his daughters meanwhile had hastened on to Zoar (q.v.), the smallest of the five cities of the plain, which had been spared on purpose to afford him a refuge; but, being fearful, after what had passed, to remain among a people so corrupted, he soon retired to a cavern in the neighboring mountains. and there abode (Gen 19:30). After some stay in this place, the daughters of Lot became apprehensive lest the family of their father should be lost for want of descendants, than which no greater calamity was known or apprehended in those times; and in the belief that, after what had passed in Sodom, there was no hope of their obtaining suitable husbands, they, by a contrivance which has in it the taint of Sodom, in which they were brought up, made their father drunk with wine, and in that state seduced him into an act which, as they well knew, would in soberness have been most abhorrent to him. They thus became the mothers, and he the father, of two sons, named Moab and Ammon, from whom sprung the Moabites and Ammonites, so often mentioned in the Hebrew history (Gen 19:31-38). With respect to Lot’s daughters, Whiston and others are unable to see any wicked intention in them. He admits that the incest was a horrid crime, except under the unavoidable necessity which apparently rendered it the only means of preserving the human race; and this justifying necessity he holds to have existed in their minds, as they appear to have believed that all the inhabitants of the land had been destroyed except their father and themselves. But it is incredible that they could have entertained any such belief.

The city of Zoar had been spared, and they had been there. The wine also with which they made their father drunk must have been procured from men, as we cannot suppose they had brought it with them from Sodom. The fact would therefore seem to be that, after the fate of their sisters, who had married men of Sodom and perished with them, they became alive to the danger and impropriety of marrying with the natives of the lad, and of the importance of preserving the family connection. The force of this consideration was afterwards seen in Abraham’s sending to the seat of his family in Mesopotamia for a wife to Isaac. But Lot’s daughters could not go there to seek husbands; and the only branch of their own family within many hundred miles was that of Abraham, whose only son, Ishmael, was then a child. This, therefore, must have appeared to them the only practicable mode in which the house of their father could be preserved. Their making their father drunk, and their solicitous concealment of what they did from him, show that they despaired of persuading him to an act which, under any circumstances, and with every possible extenuation, must have been very distressing to so good a man. That he was a good man is evinced by his deliverance from among the guilty, and is affirmed by an apostle (2Pe 2:7); his preservation is alluded to by our Savior (Luk 17:18, etc.); and in Deu 2:9; Deu 2:19, and Psa 83:9, his name is honorably used to designate the Moabites and Ammonites, his descendants. This account of the origin of the nations of Moab and Ammon has often been treated as if it were a Hebrew legend which owed its origin to the bitter hatred existing from the earliest to the latest times between the “children of Lot” and the children of Israel.

The horrible nature of the transaction not the result of impulse or passion, but a plan calculated and carried out, and that not once, but twice, would prompt the wish that the legendary theory were true. But even the most destructive critics (as, for instance, Tuch) allow that the narrative is a continuation without a break of that which precedes it, while they fail to point out any marks of later date in the language of this portion; and it cannot be questioned that the writer records it as a historical fact. Even if the legendary theory were admissible, there is no doubt of the fact that Ammon and Moab sprang from Lot. It is affirmed in the statements of Deu 2:9; Deu 2:19, as well as in the later document of Psa 33:8, which Ewald ascribes to the time when Nehemiah and his newly- returned colony were suffering from the attacks and obstructions of ”Obiah the Ammonite and Sanballat the Horonite (Ewald, Dichter, Psalms 83).

This circumstance is the last which the Scripture records of the history of Lot, and the time and place of his death are unknown. A traditional respect has been shown to his memory (also that of his wife, who is called Edith, [one of his daughters being called Plutith, , in the tract Pirke Elieser, chapter 25) by the Talmudists (see Otho’s Lex. Rabb. page 389) and Arabs (see Herbelot, Biblioth. Orient. 2:495); and the Mohammedans still point out his grave in the village of Beni-Nain, east of Hebron (Robinson, Researches, 2:187). For the pretty legend of the repentance of Lot, and of the tree that he planted, which, being cut down for use in the building of the Temple, was afterwards employed for the cross, see Fabricius, Cod. Pseudep. V.T. pages 428-431. The Mohammedan traditions of Lot are contained in the Koran, chiefly in chapter 7 and 11; others are given by D’Herbelot (s.v. Loth). According to these statements, he was sent to the inhabitants of the five cities as a preacher, to warn them against the unnatural and horrible sins which they practiced sins which Mohammed is continually denouncing, but with less success than that of drunkenness, since the former is perhaps the most common, the latter the rarest vice of Eastern cities. From Lot’s connection with the inhabitants of Sodom, his name is now given not only to the vice in question (Freytag, Lexicon, 4:136 a), but also to the people of the five cities themselves the Lothi, or Kaum Loth. The local name of the Dead Sea is Bahr Lut-Sea of Lot. See Niemeyer, Charakt. 2:185 sq.; Blaufurs, Le Loti hospitalitate (Jena, 1751); Korner, De indole genesrorum Lothi (Weissenf. 1755); Seidenstruicker, in the Schleswig Journal, 1792, volume 6, and in Hencke’s Magaz. 3:67 sq.; Bauer, Mythol. d. Hebr. 1:238 sq.; Kitto’s Daily Bible Illust. ad loc.

Fuente: Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological and Ecclesiastical Literature

Lot

(Heb. goral, a “pebble”), a small stone used in casting lots (Num. 33:54; Jonah 1:7). The lot was always resorted to by the Hebrews with strictest reference to the interposition of God, and as a method of ascertaining the divine will (Prov. 16:33), and in serious cases of doubt (Esther 3:7). Thus the lot was used at the division of the land of Canaan among the serveral tribes (Num. 26:55; 34:13), at the detection of Achan (Josh. 7:14, 18), the election of Saul to be king (1 Sam. 10:20, 21), the distribution of the priestly offices of the temple service (1 Chr. 24:3, 5, 19; Luke 1:9), and over the two goats at the feast of Atonement (Lev. 16:8). Matthias, who was “numbered with the eleven” (Acts 1:24-26), was chosen by lot.

This word also denotes a portion or an inheritance (Josh. 15:1; Ps. 125:3; Isa. 17:4), and a destiny, as assigned by God (Ps. 16:5; Dan. 12:13).

Lot, (Heb. lot), a covering; veil, the son of Haran, and nephew of Abraham (Gen. 11:27). On the death of his father, he was left in charge of his grandfather Terah (31), after whose death he accompanied his uncle Abraham into Canaan (12:5), thence into Egypt (10), and back again to Canaan (13:1). After this he separated from him and settled in Sodom (13:5-13). There his righteous soul was “vexed” from day to day (2 Pet. 2:7), and he had great cause to regret this act. Not many years after the separation he was taken captive by Chedorlaomer, and was rescued by Abraham (Gen. 14). At length, when the judgment of God descended on the guilty cities of the plain (Gen. 19:1-20), Lot was miraculously delivered. When fleeing from the doomed city his wife “looked back from behind him, and became a pillar of salt.” There is to this day a peculiar crag at the south end of the Dead Sea, near Kumran, which the Arabs call Bint Sheik Lot, i.e., Lot’s wife. It is “a tall, isolated needle of rock, which really does bear a curious resemblance to an Arab woman with a child upon her shoulder.” From the words of warning in Luke 17:32, “Remember Lot’s wife,” it would See m as if she had gone back, or tarried so long behind in the desire to save some of her goods, that she became involved in the destruction which fell on the city, and became a stiffened corpse, fixed for a time in the saline incrustations. She became “a pillar of salt”, i.e., as some think, of asphalt. (See SALT)

Lot and his daughters sought refuge first in Zoar, and then, fearing to remain there longer, retired to a cave in the neighbouring mountains (Gen. 19:30). Lot has recently been connected with the people called on the Egyptian monuments Rotanu or Lotanu, who is supposed to have been the hero of the Edomite tribe Lotan.

Fuente: Easton’s Bible Dictionary

Lot (1)

Haran’s son, Abraham’s nephew (Gen 11:27-31). Born in Ur of the Chaldees, before Terah’s emigration. Accompanied Abram to Charan, then to Canaan (Gen 12:4-5), then, in the famine, to Egypt. On their return a quarrel arose between Abram’s and Lot’s herdsmen. In the spirit of a child of God Abram goes to Lot himself, instead of listening to subordinates’ reports, and begs as they are brethren there should be no strife between them (contrast Act 15:39), and offers Lot precedency, though as his senior Abram might have claimed it; “if thou wilt take the left hand, then I will go to the right,” etc. Lot chose by sight, not faith, the richly watered circle of the Jordan, fertile, but the region of wicked Sodom (Jos 7:24; Jos 8:15). At first Lot only “pitched his tent toward Sodom,” but he was venturing too near temptation not to be caught (Psa 1:1; 1Co 15:33).

He soon was dwelling in a “house” in Sodom, and paid the penalty in being carried off with his much-loved “goods” by Chedorlaomer; he was rescued only by the disinterested bravery and magnanimity of Abram, who, forgetting Lot’s unamiable conduct, thought only of how to rescue him at all hazards in his distress. This warning ought to have been enough to drive Lot from Sodom, but no, he still lives there. Next, Lot appears exercising that goodly hospitality by which he” entertained angels unawares,” and for which the Epistle to Hebrew (Heb 13:2) commends him. Evidently, the luxury of worldly Sodom had not wholly corrupted the simplicity of his character. The Spirit of God, who knows hearts, designates him (2Pe 2:7-9) “just Lot, vexed with the filthy conversation (the licentious behaviour) of the wicked” (the lawless, who set at defiance the laws of nature and God).

The Sodomites’ words, “this one fellow came in to sojourn, and he will needs be a judge” refer evidently to Lot’s remonstrances with them which Peter presupposes. The gracious Lord reminds us of his faithfulness, not of his subsequent incest. If there had been “ten” such “fellows” in Sodom Jehovah would have spared it (Gen 18:32). Again God records, “that righteous man dwelling among them, in seeing and hearing, vexed (tormented) his righteous soul from day to day with their unlawful deeds.” Lot had gone into temptation, and must have perished but, for God’s grace; to all appearances his position was hopeless, but “the Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations,” He is at no loss for means. The angels’ visit was meant to test Lot as well as the Sodomites. The angels’ declining his invitation at first, “we will abide in the street (the broad open space) all night,” answers to Jesus’ mode of eliciting the faith of the two Emmaus disciples (Luk 24:28).

His sin is faithfully recorded, his offering to sacrifice his daughters’ honour to save his guests. He was retributively punished by those daughters sacrificing their father’s honour and their own. They seem to have been only betrothed, not yet married, to Lot’s so-called “sons in law.” When he warned them to flee from the coming destruction “he seemed as one that mocked unto his sons in law” (compare Luk 24:11). His imperfection of faith appears in that “he lingered” even on the morning of Sodom’s doom. But the angels “laid hold upon his hand … the Lord being merciful to him (Rom 9:15-16) … and set him without the city.” They further warned him, “escape for thy life, look not behind thee (compare the Christian’s motto, Phi 3:13; Luk 9:62), neither stay thou in all the plain,” the (ciccar) circuit of Jordan which he had so coveted. Defective faith made him plead for leave to stay at Zoar, which, as “a little one,” he urges could have but few sinning in it so as to incur a share in Sodom’s doom.

God grants even this, and adds “I cannot do anything until thou be come there”; God’s love controls His omnipotence (Mat 27:42). Lot’s wife “looked back” with regrets on Sodom’s sinful pleasures, then stayed behind, and “became a pillar of salt”; possibly overtaken by the fire and brimstone and incrusted with salt. The Americans found E. of Usdum a pillar of salt 40 ft. high, which may be the traditional one identified with Sodom’s wife (Josephus, Ant. 1:11). Vacillation in faith led him to doubt even Zoar’s safety, notwithstanding God’s promise. From “lingering” about Sodom, Lot passes to the opposite extreme, desponding of safety even in its extreme skirt. His unbelief issued in the sin in the cave, and the offspring were “the children of Lot,” Moab and Ammon (Deu 2:9; Deu 2:19; Psa 73:8). See our Lord’s spiritual lesson from Sodom and Lot’s wife (Luk 17:28-32).

Fuente: Fausset’s Bible Dictionary

Lot (2)

Early used to decide an issue; so in choosing each of the two goats on the day of atonement (two inscribed tablets of boxwood were the lots used according to Joma 3:9 (?)), Lev 16:8, and in assigning the inheritances in Canaan (Num 26:55; Num 34:13), in selecting men for an expedition (Jdg 1:1; Jdg 20:10), in electing a king (1Sa 10:20), in detecting the guilty (1Sa 14:41-42), in selecting an apostle (Act 1:26), as formerly priests’ offices among the 16 of Eleazar’s family and the eight of Ithamar (1Ch 24:3; 1Ch 24:5; 1Ch 24:19; Luk 1:9), in apportioning spoil (Oba 1:11; Joe 3:3), in dividing Jesus’ garments (Mat 27:35; Psa 22:18). In Pro 16:33, “the lot is cast into the lap,” i.e. into an urn or cap in the judge’s lap; “but the whole disposing (Hebrew:judgment) thereof is of the Lord.” Only in weighty cases resort was had to judgment by lot; it was entered on with solemnity, as God is arbiter. Sanctification of the people preceded in Jos 7:13-18.

Fuente: Fausset’s Bible Dictionary

LOT

When Abraham and his household moved from Mesopotamia into Canaan, his nephew Lot went with him. He also went with Abraham into Egypt, and then back into Canaan (Gen 11:26-31; Gen 12:1-5; Gen 12:10; Gen 13:1).

Like Abraham, Lot was a wealthy owner of sheep and cattle. When trouble arose between Abrahams and Lots workers, the two households separated. Lot chose for himself the fertile pasture lands around Sodom and Gomorrah, east of the Dead Sea (Gen 13:5-11). Lots choice was selfish and it soon brought him trouble. Mesopotamian invaders raided his territory, plundered his goods and took Lot himself captive. Only swift action by Abraham rescued him (Gen 14:1-3; Gen 14:12-16).

Lot established himself in the city of Sodom and continued to increase in prosperity. But Sodom and the neighbouring city of Gomorrah were so morally corrupt that God decided to destroy them (Gen 13:12-13; Gen 18:20-21). Lot did not agree with the immoral practices of Sodom (2Pe 2:7-8), though he apparently did nothing to oppose them. He was even prepared to allow the sexual perverts of the city to rape his daughters, in order to save two guests from homosexual assault (Gen 19:1-11). Lot was so much at home in Sodom that even when Gods judgment was about to fall on the city, he did not want to leave (Gen 19:15-20).

The two daughters of Lot, still affected by the evil influences of Sodom, forced their father into immoral sexual relations with them. The two children born as a result marked the beginnings of two nations, Ammon and Moab (Gen 19:30-38).

Fuente: Bridgeway Bible Dictionary

Lot

LOT.The suddenness of the Divine Parousia and the unpreparedness and want of expectation on the part of the world, find illustration from the days of Lot (Luk 17:28), when the people of Sodom continued their social and commercial activity until the day that Lot went out (Luk 17:29).

Lots Wifeto whom in Jewish tradition the name Edith is givenis recorded in Genesis 19 to have been turned into a pillar of salt as a result of her looking back upon Sodom while escaping to the mountain. Her fate, as one failing to escape imminent and foretold destruction, is referred to in Luk 17:32, though without specific mention of the form in which destruction overtook her.

Our Lords word Remember neither confirms nor rejects the tradition. It is with the spiritual fact and its lesson, not with the memorial, that He is concerned. The folly of unreadiness, of the longing for things left behind, of the desire to retain a transient little in the face of impending judgment and at the cost of a greater and eternal loss, is the lesson He would teach in connexion with His Parousia, from the remembrance of Lots wife.

Literature.Hasting’s Dictionary of the Bible , Smiths DB [Note: Dictionary of the Bible.] , Encyc. Bibl., Kittos Encyc., Jewish Encyc. s.v.; G. A. Smith, HGHL [Note: GHL Historical Geog. of Holy Land.] p. 505; Josephus Ant. i. xi. 4; Jon. Edwards, Works [ed. 1840], ii. 64; Comm., esp. Driver on Genesis; and the following expository sermons, J. A. Alexander, Gospel of Jesus Christ, 38; H. E. Manning, Teaching of Christ, 38; F. Temple, Rugby Sermons, ii. 312; S. Cox, Expositions, iv. 280; B. Herford, Courage and Cheer, 79; G. Matheson, Representative Men of the Bible, ii. 22; A. Whyte, Bible Characters, i. 129.

J. T. L. Maggs.

Fuente: A Dictionary Of Christ And The Gospels

Lot

LOT.The son of Haran, brother of Abraham. His name seems clearly derived from a root meaning to wrap closely. The account of his life is contained in Gen 11:27 to Gen 14:16; Gen 14:19. He was born in Ur, and went with Abraham to Haran, and thence to Canaan. He accompanied Abraham in much of his wandering. The separation between them (ch. 13) was due to a quarrel between their herdsmen, each having great possessions of cattle. As a result, Lot dwelt in the cities of the plain, making his home in Sodom. During the expedition of Chedorlaomer (ch. 14) he was carried away captive, and rescued by Abraham. In ch. 19 is narrated the escape of Lot and his daughters from Sodom, with the subsequent incidents. The city of Zoar, where they dwelt for a time, is possibly the Zoara or Zor of Josephus, at the S.E. extremity of the Dead Sea, in the modern Ghr es-Sfieh, a well-watered region. The mountain to which he finally went is doubtless the mountainous region later known as Moab. The story of the daughters of Lot (Gen 19:30-38) is now usually considered to be not history, but a traditional account of the origin of the two nations, Moab and Ammon. The basis of the story is partly popular etymology of the two names; while it is prompted chiefly by national rivalry and hostility. That Lot was a righteous man (2Pe 2:7-8) may be granted in a relative sense, in comparison with the Sodomites; but he shows no great strength of character.

Lots wife.The historical character of the story of Lots wife and her transformation into a pillar of salt is doubtful: it may have arisen from the peculiarities of the cliffs in the vicinity of the Dead Sea. At its S.W. extremity is a range of cliffs 6 miles long and 600 feet high, called Jebel Usdum, the mountain of Sodom. These consist of crystallized rock salt, covered with chalky limestone and gypsum, and curiously furrowed and worn, so as sometimes to resemble a human figure.

George R. Berry.

Fuente: Hastings’ Dictionary of the Bible

Lot

Son of Haran, and nephew to Abraham. His name signifies wrapped up, or hidden. His history we have interspersed with that of Abraham, from Gen 11:27-32; Gen 12:1-20; Gen 13:1-18; Gen 14:1-24; Gen 15:1-21; Gen 16:1-16; Gen 17:1-27; Gen 18:1-33; Gen 19:1-36.

Fuente: The Poor Mans Concordance and Dictionary to the Sacred Scriptures

Lot (1)

lot:

I. Personality.

The man who bore the name Lot (, lot; , Lot) is mentioned for the first time in Gen 11:27, at the beginning of that section of Genesis which is entitled the generations of Terah. After Terah’s 3 sons are named, it is added that the third of these, Haran, begat Lot.

The reason for thus singling out but one of the grandsons of Terah appears in the next verse, where we are told that Haran died before his father Terah in the land of his nativity, in Ur of the Chaldees. For that period in the life of this family, therefore, which begins with the migration from Ur, Lot represents his father’s branch of the family (Gen 11:31). It is hardly probable that the relation between Abraham and Lot would have been what it was, had not Haran died; but be this as it may, we read this introduction of Lot into the genealogy of Terah as an anticipation of the story to which it furnishes an introduction, and in which Lot is destined to play an important part.

The sections of that story in which Lot appears are: in Gen 11, the migration from Ur to Haran; in Gen 12, Abraham’s wanderings; in Gen 13, the separation of Abraham and Lot; in Gen 14, the campaign of the eastern kings against Sodom and Abraham’s recovery of the captives; and in Gen 19, the destruction of Sodom.

In Gen 14:14, Gen 14:16 Lot is termed the brother of Abraham; but that this does not represent a variant tradition is proved by reference to Gen 14:12 of the same chapter (ascribed to an independent source) and to Gen 13:8 (ascribed to J; compare Gen 11:28 J).

II. Career.

1. First Period:

Lot’s life, as the scanty references to him permit us to reconstruct it, falls into four periods. Of the first period – that previous to the migration from Haran – we know nothing save Lot’s birth in Ur, the death of his father there, the marriage of his sister Milcah to his uncle Nahor (of another sister, Iscah, we learn only the name), and the journey to Haran in company with Terah, Abraham and Sarah. The fact that Sarah’s childlessness and Haran’s death are the only two circumstances related of the family history, may serve to explain why Lot went with Abraham instead of staying with Nahor. A childless uncle and a fatherless nephew may well have remained together with the idea that, even if there was no formal adoption, the nephew might become his uncle’s heir. Certainly, the promise of a numberless seed, so often repeated to the patriarchs, comes first to Abraham immediately after Lot has separated from him (see Gen 13:6-18).

2. Second Period:

In the second period of Lot’s life, we find him the companion of Abraham on his journeys from Mesopotamia to Canaan, through Canaan to Egypt, and back again to the neighborhood of Beth-el. His position is subordinate, for his uncle is head of the family, and oriental custom is uniform and rigorous in the matter of family rule. Hence, the use of the singular number throughout the narrative. What Abraham did, his whole clan did. Yet Lot’s position was as nearly independent as these patriarchal conditions admit. When the story reaches the point where it is necessary to mention this fact, the narrator explains, first, the generosity with which Abraham treated his nephew, in permitting him to have flocks, and herds, and tents of his own, a quasi-independent economy, and second, that disproportion between their collective possessions and the land’s resources which made separation inevitable. Up to this point the only mention of Lot during this period of wandering is contained in Gen 13:1, in the words and Lot with him. And even here the words are useless (because stating a fact perfectly presumable here as elsewhere), except as they prepare the reader for the story of the separation that is immediately to follow.

3. Third Period:

That story introduces the third period of Lot’s career, that of his residence in the Kikkar (the Revised Version (British and American) Plain, the Revised Version margin Circle) and in Sodom. To the fundamental cause of separation, as above stated, the author adds the two circumstances which contributed to produce the result, namely, first, the strife that arose between Abraham’s herdsmen and Lot’s herdsmen, and, second, the presence in the same country of others – the Canaanites and Perizzites – thus reminding his readers that it was no vacant land, through which they might spread themselves absolutely at will and so counteract the operation of the principal cause and the contributory cause already set forth.

With a magnanimity that must have seemed even greater to minds accustomed to patriarchal authority than it seems to us, and that was in fact much more remarkable than it would be here and now, Abraham offers to his nephew the choice of the land – from the nomad’s point of view. In the we are brethren (Gen 13:8), the whole force of the scene is crystallized. Lot, who believes himself to have chosen the better part, is thereupon traced in his nomadic progress as far as Sodom, and the reader leaves him for a time face to face with a city whose men were wicked and sinners against Yahweh exceedingly, while the narrative moves on with Abraham through that fresh scene of revelation which presented to this man of magnanimity a Divine deed to all the land, and to this man, now left without an heir from among his own kindred (compare Gen 15:2, Gen 15:3), a Divine pledge of innumerable offspring.

Lot returns for a moment to our view as the mainspring of Abraham’s motions in the campaign of Gen 14. We are expressly told that it was when Abram heard that his brother was taken captive, that he led forth his trained men … and pursued. On the one hand we hear that Lot now dwelt in Sodom, having abandoned the life in tents that he had led since Mesopotamian days, and on the other hand we find in him a foil to the energetic, decisive and successful figure of his uncle – for Lot plays a sorry role, bracketed always with the women and the goods.

This period of his life ends with the annihilation of his chosen home, his wealth, his companions, and all that was his save two daughters, who, it would seem, might better have perished with the rest. Genesis 19, coming immediately after the intercession of Abraham for Sodom that poignantly impresses on the reader’s mind the wickedness of Lot’s environment, exhibits to us the man himself in his surroundings, as they have affected him through well-nigh a score of years (compare Gen 12:4; Gen 17:1). What we see is a man who means well (courtesy, Gen 19:1; hospitality, Gen 19:2, Gen 19:3, Gen 19:6-8; natural shame, Gen 19:7; loyalty, Gen 19:14; and gratitude, Gen 19:19), but who is hopelessly bound up with the moral life of the city through his family connections – alliances that have pulled him down rather than elevated others (Gen 19:9, Gen 19:14, Gen 19:26, Gen 19:31-35). The language of 2Pe 2:7, 2Pe 2:8 reminds us that Lot was, even at this time of his life, a righteous man. Viewed as a part of his environment (the writer has been speaking of Sodom, Gen 19:6), Lot was certainly entitled to be called a righteous man, and the term fits the implications of Gen 18:23-32. Moreover, Gen 19 itself shows Lot vexed … with their lawless deeds and sore distressed by the lascivious life of the wicked (compare Gen 19:3, Gen 19:7, Gen 19:8, Gen 19:14). Yet the contrast with Abraham is always present in the reader’s mind, so that the most lasting impressions are made by Lot’s selfishness worldliness vacillation and cowardice, not to mention the moral effect made by the closing scene of his life (Gen 19:30-38).

4. Fourth Period:

The fourth period of Lot’s career is of uncertain duration. Upon the destruction of Sodom he dwelt at first in Zoar, the little city, spared as a convenient refuge for him and his; but at some time unspecified, he went up out of Zoar, for he feared to dwell in Zoar – why, we cannot say. This fear was greater than even the evidently great fear he entertained of dwelling in the mountain (Gen 19:19). In this mountain-country of rocks and caves (Driver in HDB, article Lot, cites Buckingham, Travels in Syria, 61-63, 87, as authority for the statement that people still live in caves in this region), Lot and his two remaining daughters dwell; and the biography of this companion of the friend of God ends in a scene of incest, which supplies the logical epilogue to a drama of progressive moral deterioration. This bestial cave-man of Gen 19 is the brother of Abraham, but he has reached this goal because his path had led down from Beth-el to Sodom. The origin of the two neighboring and kindred nations, Moab and Ammon, is by the Hebrew tradition traced thus to Lot and his daughters.

III. Place in Later Literature.

In the Bible, Lot finds mention only as the father of Moab and Ammon (Deu 2:9, Deu 2:19; Psa 83:8), and in the passage in 2 Pet already noticed; and, besides these places, in Luk 17:28-32. Here Lot represents the central figure in the destruction of Sodom, as Noah in the flood in the preceding context (compare the association of these two characters in 2 Pet and the Koran). His deliverance is mentioned, the haste and narrowness of that escape is implied, and his wife’s fate is recalled. In Jewish and Mohammedan lore (including many passages in the Koran itself), Lot is a personage of importance, about whom details are told which fancy has added to the sober traditions of old Israel. But particularly for Mohammed there was point of attachment in Lot’s career, offered in Gen 19:7, Gen 19:14. Like Mohammed to the men of wicked Mecca, Lot becomes a preacher of righteousness and a messenger of judgment to the men of wicked Sodom. He is one of the line of apostles, sent to reveal God’s will and purpose to his contemporaries.

IV. Critical Theories About the Figure of Lot.

The common view of those who deny the historical reality of Lot is that this name simply stands for the ethnic group, Moab and Ammon. Wellhausen, e.g., expressly calls Lot a national name (Volksname). As to what is told of him in Gen he remarks: Were it not for the remarkable depression in which the Dead Sea lies, Sodom and Gomorrah would not have perished; were it not for the little flat tongue of land that reaches out into the swamp from the Southeast, Lot would have fled at once to the mountains of his sons, Moab and Ammon, and not have made the detour by Zoar, which merely serves the purpose of explaining why this corner is excepted from ‘the overthrow,’ to the territory of which it really belongs (Prolegomena6, 323). Meyer confesses that nothing can be made of Lot, because any characteristic feature that might furnish a point of attachment is entirely lacking. The first of the families of the Horites of Seir was named Lotan (Gen 36:20, Gen 36:22), and this writer believes it probable that this name is derived from Lot; but that Lot was ever a tribal name (Stammname) follows neither from this fact (rather the contrary) nor from the designation of Moab and the bene Ammon as ‘Sons of Lot’ (Die Israeliten und ihre Nachbarstamme, 311; Compare 261, 339). If Horite was understood as cave-dweller, the story in Gen 19:30 might be adduced in support of this combination. But the most recent line of reasoning concerning these patriarchal figures makes their names neither Divine names nor tribal names, whether in actual use or regarded as such, but rather simple personal names like Tom, Dick and Harry…. Typical names they became … so that … Israel’s story-tellers would connect the name of Lot with the overthrow of the cities (Gressmann, article in ZATW, 1910). These names were chosen just because they were very common at the time when the narratives were stamped into types; later they became unfashionable, but the story-tellers held fast to the old names. One sees from this at once into how ancient a time the proper names Abraham and Lot must reach, and understands therefore the more easily how they could be changed into tribal ancestors. It does not require the cautions, uttered by writers of this way of thinking, against regarding their views as a return to the old historical view of the patriarchs, to remind us that, in spite of all that may be said to the contrary, the present trend of thought among the most radical critics of the Genesis-traditions is much mote favorable to that conservative historical view than were the opinions which they have overthrown. So that it may justly be asserted, as Gressmann writes: Confidence in tradition is in any case on the rise.

Lot’s Wife: This woman, unknown by name, figures in the narrative of Lot that relates his escape from Sodom. She is mentioned in Gen 19 only in Gen 19:15-17, where she is commanded to flee from the doomed city with her husband and daughters, and is laid hold upon by the angelic visitors in their effort to hasten the slow departure; and in Gen 19:26, where she alone of the four fugitives disobeys the warning, looks back, and becomes a pillar of salt This disobedience, with the moral state it implied and the judgment it entailed, is held up as an example by Christ in Luk 17:32. In the Scriptures this is all that is said of a person and event that furnished the basis for a great deal of speculation. Josephus (Ant., I, xi, 4) adds to the statement derived from Gen, She was changed into a pillar of salt, the words, for I visited it, and it still remains even now (see also The Wisdom of Solomon 10:7).

Among Christian writers contemporary with and subsequent to Josephus, as well as among the Jews themselves and other Orientals, the same assertion is found, and down to recent times travelers have reported the persistence of such a pillar of salt, either on the testimony of natives or as eyewitnesses. The question of the origin and nature of these pillars is a part of the larger question of Sodom and its neighborhood (see SALT; SIDDIM; SLIME); for that no one particular pillar has persisted through the centuries may be regarded as certain; nor if it had, would the identification of Lot’s wife with it and with it alone be ascertainable. This is just an early, persistent and notable case of that identification of Biblical sites which prevails all over the Holy Land. It is to be classed with the myth-and legend-building turn of mind in simple peoples, which has e.g. embroidered upon this Old Testament account of the destruction of Sodom such marvelous details and embellishments.

The principal thing to observe is the vagueness and the simplicity of the story in Gen. For it does not necessarily imply the metamorphosis popularly attributed to it, in the strict sense of that word. And it lacks, even in a narrative like this, where the temptation would be greatest, all indications of that popular archaeology or curiosity, which according to some critics, is alleged to have furnished the original motive for the invention of the patriarchal narratives. She became a pillar of salt, and Remember Lot’s wife: this is the extent of the Biblical allusions. All the rest is comment, or legend, or guess, or science.

Fuente: International Standard Bible Encyclopedia

Lot (2)

See DIVINATION.

Fuente: International Standard Bible Encyclopedia

Lot

Lot (A covering); son of Haran and nephew of Abraham, who by the early death of his father had already come into possession of his property when Abraham went into the land of Canaan (Gen 11:31). Their united substance, consisting chiefly in cattle, was not then too large to prevent them from living together in one encampment. Eventually, however, their possessions were so greatly increased, that they were obliged to separate; and Abraham with rare generosity conceded the choice of pasture-grounds to his nephew. Lot availed himself of this liberality of his uncle, as he deemed most for his own advantage, by fixing his abode at Sodom, that his flocks might pasture in and around that fertile and well-watered neighborhood (Gen 13:5-13). He had soon very great reason to regret this choice; for although his flocks fed well, his soul was starved in that vile place, the inhabitants of which were sinners before the Lord exceedingly. There ‘he vexed his righteous soul from day to day with the filthy conversation of the wicked’ (2Pe 2:7).

About eight years after his separation from Abraham (B.C. 1913), Lot was carried away prisoner by Chedorlaomer, along with the other inhabitants of Sodom, and was rescued and brought back by Abraham (Genesis 14), as related under other heads [ABRAHAM; CHEDORLAOMER]. This exploit procured for Abraham much celebrity in Canaan; and it ought to have procured for Lot respect and gratitude from the people of Sodom, who had been delivered from hard slavery and restored to their homes on his account. But this does not appear to have been the result.

At length the guilt of ‘the cities of the plain’ brought down the signal judgments of Heaven. The avenging angels, after having been entertained by Abraham, repaired to Sodom, where they were received and entertained by Lot, who was sitting in the gate of the town when they arrived. While they were at supper the house was beset by a number of men, who demanded that the strangers should be given up to them, for the unnatural purposes which have given a name of infamy to Sodom in all generations. Lot resisted this demand, and was loaded with abuse by the vile fellows outside on that account. They had nearly forced the door, when the angels smote them with instant blindness, by which their attempts were rendered abortive, and they were constrained to disperse. Towards morning the angels apprised Lot of the doom which hung over the place, and urged him to hasten thence with his family. He was allowed to extend the benefit of this deliverance to the families of his daughters who had married in Sodom; but the warning was received by those families with incredulity and insult, and he therefore left Sodom accompanied only by his wife and two daughters. As they went, being hastened by the angels, the wife, anxious for those who had been left behind, or reluctant to remove from the place which had long been her home, and where much valuable property was necessarily left behind, lingered behind the rest, and was suddenly involved in the destruction, by whichsmothered and stiffened as she stood by saline incrustationsshe became ‘a pillar of salt.’

Lot and his daughters then hastened on to Zoar, the smallest of the five cities of the plain, which had been spared on purpose to afford him a refuge: but, being fearful, after what had passed, to remain among a people so corrupted, he soon retired to a cavern in the neighboring mountains, and there abode. After some stay in this place, the daughters of Lot became apprehensive lest the family of their father should be lost for want of descendants, than which no greater calamity was known or apprehended in those times; and in the belief that, after what had passed in Sodom, there was no hope of their obtaining suitable husbands, they, by a contrivance which has in it the taint of Sodom, where they had been brought up, made their father drunk with wine, and in that state seduced him into an act which, as they well knew, would in soberness have been most abhorrent to him. They thus became the mothers, and he the father, of two sons, named Moab and Ammon, from whom sprung the Moabites and Ammonites, so often mentioned in the Hebrew history (Genesis 19). This circumstance is the last which the Scripture records of the history of Lot; and the time and place of his death are unknown.

Fuente: Popular Cyclopedia Biblical Literature

Lot

Son of Haran the brother of Abraham. He seems to have accompanied Abraham. without having a like faith in Abraham’s God. When their flocks and herds had so increased that they could no longer dwell together, Abraham bade his nephew choose whither he would turn. Lot looked on the well-watered plain of the Jordan, and went toward Sodom, notwithstanding that the men of that city were exceedingly wicked. The next record of Lot is that he dwelt in Sodom, and from thence was carried away by the four kings who made war against that city.

Though rescued by Abraham he did not profit by the discipline, but returned to dwell in the guilty city; whereas Abraham would not accept so much as a shoe latchet from its king. Lot is next seen sitting in the gate of Sodom, the place of power and judgement, when the two angels arrived to destroy the city. He acted hospitably towards them, but had to be rescued by them from the enmity of the inhabitants.

Lot and his family were loathe to leave the city, but the angels hastened them out, and bade them flee to the mountains. Lot begged to be allowed to go to Zoar, and was permitted; but, fearing to stay there, he left with his two daughters and abode in a cave, where, alas, he became the father of Moab and Ben-ammi, the ancestors of the Moabites and the Ammonites, who are afterwards alluded to as the children of Lot.

From his history in the O.T. it could not have been discovered that he was a righteous man; but this testimony is given of him in 2Pe 2:7-8, where he is called ‘just Lot,’ who, as a righteous man, was daily vexed in his soul by the unlawful deeds of those among whom he dwelt. Though God delivered him, he is a solemn instance of a righteous man dwelling needlessly amid gross wickedness; his course being the strongest contrast to that of Abraham. Gen 11 – Gen 14, Gen 19; Psa 83:8; Luk 17:28-29.

LOT’S WIFE, on leaving Sodom, looked back and became a pillar of salt! and is held up as a warning not to linger but to flee from coming judgements. Luk 17:32.

Fuente: Concise Bible Dictionary

Lot

H3876 G3091

1. Feast of

Purim

2. The son of Haran:

– Accompanies Terah from Ur of the Chaldees to Haran

Gen 11:31

– Migrates with Abraham to the land of Canaan

Gen 12:4

– Accompanies Abraham to Egypt; returns with him to Beth-El

Gen 13:1-3

– Rich in flocks, and herds, and servants; separates from Abraham, and locates in Sodom

Gen 13:5-14

– Taken captive by Chedorlaomer; rescued by Abraham

Gen 14:1-16

– Providentially saved from destruction in Sodom

Gen 19; Luk 17:28-29

– Disobediently protests against going to the mountains, and chooses Zoar

Gen 19:17-22

– His wife disobediently longs after Sodom, and becomes a pillar of salt

Gen 19:26; Luk 17:32

– Commits incest with his daughters

Gen 19:30-38

– Descendants of

Ammonites; Moabites

Fuente: Nave’s Topical Bible

Lot

Lot (lt), veil or covering. The son of Haran and nephew of Abraham. Gen 11:27; Gen 11:31. His sisters were Milcah the wife of Nahor, and Iscah, by some identified with Sarah. Haran died before the emigration of Terah and his family from Ur of the Chaldees, ver. 28, and Lot was therefore born there. He removed with the rest of his kindred to Haran, and again subsequently with Abraham and Sarai to Canaan. Gen 12:4-5. With them he took refuge in Egypt from a famine, and with them returned first to the “South,” Gen 13:1, and then to their original settlement between Bethel and Ai. vs. 3, 4. Later, they separated, Lot choosing the fertile plain of the Jordan, near Sodom. Gen 13:10-14. Lot was captured by the four kings of the East, and rescued by Abram. Gen 14:1-24. He was still living in Sodom, Gen 19:1-38, from which he was rescued by angels on the day of its final overthrow. He fled first to Zoar, in which he found a temporary refuge during the destruction of the other cities of the plain. The end of Lot’s wife is commonly treated as one of the difficulties of the Bible; but it surely need not be so. The value and the significance of the story to us are contained in the allusion of Christ. Luk 17:32. It is folly to think of identifying the “pillar” with some one of the fleeting forms which the perishable rock of the south end of the Dead Sea is constantly assuming. From the incestuous intercourse between Lot and his two daughters sprang the nations of Moab and Ammon.

Lot. Casting lots or a pebble is an ancient custom of deciding doubtful questions. Pro 16:33. Among the Jews lots were used with the expectation that God would so control them as to give a right direction to them, as in the choice of the apostle Matthias, Act 1:26, and in the cases of Saul and Jonathan, and Jonah and his companions to determine who had offended God. 1Sa 14:41-42; Jon 1:7. In the division of the Promised Land among the tribes of Israel the use of the lot was expressly commanded by God himself, it being understood that the extent of territory should be proportioned to the population of each tribe. Num 26:55. So the selection of the scapegoat on the day of atonement was to be determined by lot. Lev 16:8. Property was divided in a similar way. Psa 22:18; Mat 27:35. The orders of the priests and their daily services were also assigned by lot. 1 Chron. chaps. 24, 25. The manner of casting lots is supposed to have been by stones or marks which were thrown together into the lap or fold of a garment, or into an urn or vase, and the person holding them shook them violently, and they were then drawn. The passage, Pro 16:33, is paraphrased thus: “In a lot-vase the lots are shaken in all directions; nevertheless, from the Lord is the whole decision or judgment.”

Fuente: People’s Dictionary of the Bible

Lot

Lot. (veil or covering).

1. The son of Haran, and therefore the nephew of Abraham. Gen 11:27; Gen 11:31. (B.C. before 1926-1898). His sisters were Milcah, the wife of Nahor, and Iscah, by some identified with Sarah. Haran died before the emigration of Terah and his family from Ur of the Chaldees, Gen 11:28, and Lot was, therefore, born there.

He removed with the rest of his kindred to Charran, and again subsequently with Abraham and Sarai to Canaan. Gen 12:4-5. With them, he took refuge in Egypt from a famine, and with them, returned, first to the “south,” Gen 13:1, and then to their original settlement between Bethel and Ai. Gen 13:3-4.

But the pastures of the hills of Bethel, which had, with ease, contained the two strangers on their first arrival, were not able any longer to bear them, so much had their possessions of sheep, goats and cattle increased. Accordingly, they separated, Lot choosing the fertile plain of the Jordan, and advancing as far as Sodom. Gen 13:10-14.

The next occurrence in the life of Lot is his capture by the four kings of the east and his rescue by Abram. Gen 13:14. The last scene preserved to us in the history of Lot is too well known to need repetition.

He was still living in Sodom, Gen 19:1, from which he was rescued by some angels on the day of its final overthrow. He fled first to Zoar, in which he found a temporary refuge during the destruction of the other cities of the plain. Where this place was situated is not known with certainty. See Zoar.

The end of Lot’s wife is commonly treated as one of the difficulties of the Bible; but it surely need not be so. It cannot be necessary to create the details of the story where none are given. On these points, the record is silent. The value and the significance of the story to us are contained in the allusion of Christ. Luk 17:32.

Later ages have not been satisfied so to leave the matter, but have insisted on identifying the “pillar” with some one of the fleeting forms which the perishable rock of the south end of the Dead Sea is constantly assuming in its process of decomposition and liquefaction. From the incestuous intercourse between Lot and his two daughters, sprang the nations of Moab and Ammon.

(literally, a pebble).

2. The custom of deciding doubtful questions by lot is one of great extent and high antiquity. Among the Jews, lots were used with the expectation that God would so control them as to give a right direction to them. They were very often used by God’s appointment. “As to the mode of casting lots, we have no certain information. Probably several modes were practiced.”

“Very commonly among the Latins, little counters of wood were put into a jar with so narrow a neck, that only one could come out at a time. After the jar had been filled with water and the contents shaken, the lots were determined by the order in which the bits of wood, representing the several parties, came out with the water. In other cases, they were put into a wide open jar, and the counters were drawn out by the hand. Sometimes again, they were cast in the manner of dice. The soldiers who cast lots for Christ’s garments undoubtedly used these dice.” — Lyman Abbott.

Fuente: Smith’s Bible Dictionary

LOT

son of Haran, General references to

Gen 11:27; Gen 11:31; Gen 12:4; Gen 13:1; Gen 13:11; Gen 14:12; Gen 19:1; Gen 19:23; Luk 17:28; 2Pe 2:7

–Life Summarized
A religious man

2Pe 2:7; 2Pe 2:8

Made a worldly choice

Gen 13:10; Gen 13:11

Associated with evil men

Gen 13:12; Gen 13:13; Gen 19:1

Narrow escape from destruction

Gen 19:17

Lost property, wife, and reputation

Gen 19:24-38

Fuente: Thompson Chain-Reference Bible

Lot

the son of Haran, and nephew to Abraham. He accompanied his uncle from Ur to Haran, and from thence to Canaan; a proof of their mutual attachment, and similarity of principles respecting the true religion. With Abraham he descended into Egypt, and afterward returned with him into Canaan: but the multiplicity of their flocks, and still more the quarrels of their servants, rendered a friendly separation necessary. When God destroyed the cities of the plain with fire and brimstone, he delivered just Lot from the conflagration, according to the account of the divine historian. The whole time that Lot resided there was twenty-three years. During all this period he had been a preacher of righteousness among this degenerate people. In him they had before their eyes an illustrious example of the exercise of genuine piety, supported by unsullied justice and benevolent actions. And doubtless it was for these purposes that Divine Providence placed him for a time in that city. The losses which Lot sustained on this melancholy occasion were very great; his wife, property, and all the prospects of the future settlement of his family blasted. Pity must therefore draw a friendly veil over the closing scene of this man of affliction; and let him that thinketh he standeth, take heed lest he fall into deeds more reprehensible than those of Lot, without having equal trials and sufferings to plead in his favour. Respecting his wife, whether grieving for the loss of her property, or inwardly censuring the severity of the divine dispensation, or whether moved by unbelief or curiosity, cannot now be known; but, looking back, she became a pillar of salt, Gen 19:26. It would be endless to present the reader with all the opinions on this subject. Some contend that nothing more is meant than that she was suffocated: others, that a column or monument of metallic salt was erected upon her grave: others affirm that she became encrusted with the sulphur, insomuch that she appeared like an Egyptian mummy, which is embalmed with salt. Our Lord warns his disciples to remember Lot’s wife in their flight from Jerusalem, and not to imitate her tardiness, Luk 17:32.

2. LOT, any thing cast or drawn in order to determine any matter in question, Pro 18:18. We see the use of lots among the Hebrews in many places of Scripture: God commands, for example, that lots should be cast upon the two goats which were offered for the sins of the people, upon the solemn day of expiation, to know which of the two should be sacrificed, and which liberated, Lev 16:8-10. He required also that the land of promise should be divided by lot as soon as it was conquered; which command Joshua accordingly executed, Num 26:55-56; Num 33:54; Num 34:13, &c; Joshua xiv-xvi; hence the term lot is used for an inheritance, Thou maintainest my lot; and figuratively for a happy state or condition. The priests and Levites had their cities appointed by lot. Lastly, in the time of David, the four and twenty classes of the priests and Levites were distributed by lot, to determine in what order they should wait in the temple, 1Ch 6:54; 1Ch 6:61; 1Ch 24:5; 1Ch 25:8. In the division of the spoil, after victory, lots were likewise cast, to give every man his portion, Oba 1:11; Nah 3:10, &c. In the New Testament, after the death of Judas, lots were cast to decide who should occupy the place of the traitor, Act 1:26. From the above instances, it is clear that when men have recourse to this method, the matter ought to be of the greatest importance, and no other apparent way left to determine it; and the manner of making the appeal should be solemn and grave, if we would escape the guilt of taking the name of God in vain. It unquestionably implies a solemn appeal to the Most High to interpose by his decision; and so every thinking man will be very careful that he has a true and religious ground for so serious a proceeding; and few if any cases can now occur in which it can have any justification. The ancient manner of casting lots, was either in some person’s lap, or fold of the robe; into a helmet, or urn, or other vessel, in which they might be shaken before they were drawn or cast.

Fuente: Biblical and Theological Dictionary