Therefore she said to Abraham, “Cast out this bondwoman and her son; for the son of this bondwoman shall not be heir with my son, namely with Isaac.” And the matter was very displeasing in Abraham’s sight because of his son. (Gen 21,10-11)

At first overwhelming joy, but then great sorrow... Until Isaac came, the camp was quiet, so it was quite clear who could afford what and how the roles were divided. But now Abraham was "greatly troubled". If he had to part with something obviously evil, he surely would not have worried or regretted it. Like any man, he would probably have had difficulty seeing and acknowledging it at first, but after he had come to that conclusion, he would have taken the expulsion of the evil thing as a relief.

But the problem called Ishmael, in short, was that it was not evil, quite the contrary. After all, he was his own son! From the time of his birth, he saw him as the chief heir to the whole farm and house, because from his point of view, God was not fulfilling His ancient promise. But now everything was turned upside down. God had come and confirmed that what He had said had always been true, and it had never changed. Abraham wondered how many times this God had actually surprised him...

Now there was clearly no avoiding it. Isaac would be in permanent danger from his older brother, Ishmael was only 13 years old now, but he was already showing hostility, and the claim to the inheritance could escalate into a mortal dispute at any time. It was clear that Hagar and Ishmael saw things differently than that they should be put on the back burner for good. The descent from glory was extremely humbling for them, and so they were left with one last hope: Abraham's apparent weakness for his firstborn son. Sarah, sensing this, took the initiative and urged her husband: you must resolve this as soon as possible, while you still have strength enough. Ishmael must go.

Until Isaac came, the situation in the camp was "stable". However, the arrival of a purely heavenly seed in an environment already accustomed to half-heartedness will bring about a major crisis. The same is true in Scripture of every mixture of the holy and the unholy as practiced by Israel for centuries, and by the church after its decline into lukewarmness. The Word will come and bring unrest, a separation of the holy from the unholy (or from what is holy only in outward appearance). And the same is true in the life of every man as he wages the struggle for a victorious life, trying to reach it by his own strength or on the contrary by the power of the Holy Spirit.

And Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian, whom she had borne to Abraham, scoffing. (Gen 21,9)

It would seem that the joy of Isaac's birth must overwhelm everyone, that everyone would share it with Sarah, but after a few years, it mercilessly became apparent that this would not be true. There was a growing tension between Hagar and Ishmael on one side and Sarah and Isaac on the other. Hagar tried to hide it within herself, but still there was no doubt what everyone in the camp felt: she had been struck to the core by this, she had gone from being a queen to someone who was now at someone's mercy. Moreover, the one who could not hide his bitterness, and whose contempt for Isaac therefore radiated quite openly, was Ishmael. In short, it was obvious that Isaac's birth marked a major upheaval in the circumstances of Abraham's family. Hagar's future with Ishmael was suddenly uncertain.

Until God visited Sarah and she miraculously conceived, the situation in the camp was more or less stable. Sarah maintained her status as a woman, whom Abraham honored despite her barrenness, even though he had already had a child with Hagar. When Hagar tried to "raise her head" against Sarah. Abraham made it clear to her that she could not afford to do that, so she took a stand and kept a safe distance from him and Sarah. In doing so, she took pleasure in Abraham's continued preoccupation with her son, and it was clear to her that his and her future with the wealthy Abraham was secure. Fortune had not turned its back on her, she often thought.

But then God stepped in. The God with whom Abraham had spoken and to whom he had sacrificed... and everything was turned upside down. No, Hagar wasn't a diplomat by nature (as few in the tribal societies of the East were), and the hot-tempered Ishmael certainly wasn't. The tension that had been building in the camp since then was rubbing off on the others. Everyone was waiting to see what resolution the whole situation would take. Some sympathized with Hagar, others wished that this miracle-born child would one day become their new head rather than the quarrelsome Ishmael, as they had more or less already accepted. But at the sight of Abraham, who had grown so deeply attached to Ishmael, the fruit of his old age, a tension of expectation of the outcome hung over the camp.

It's strange, but sometimes things get complicated when God comes, they said quietly among themselves.

So the child grew and was weaned. And Abraham made a great feast on the same day that Isaac was weaned. And Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian, whom she had borne to Abraham, scoffing. (Gen 21,8-9)

The birth of the child, the pure joy and laughter of Sarah worked on both parents like an elixir of youth. Their strength seemed renewed, their readiness to stand by the desired child until it was able to be on its own feet in life gave them a new determination, so that many of the glooms which old age inevitably brings with it were for a long time quelled. But as it happens in the world, even pure joy has its reverse side...

With the arrival of Isaac, something fundamental changed in the house of Abraham. Something we understand well these days - a change of succession. This change did not occur at the moment of Isaac's birth, but months earlier, when it became clear that Sarah was pregnant. While Abraham was silent at first, as if he could not believe the news, and then erupted into an outburst of incredible gratitude and joy. While the whole tribe marveled that the God of their lord had proved faithful to His promises after all, something that many had already secretly doubted, there was a person in the camp who was struck by the news with unrelenting bitterness.

Abraham now found himself unable to avoid keeping an eye on Sarah whenever she moved away from him, and sometimes secretly watching Hagar when Sarah had to pass her tent. The pregnancy itself was by no means a guarantee that the child would be born healthy and survive the first few months, he knew that very well. Ishmael didn't really understand the whole situation at first. After all, Abraham had tried very hard to preserve in him the consciousness of a beloved son, so he had gotten him the latest model crossbow and tried to spend even more time with him than before. But through it all, Ishmael unmistakably sensed what was going on in the mind of his mother. She knew from the first moment that once Isaac was born that her star would be extinguished forever. It was clear to Hagar that neither she nor Ishmael would ever again have the position they had enjoyed in the house. So fear settled permanently in the hearts of both mothers, for even Sarah could not now help not to feel the jealousy of her stepson towards Isaac. She demanded a clear statement how Abraham would handle the question of succession, and what would then become of Ishmael and his mother.

As is sometimes the case, family celebrations are not exactly a place of peace and tranquility, but a catalyst for underlying tensions and disagreements. And so the feast that Abraham had arranged to share with everyone the great joy that the child of promise was prospering in every way resulted in already open expressions of resentment on the part of Ishmael. With his violent temper, it was becoming apparent that little Isaac would be in permanent danger beside him.

And Abraham called the name of his son who was born to him—whom Sarah bore to him—Isaac. (Gen 21,3) Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are children of promise. (Ga 4,28)

The name Isaac comes from the Hebrew "yitzchak" and means "he will laugh, be merry". Last time we talked about Sarah's incentive to laugh with her because she had reached the joyful end of her waiting - at a time when she was already completely doubting, indeed, de facto writing off the possibility. Whenever someone now called out to little Isaac as he ran between the tents of the caravan, he was reminded of this joy of God, who does the impossible.

The true religion is that which came from heaven, which was not invented by man - it is the religion of the miracle, the new birth from above. Here God himself acts, and often in spite of our possibilities and abilities. The miracle is what sets us free, it is something we cannot do, something we can never accomplish, something we have no control over, nor can anyone ask us to do. Only God can do it, and we watch in amazement. That's why there's a place for "Isaac" - laughter. In contrast, man-made religions become a burden, a moral law resting heavily on human shoulders that must be faithfully carried out, so that we may one day hopefully reach acceptance. Man does not particularly like to laugh at this, so he secretly seeks his pleasures elsewhere if he manages to escape from these shackles into another world, at least for a time. Such religion does not fill anyone with real joy, it is rather a shadow on the soul. That is why so many religious people are outwardly faithful but inwardly gloomy and not very happy. One person observed that a well-known Reformer, who was often portrayed during his lifetime, does not smile in a single portrait. After all, he had such a serious task to perform!

Yet how differently does Scripture speak of those who have come to know Christ, "Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are children of promise." We also are sons of Abraham - and therefore bear the mark of Isaac, of laughter. It is certainly not the only thing that characterizes us. But as sons of the heavenly birth, followers of the true Isaac, Christ, we too bear the seal of joy. Unless, of course, we have fallen into the oppressive bondage of the law.

And Sarah said, “God has made me laugh, and all who hear will laugh with me.” (Gen 21,6)

Despite what I wrote last time, the path of following God is not just a strenuous overcoming of obstacles. There is also room for joy and laughter! If we read today that Sarah gave birth at the age of ninety, then we should laugh - at least she encourages us to do so...

It is interesting to note that Sarah is the first person we read in the Bible who laughs. Her laughter is even recorded twice - but each time it is a different laugh. The first, when she didn't believe God's messengers that she was still going to have a child. At the time it seemed absurd to her (there are many things absurd to the human mind on the path of discipleship). But she wouldn't have offended God with that alone. But she went beyond the absurdity; it was not only laughter, but partly mockery, and this touched God, who was expecting and seeking faith from them, and so He let her know, "but yes, you laughed."

But her laughter after she gave birth to her son is a laughter of joy, of freedom, of relief. There is nothing wrong with that; on the contrary, it is a laughter that is empowering, liberating, expressing gratitude. People usually laugh at someone's expense, either directly or when human qualities are parodied in an anecdote or skit. Sarah's laughter at a promise fulfilled is something else entirely. It does not lift itself above anyone; it is an echo of the joy of heaven, a rejoicing of the heart, healing the soul.

Not in vain was Abraham's son named Isaac - "the laughing one". When we experience the workings of God, we are left in awe, and often we can relax and laugh wholeheartedly at it.

For I think that God has displayed us, the apostles, last, as men condemned to death; for we have been made a spectacle [e]to the world, both to angels and to men. We are fools for Christ’s sake, but you are wise in Christ! We are weak, but you are strong! You are distinguished, but we are dishonored! To the present hour we both hunger and thirst, and we are poorly clothed, and beaten, and homeless. (1Co 4,9-11)

How do we imagine a winner? Usually we like favourites who win in a start-finish style, outperforming others because they are gifted, but on top of that they have added a lot of work on themselves. We admire them because no one else can do what they have done. Or our admiration is won by the outsiders who started from the last place and yet outperform the others and in the end sensationally stand on the podium. But some hackneyed half-victories, half-losses, tedious plight, endless striving, and yet no great glory, do not inspire much enthusiasm and admiration.

But let's face it, life, the real life, is mostly like that.

And how then do we imagine God's victory? Did Paul, for example, walk in it? If all we knew about him was what he wrote to the Corinthians (see above) we would probably doubt it, but that is exactly how he saw his life. We are weak... We just mustn't read that passage without seeing the meaning behind it and what Paul is saying: that's how our life on this earth appears when seen on the outside, but it's different on the inside and very different when viewed from eternity above: and yes, then it really is the victory of God.

Abraham ascended his height and attained faith. One would expect something of a triumphal march in the limelight - he has a son, he preserves the lineage, and possession of the promised land is thereby sealed for his posterity. Great rejoicing, to be sure, but no spotlight - after all, even Isaac's birth took place outside the land because it was currently in drought. And who would have expected that from now on all problems would end and only jubilation would follow, then some new problems have only now emerged... As Paul writes elsewhere: "...we are hard-pressed on every side, yet not crushed; we are perplexed, but not in despair; persecuted, but not forsaken; struck down, but not destroyed..." (2Co 4,8-9)

And yet - Paul lived a victorious life, just as Abraham has now achieved victory. Only, we must not be mistaken about what such victories actually look like: they appear quite differently when viewed from the standpoint of this world and the world to come.

Just as with the man who died in weakness in the sight of all to overcome sin and the world in order to open the way to eternal glory for all of us.

(Abraham)...who, contrary to hope, in hope believed, so that he became the father of many nations, according to what was spoken, “So shall your descendants be.” And not being weak in faith, he did not consider his own body, already dead (since he was about a hundred years old), and the deadness of Sarah’s womb. He did not waver at the promise of God through unbelief, but was strengthened in faith, giving glory to God, and being fully convinced that what He had promised He was also able to perform. (Rom 4,18-21)

In describing the long years that preceded Isaac's birth, it does not seem to us that Abraham had the kind of faith evidenced in the Epistle to the Romans. We see in him, indeed, glorious victories, but also many hesitations and defeats. Therefore, the attitude described in the Epistle to the Romans was obviously only a matter of the final conclusion of the 25 years of discipleship. He had grown to this faith, he had worked his way to it through the various situations and trials through which he had passed. It is impossible to pigeonhole Abraham as a biblical figure: since he is called the father of faith, he always believed, did not doubt, and that´s it. This is a complete misunderstanding. Like everything that has value in life, his faith was dearly paid for; he had to drudge his way to it, to put it succinctly.

But in the end, this man permanently undergoing a change of heart and character rose to his height. Then, when it was much harder than ever before! Before, he could have had the child after all, at least in theory, the problem was Sarah's infertility. But when his body (and Sarah's body) went limp and the "biological clock" caught up with them both, all hope was over.

What a strange power the faith has to turn the impossible into the possible. And how marvelous that Abraham actually grew into it when he now faced far greater obstacles than before. At the time when things were easier, he wavered in his faith (he became satisfied with Ishmael). Now that he had grown old and believing was so much harder, even impossible - he believed God and strengthened by faith "gave honor." At that moment, he not only believed, but also spoke. Never before had he seemed so deranged to his servants as when they saw him, the centenarian, walking through the camp, praising God and expecting the birth of a son he clearly could no longer have.

To conceive him, he and Sarah had to experience the revival of what was already dead in their bodies. God´s personal promise to Abraham came to fruition as a resurrection, life from the death. The life of Isaac was a miracle, a revelation of things of divine character on earth, the beginning of the nation of God that was to become the light of the world. And therefore he had to be conceived by faith, not in the normal way - he had to come "from above," to be called into being by the movement of God and to be surrendered and consecrated to Him.

For Sarah conceived and bore Abraham a son in his old age, at the set time of which God had spoken to him. (Gen 21,2)

We have already said that Abraham did not come to know God through a theological approach, that is, through book study, knowledge and understanding, but through experiences that came as he walked the path of his life. He didn't study articles of faith, but practically grew in it; he didn't read books on intercession, and yet became one of the greatest intercessors; he didn't download sermons how to get blessings in his job, but practically experienced how God provided for his job as he sought the way for his farm and his community. His knowledge of God was thus brought to him by the specific situations he was exposed to. Or, better said, it was always first a lack, a crisis in which he had to seek God and take the right attitude. Having taken it, he received the blessing in that area of his life. Nothing has changed in this way of God's dealings with man over the next thousand years. We may learn about God through theological understanding, but our lives as such may be virtually unaffected. However, experiencing the depths, the crisis in which we must find God's way forward, truly transforms us and places us under the blessed hand of God. It is not a cheap and always pleasant way, but it is an unchangeable spiritual pattern: without such an inner transformation one cannot ascend permanently higher.

As we have already noted, Abraham was in some danger in Gerar, and he preferred to help himself with a half-truth. He may not have passed with flying colours, but at the same time it cannot be said that he deliberately intended to commit evil, and therefore God did not judge him. This situation eventually brought him a new experience: not only did God intervene on his behalf, but He ultimately affirmed Abraham by having him pray for the women of Abimelech's house who were afflicted with barrenness.

All of this only reinforces the principle described above: had it not been for this experience, Abraham would not have experienced how God heals even physical diseases, namely the one that troubled him most: infertility! He legitimately thought: if God healed infertility in idolaters... why couldn't the same thing happen to his own wife?

Often over the past 25 years, he had waged a struggle of faith in which he had both waxed and waned. For so many years he had hoped for the birth of his own son that it sometimes seemed like a distant idea, a fading hope. But never before had he felt so close and tangible an experience of his God miraculously healing infertility, and this literally through him.

Now there was no time for doubt; at 99 years old, he was experiencing the distant, perishable hope being transformed into a certainty: his God could do it, of course - for him, right here, right now.

And the Lord visited Sarah as He had said, and the Lord did for Sarah as He had spoken.(Gen 21,1)

What a simple description of the most significant events in the history of the world: the Lord visited... the Lord fulfilled. As if it were the simplest thing that could happen to man! But we've been telling the story of Abram's transformation for too long to make it clear that it's not so simple from man's perspective - that is, until he finds himself in the position of blessing. Abraham and Sarah had been working towards this for 25 years, and it was only at some point in their journey that it became so easy and natural. But then it actually seemed more natural to them than the opposite! Unless one is in a position towards God that God wants to bless, it is far more natural that things don't work out and accepting them from God seems difficult. Once he is in such a position, he finds it strange, on the contrary, why shouldn't these God´s things work?

Isaac's birth was a pivotal point in the history of the salvation of the world for God. Without Isaac, there would have been no Israel and no Christ. God worked on Abraham for years, and we know that at times it was pretty bitter medicine for him. But when Scripture gloriously announces the fulfillment of the promise, it does not first say that God fulfilled His promise to Abraham, but to... Sarah! Yet it seems to us that the struggles of faith have been waged primarily by Abraham all along, and his wife even often appears in the position of doubter. But this description of the birth of a son, the diction of the text, proves that God was also working on Sarah and her faith all along, even if it was done more covertly, "behind the curtain."

Sarah was in a simpler position than Abraham in the sense that he could not afford to doubt publicly. He was a bit like today's clergy in this regard: his responsibility to the whole community led him to keep certain struggles to himself and not show doubt in order to keep their faith in God from wavering. Sarah had more freedom in this, and could vent her skepticism more easily - so she laughs at God's messengers instead of believing, invents another path when God's way seems to lead nowhere, etc.

But we see that in the end, even Sarah rose to the heights in her heart and believed against all reality that God is faithful and able to fulfill what He promised, so God "fulfilled...her".

God doesn't want to leave anyone behind, He wants to lead everyone to higher paths without exception! And how precious it is when spouses can walk on them together.

So Abraham prayed to God; and God healed Abimelech, his wife, and his female servants. Then they bore children; for the Lord had closed up all the wombs of the house of Abimelech because of Sarah, Abraham’s wife. (Gen 20,17-18)

In particular, we find six kinds of healing in Scripture:
1. healing by power accompanying the preaching of the word (as a sign from above)
2. healing by the faith of the sick person (e.g. the case of the woman with the hemorrhage)
3. healing through the gift of healing (1 Cor. 12)
4. healing as a prophetic sign (e.g., the healing of Naaman)
5. healing through intercession (see petitions for fellow workers in the epistles)
6. healing through confession of sin and forgiveness (and note, this is not speaking of new believers, but of confession of sin and its forgiveness among long-time believers (see Jam 5:15)

It is interesting that today in the Church (i.e., by people who have been believers for a long time) the issue of supernatural healing is viewed primarily at two extremes. The first more or less denies it. According to him, the power of God does not operate today as in the beginning, when it was necessary for it to confirm the preached word. But after the period of the first apostles, it is said, it was no longer needed to that extent, and so supernatural manifestations ceased. After all, today we have doctors and God uses them to heal.

The problem is that none of these inferences are explicitly in the Bible. Even Jesus, in his last discourse in J14, apparently did not count on the manifestations of his Spirit gradually subsiding, quite the opposite. (And doctors were around then too, by the way, though obviously not on the level of today's medicine).

The other extreme is the claim that if we believe properly, we are all healthy, right HERE and NOW. Of course, anyone who has tried practicing this for a few years (and isn't in their twenties anymore, so naturally there already are some issues in their body) could develop their own opinion about the reality of this approach.   

Somewhere between these two extremes is the "intercessory" approach. Its proponents pray for healing, often in secret, but they also have no problem praying openly with the person. They believe that it is in God's power to heal, but they do not claim it by force, rather they wait to see if there will be intervention from above, that is, if and what will happen. (Admittedly, the results today are not somehow dazzling, but it still happens occasionally - I wish there were more of it).

The first two extremes don't actually count on God acting specifically and personally with a given case. According to them, it works either never or always. It is not God directly at work, but his principle - which works according to the theology being held: in no or every case.

It is therefore remarkable to realize that Abraham's prayer for the women of Abimelech's house, this first prayer for healing in Scripture (!), was not a prayer of faith but a prayer of restoration. It falls into the last category of the six named. It teaches us that perhaps more often than we admit, physical healing requires breaking down the barriers that stand between God and the person. To remove the block, the disfavour, and often to confess and forgive the guilt. And then to allow the flow of God's life to renew that person again, from spirit to body.

God dealt with Abimelech in a very specific and personal way, not as an impersonal principle, but with a clearly manifested will and through a specific revelation given to his servant Abraham.

So Abraham prayed to God; and God healed Abimelech, his wife, and his female servants. Then they bore children; for the Lord had closed up all the wombs of the house of Abimelech because of Sarah, Abraham’s wife. (Gen 20,17-18)

Abraham did not just receive protection, compensation, and multiplication of his flocks in Gerar, all in spite of some unbelief on his part. This kind of blessing accompanied him on his journey and he experienced it many times. But now he had a completely new spiritual experience: God had answered his prayer for healing in a very concrete way.

Virtually all ancient cults related to fertility in some way, because it was a guarantee of the continuation of the lineage, of simple survival. Without its own offspring, the tribe had no other fathers, shepherds or warriors. In times when there was no medical security and local tribal wars often broke out, disputes were settled by the extermination of whole families or tribes, a considerable loss of offspring had to be reckoned with, and so only its abundance gave some guarantee for the future.

God "closed...every womb". God was thus demonstrating His power over the deities of Abimelech's tribe (to whom they certainly tried to appeal for help, as they normally did) and confirming Abraham as his own man before them. "Touch him not, or calamities will befall you," he was announcing to them in a way they understood well. All sorts of ideas about how to deal with Abraham were very likely in the minds of Abimelech and his people, so it was necessary to give him additional protection. But what exactly happened with the women? We don't know, but from the general tenor of the text, it is certain that they discovered their barrenness very soon after the incident with Sarah - for it is clear that Abraham prayed for them shortly after her release, not after many months when none of them would have had a child visibly. As much as the people of that time did not have a deep knowledge of medicine, they understood the area of childbearing, for it was so important to them. Therefore, though we do not know for sure, of course, the simplest explanation is that what had happened to the women in Abimelech's house long before had happened to Sarah, namely, that "it had ceased to be with Sarah after the manner of women" (18:11, NRSVA).

Abraham's prayer is the first prayer for physical healing that we find in Scripture. The man of God, the prophet, prays by direct commission from God for the deliverance of the people from the sickness that is caused by their having fallen into God's displeasure. It is interesting, therefore, that unlike other healings in Scripture (e.g., prayers accompanying the preaching of the gospel), this is more of a prayer that accompanies the restoration of grace over a person's life in the sense of James 5:15, "and if he has committed sins, he will be forgiven." Today this kind of prayer is understood and practiced rather rarely.

Then Abimelech took sheep, oxen, and male and female servants, and gave them to Abraham; and he restored Sarah his wife to him. And Abimelech said, “See, my land is before you; dwell where it pleases you.” Then to Sarah he said, “Behold, I have given your brother a thousand pieces of silver..." (Gen 20,14-16)

We know that Abraham did not behave in an exemplary manner, yet he emerged victorious from the situation. It is amazing to see how God's people are carried higher by sheer grace even when they are not excelling in God's way! But something must be added to this: Abraham's guilt here did not consist in throwing himself into some excess or sin. It was not a calculated act, a premeditated decision. It was far more a weakness of faith, a failure to stand the test, which was greater at that moment than how far his faith had grown. God has great grace for such.

In the end, the whole episode brought him, as it had once done in Egypt, riches - "oxen, cattle, slaves, and maidservants" and "a thousand shekels of silver." But more importantly, the incident brought him closer to Abimelech. He offered to let him settle anywhere in his land - meaning that Abraham would now be under his protection, seen as his own, not a foreigner. Now he no longer has to feel any fear here!

This protection was actually the most precious thing to him. For it is in this land that, a few months later, the most desired moment of his life will occur and his son, Isaac, will be born.

God uses even our weaknesses and mistakes to build something precious, something valuable. Corrie ten Boom recalls how one mission tour took her to Asian countries. But she had great difficulty remembering the faces of the locals; they all looked the same to her, as they do to many Europeans. So it happened that she approached a person in confidence whom she thought was her helper from the local church, but she was wrong; he was a stranger and even a non-believer who did not react well at that moment. She was ashamed of her faux pas - until she found out later that because of her mistake, the man had found himself in her congregation and eventually turned to Christ.

And it came to pass, when God caused me to wander from my father’s house, that I said to her: This is your kindness that you should do for me: in every place, wherever we go, say of me, “He is my brother.” (Gen 20,13)

It is not easy for most people to understand why God made Abraham wait so long for the birth of the promised son. As El-shaddai, the Almighty, he could have acted long ago, but he did not. Why?

We have already mentioned that God did not want the son to be given to that Abraham (actually Abram) who he was like in the beginning. It is a mystery that the untransformed mind cannot comprehend: God's treasures cannot be possessed by a carnal man. After the fall, God denied man, whose defining component had become "flesh," access to the tree of life. A person without deeper spiritual experience believes that God is essentially a kind of St. Nicholas who distributes gifts to people. Since he does receive some in the beginning and encounters the incredible principle of God's grace in salvation, he is affirmed that this is true: everything is free and most certainly immediately. But later he discovers that it doesn't quite work that way, and his faith withers as a result; he hasn't understood or not been told, that his faith will be tested, his heart transformed in the wilderness of life. It is not an easy road, but it is the only road to spiritual riches and victory. Abraham walked that path, too, and for 24 years by now. The events in Gerar probably take place shortly before the miracle of Isaac's conception, and now he was approaching the glorious moment when the promise could be fulfilled.

When a man is slowly changing within, it is rather his surroundings that take notice. We ourselves notice our changes when they are greater and take place at a particular moment, i.e., in leaps and bounds. Most of the time it is a stage of crisis, a trial, which forces us to change our attitudes and outlook and throws us into the arms of God.

According to what he said to Abimelech, Abraham still perceived his situation as very dangerous just before the conception of Isaac. He certainly thought a lot about his situation. If he had had the opportunity to look at it from God's perspective, he would have come to the conclusion - that he didn't actually have to tell a half-truth at all. He was in the center of God's view, literally the apple of His eye. Nothing would have happened to him - for that would have made an end of the line of God's nation on earth, His plan for the whole world! But Abraham still sees God (literally the deity - Elohim) - as those who have "let him wander" while he is given over to the adversity of life, he must protect himself by every means available.

Let us be careful not to judge the mistakes of others - it makes us feel good, and so we love doing it. I do not point it out for this reason. But it is good to understand how Abraham grew spiritually by this example.

For we will continue to witness how he completely let himself into God's hand as he reached the heights of faith in his life. Now such a "leap" in growth is before him. Perhaps it was the situation he found himself in at Gerar and his thinking about it that helped him to do so. It has brought him to an even greater degree of self-surrender to God for life and death, to the heights of faith that God is able to do anything for him, even the utterly impossible.

Shortly thereafter, the promised Isaac came into the world.

And Abimelech called Abraham and said to him, “What have you done to us? How have I offended you, that you have brought on me and on my kingdom a great sin? You have done deeds to me that ought not to be done.” (Gen 20,9)

Abimelech was clearly shaken. He was a king, and no one in his territory exceeded him, but he had just encountered the power of God Himself, before which he and his men were in fear. He summons Abraham and reproaches him for his conduct. How strange it is when a heathen king morally rebukes a man of God!

It is good to perceive how other people see us. It is good not to live a life that arouses disgust at our faith. But there is a balance to be struck. It probably happens to every follower of God from time to time that he is judged unfairly by those around him. When people feel that we are superior to them in certain things and we care about how our lives are perceived by those around us, they like to point out something in which we are not exactly perfect. But such criticism may not be fair, for it is often carried by the slogan "it is easy to find a stick to beat a dog...". Often we come to the conclusion that if we were to live up to all expectations and meet everyone's criticism, we would end up being unable to do anything at all, we would be completely paralyzed - if we behave this way, it bothers someone, if differently, it bothers someone else.

On the contrary, it's more often a trap to throw us into feelings of guilt and justification in front of people. When we fall into this, the criticism doesn't stop. Since it is working and fulfilling its purpose, it will continue. Therefore, it is wisest to draw our own conclusions about the matter and not fall into a state of inwardly reporting to men and not to God. If there is anything we need to change, let us confess and bring it to God, knowing that He alone is the judge of us, not men.

Abraham's present case is a little different, however, because we know for certain that the fault was on his side. Nevertheless, God remained at his side and ultimately vindicated him against Abimelech ("He will pray for you and you will live" Gen. 20:7), for he rather could not bear the pressure of the current situation (a sense of danger) than to have plunged into sin through his own initiative.

How good it is that God sees not only the act, but also the motives that led the person to it! For this reason, too, our judgment is never entirely just. The same act of two men may be judged differently by God. This is also why Scripture advises us to be very careful about our judgment of others.

But Abimelech had not come near her; and he said, “Lord, will You slay a righteous nation also? Did he not say to me, ‘She is my sister’? And she, even she herself said, ‘He is my brother.’ In the integrity of my heart and innocence of my hands I have done this.” And God said to him in a dream, “Yes, I know that you did this in the integrity of your heart. For I also withheld you from sinning against Me; therefore I did not let you touch her. Now therefore, restore the man’s wife; for he is a prophet, and he will pray for you and you shall live. But if you do not restore her, know that you shall surely die, you and all who are yours.” (Gen 20,4-7)

Well, Abimelech has just shown us how to usurp a stranger's wife with integrity and "clean hands" - and God may yet vouch for him!

To understand places like this, we must remember that in ancient times, people acted on the basis of customary law, because, unlike in our time, no other law was yet widespread. The king of a given area obviously had the right to take into his harem any unmarried woman in his territory. Horrible as it seems, it is perhaps worth mentioning that thousands of years later, in the 18th century, we also find references to the so-called law of the first night in so-called Christian Europe. According to this, a feudal lord had the right to have first intercourse with the wife of his estate who had just entered into marriage.

God certainly did not approve of such a thing, for we know from later Scripture how He views marriage - only that this standard was not even reached by many patriarchs, let alone by Abimelech, who did not honor the Lord at all. Therefore, this must be understood to mean that God is now only treating him as a stranger, based on his understanding, his culture, the generally accepted principles of the time - which he did not actually violate. Of course, if Abimelech were to become a worshiper of God, his morality would have to undergo changes far more far-reaching than that - and God would certainly require it!

"But if you do not restore her, know that you shall surely die, you and all who are yours." I wonder what it's like when God threatens someone with death - and mind you, not through an intermediary, but directly, right to their face! There are not many places in Scripture where we see something like this. It looks like Abimelech took a moment to compose himself after God had agreed at first, but it seems to have strengtened him so much that God had to go further and get tough: if you don't give her back, not only you will die, but all your loved ones as well!

This, too, was a custom of the time, and Abimelech understood it very well: not only the guilty party was punished for the harm done, but his whole family or tribe. The retribution normally exceeded the act committed.

This is also why the later Old Testament provision of "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" is, in the view of the time, an expression of mercy, not harshness as it appears to us today - it stipulates that the punishment was not to exceed the offense.

But God came to Abimelech in a dream by night, and said to him, “Indeed you are a dead man because of the woman whom you have taken, for she is a man’s wife.” (Gen 20,3)

A remarkable thing happened: God Himself went into action for a man whose attitude was not 100% right at that moment. Abraham caused the situation, though the mitigating circumstance for him is that he spoke a half-truth out of more or less legitimate fear for his life, under great pressure.

It is all the more remarkable that God should have inserted Himself with such vehemence into a matter where His man's actions were not perfectly holy. The vehemence is unprecedented - God announces to Abimelech straight away that he is going to die! Hebrews 10:31 says it is "terrible to fall into the hand of the living God." Not just the dry statement of imminent death, but the very experience of meeting God without mercy must have been truly terrifying for Abimelech.

In situations like this, in our moments of failure, we realize again that God is far greater than our sins! If the measure of His grace matched the perfection of our lives, so that it balanced it like a tongue on a scale, if it were not infinitely greater - just where would we be? Thank God that His willingness to blot out (and forget) sin is many times greater. That He always offers to help us again, even after we have failed Him. If there were no such addition of something MORE on our faith journey - if everything worked only to the extent that we tried our best, we might as well go to the monastery of any religion, and try to achieve sanctification there through superhuman discipline and mortification of our inclinations.

But God has given us the additon of His own MORE! The power of His Spirit is present whenever we acknowledge that we are weak, so that we fail to live truly holy lives. It is near whenever we are willing to receive it, whenever we do not hinder it. He even works with us in secret, at times when we don't really know we need it. She offers herself to us again even after we have grieved her. Again and again God offers us his grace, without any reproach.

This is not to encourage us to take our following lightly, because God always works it out for us in the end. But let us turn our eyes from our imperfection to the One who has given us everything we need to live - and first and foremost, to live a spiritual life. Our journey, true discipleship, is marked by an overflow of God's grace. Otherwise it would be, as we like to say, only a dead religion.

Now Abraham said of Sarah his wife, “She is my sister.” And Abimelech king of Gerar sent and took Sarah. (Gen 20,2)

Abraham certainly could not have been proud of the way he acted, but he justified it to himself by trying to minimize the danger. Scripture does not always offer an interpretation of the events described that is easily detected after the first cursory reading. At this point we are shocked to see Abraham telling a half-truth, and so we make a snap judgment: what a patriarchal dictate, what inequality, he protected himself at the expense of the weaker sex, nothing happened to him, but what about Sarah? What arrogance over the fate of those closest to him when his own wife ends up in the harem of the local king. He should be ashamed of himself!

But we need to go a little deeper to understand and perhaps gain some grace for him. For some places in Scripture tell a story, but not an evaluation of it (and certainly not primarily to us who live in a world so far removed from the one in which these stories took place that certain things are harder for us to understand).

We find two clues that can guide us to be clearer about the extent of Abraham's guilt. The first is this: 'Abimelech sent for Sarah'. Abraham was in foreign territory where he was a guest and felt threatened. It seems that Sarah was simply taken away by Abimelech's messengers. At that point, it was simply no longer possible to take up the fight against the outnumbered inhabitants of Gerar, especially since Abraham was forced by circumstances (probably lack of water) to remain there.

The second clue is even more obvious. Note that God did not reproach Abraham about this unfortunate episode even afterwards. On the contrary, we will see that He strikes Abimelech and affirms Abraham in relation to him - He has him pray for the miraculous healing of his house!

Abraham was certainly aware that this situation was caused by his fear and his resulting half-lie/half-truth. We are not always proud of ourselves... but we can be sure that God understands our weaknesses and the pressures we are under. (After all, who knows how many of us who are critical of him would act differently in his place?)

One thing we can be sure of, however, is that Abraham was aware of his mistake, and in the end he came to the right conclusion in his heart. How can we be sure of that? Because God then stooped to him in even greater power than he had ever known before. Abraham was later not farther from God, but nearer than he had ever been before.

But indeed she is truly my sister. She is the daughter of my father, but not the daughter of my mother; and she became my wife. 13 And it came to pass, when God caused me to wander from my father’s house, that I said to her, ‘This is your kindness that you should do for me: in every place, wherever we go, say of me, “He is my brother.” (Gen 20,12-13)

The agreement that Sarah was to refer to Abraham as her brother shows the harsh and uncertain times in which Abraham lived. There was no governmental administration of the territories in which he moved, no place to turn for help, no place to seek justice. Any stronger tribe or band of raiders meant a legitimate fear that he would be killed for Sarah's sake. To prevent that, Sara was to tell half-truths and claim to be his sister - and knowingly put herself at risk of being taken from him. In ancient times, having a harem of one's own was a sign of a ruler's manly strength, and if Pharaoh had it, then any regional ruler was going to be like him.

The risk that Sarah would be taken into a foreign harem because of this half-truth eventually came to fruition twice. These were certainly fateful and tragic moments for both. Yet they preferred to take this risk rather than risk the death of Abraham, which would have meant the final end of the family.

Probably, then, the drought forced Abraham to descend from his high places into a foreign region in which he did not feel at all safe - and that, let us consider, even with his hundreds of men! He left a place where he had prospered for years and his flocks had grown. He did not leave because he wanted to do something wrong, to enrich himself, to get anything wrong, etc. He just needed to solve a particular problem, a crisis in which he found himself.

The lesson for us is this: we are able to arrange our lives so that they flow in certain ruts, moving in predictable situations. Everything works, thrives and we are happy - in everyday life, family, work and in our life of faith. But there are times when this course is disrupted, when our train is unexpectedly thrown off the switch. So we experience surprise, shock, we have to react - we don't know how, but we have to do something! Will we do the right thing? If it hadn't been for the drought, this shameful episode in Abraham's life would not have happened...

These crises, "switches" if you will, are unpredictable in life and we cannot be prepared for 100%. One can only remain vigilant and not leave the heights in the heart if one must already leave them externally. But let us be aware of the fact that our ability to overcome them determines how far we can go on our journey and not fail. The verse from 1K10:13 gives us confidence that this is possible: "No temptation has overtaken you except such as is common to man; but God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted beyond what you are able, but with the temptation will also make the way of escape, that you may be able to bear it."

And Abraham journeyed from there to the South, and dwelt between Kadesh and Shur, and stayed in Gerar. Now Abraham said of Sarah his wife, “She is my sister.” And Abimelech king of Gerar sent and took Sarah. (Gen 20,1-2)

We don't know what caused Abraham to move from the heights above Sodom to Gerar, but it was very likely the dry season. Indeed, it is mentioned later in chapter 26: "there was again a famine in the land, different from the days of Abraham" (26:1). Here he also goes on to describe the disputes that Isaac had over the wells that Abraham had dug there. The area of Gerar was a lowland, only 40-50 m above sea level, and apparently abounded with what the highlands did not have in the dry seasons: water.

If we want to be critical of anyone, we can always find a reason, but finding one now against Abraham is really extremely easy. Because of his half-truth, Sarah found herself back in another man's harem. Is it at all possible that a man of God acted in this way, but moreover one who had already experienced a similar thing, and it was a memento with so many implications for his later life that he must have remembered it very well?

But as Oswald Chambers once said: Let us not overconfide ourselves and say of anything too easily: I will never do such a thing again! Not even the best of us are safe from falling. For we cannot be sure just because of what (we think) we are. The foundation of our security is not in us. It is always and only the grace of God that allows us to remain on our high places. Our task is to remain on them and not to leave them of our own free will. Then we have victory.

But God said to him, ‘Fool! This night your soul will be required of you; then whose will those things be which you have provided?’ (L 12,20)

When Lot reflected on his life - and he had a lot of time to do so in the cave - did he finally understand why he ended up the way he did? Had he come to an epiphany? We don't know. We have no news of his next steps; we have no idea if he might have tried to do the most logical thing and go back to Abraham. It's just that Lot was once very wealthy, with a corresponding position, and now he would have to come as a loser and ask for help. He knew he would not be rejected, for Abraham had already saved him once without his asking. But human pride can be immeasurable and often very illogical. Its greatest pain is not death, but humiliation. If Lot realized that he had a decisive part in the break with Abraham at the time, and that it was a mistake, then surely he is not the only one who finds it impossible to throw himself on the mercy of the one against whom he feels guilty. For he would confess it by his deed, and that is something which many of them will not permit ("better die than bow").

The interesting question is, whether Lot figured out that it was worth it to go unconditionally God's way in life? Because it usually doesn't seem so at the beginning of the journey! It seems more difficult and fraught with complications, to think through the rightness, wrongness of one's actions, to be mindful of morality, to not overstep the bounds of what is acceptable. Then there is always a quicker, easier and more tempting way. We've used that analogy several times: Abraham's way was upward, to the heights, it meant climbing against the natural forces of gravity, overcoming adversity. Lot, on the other hand, descended to the lowlands of Sodom and enjoyed the comfort it immediately gave him - for work and for life. In terms of what he expected from life, it worked out great, but only up to a point. Who knows if at the end of his life, in the dark cave, he said to himself that pithy word from Jesus' parable: "You fool"?

The whole Bible has it that following God really does pay off in the end, but beware: only in retrospect, and sometimes seen only from the side of eternity. The moment we choose God's way, we usually don't see it as a factual benefit, but a complication of sorts - others who are not guided by anything higher have it easier. It is interesting that this question is addressed without change by people of all ages, just as King David once did in Psalm 73: "Have I then in vain kept a pure heart, and washed my hands with innocence...? I wondered how to make sense of it all; it seemed impossible. It was only when I entered the sanctuary of God that I understood what end they would take." (Ps 73,13.16-17)

And there's an even more interesting question: in this sense, how might Abraham now have viewed Lot and his life? He still did not have the promised son, only a growing faith. Did he think it was good to follow God (anyway) or was he still doing it primarily for what it was going to bring him?

And this I pray, that your love may abound still more and more in knowledge and all discernment, that you may approve the things that are excellent, that you may be sincere and without offense till the day of Christ, being filled with the fruits of righteousness which are by Jesus Christ, to the glory and praise of God. (Fil 1,9-11)

God's goal with us is not for us to remain childish, naive, blinded, as one might think of the way of following God, in the sense of "thinking teaches one to doubt, and therefore it must be limited in order to believe." But true faith does not limit, but liberates; the problem is not whether or not to think, but how. Paul, on the other hand, wants the Philippians to grow in their knowledge and deep discernment.

"To discern what matters". To recognize what matters is one of the most important things we should learn in our lives. Lot couldn't do it, and he didn't even know he was missing it. His life, until the arrival of God's messengers, had been on a track that, despite some negatives, more or less matched his expectations, and therefore he would not change on his own. He would not have left Sodom and would have eventually shared its fate.

But at the same time, this lack of knowledge of what mattered determined his life far more than he thought. It took him away from Abram, away from the community worshipping the only God, into a vibrant modern city, into a system that, while he had not entirely fallen into, he had not had the strength to leave. Gradually there was more and more things around him that he was not winning over, where it was not he who held the reins, in short, much that was "dragging" him somewhere. It's a nice term, often used for chaff driven by the wind. What is not valuable, pure, is easily carried away by the various currents.

"That ye may discern what matters, and be pure and blameless for the day of Christ, full of the fruits of righteousness..." Lot did not discern, and therefore lacked the fullness of the fruit at the moment of reckoning. On the contrary, in the cave he found himself in utter poverty in every sense of the word - despite (or because of) the fact that he had chosen prosperity for himself in the first place. He may have retained personal righteousness, but if Sodom had not burned at that time and he had lived a long life there, the fullness of eternal fruit would have been lacking in his life anyway. He would not have had it, because in the depths of his life he did not draw from God.

 ...each one’s work will become clear; for the Day will declare it, because it will be revealed by fire; and the fire will test each one’s work, of what sort it is. If anyone’s work which he has built on it endures, he will receive a reward. If anyone’s work is burned, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire. (1Cor 3,13-15)

Most of the New Testament epistles were written by the apostles in their later years. It is not surprising that their perspective does not focus on some short-term, near-term goals, but looks ever farther beyond the horizon of human life as a whole and its transcendence, toward eternity. Not that this was not the core of Christianity from the beginning; but a young Peter, Paul, or John would surely have written letters full of a dynamic message of faith and inspiration, yet different in some ways from the wide view later allowed by the wisdom that only a profound experience of life can give a person. The Holy Spirit, of course, uses man as a vessel, just as he is, but precisely in order to convey his message, man must be able to perceive it. To do this, he goes through a lifelong process of transformation; although once even a donkey could tell God's message, it was certainly not the epistle to the Corinthians. Unlike donkeys, the apostles also loved, sacrificed and struggled for those to whom they wrote. The communication of God's word is not just a dry communication of truth (information), but must be delivered by those who understand and love deeply.

We have only one direct reference to Lot in the New Testament in 2Pt 2:7, which we quoted last time. While Jesus does mention the people of his day in Luke's Gospel and warns us of the fate of his wife, the only other passage that directly refers to Lot is that of 1Cor 3. He is not named directly, but the man saved by fire, who lost everything in the process, clearly points to him.

Many today are satisfied with the gospel in the form of mere understanding the punishment of the Son of God for our sin. Understanding this information and accepting it in the life of a new believer is often the end of most efforts to follow Christ radically, even though it was intended to be the beginning of all. The mindset Paul shows here is not inherent to everyone, probably not even to most believers: namely, that one is to enter the kingdom of God with the riches of full reward, that the goal of the gospel is not the salvation of the poor ("naked") but of the rich in God! Contrary to Catholic theology, this passage also does not speak of purgatory - not man himself, but his work, his fruit, will be tested for eternal endurance. Only things of value, gold, silver, that which will stand the test of purity by fire, have the right to enter and remain. Everything else will burn irretrievably.

It is said that the fool must learn from his own mistakes, but the wise learn from the mistakes of others. Lot's end is given to us as a warning - what will we see one day when we look back on our lives? To what do we want to dedicate it? What direction will we take? And to what heights?

Let us choose well.

...and delivered righteous Lot, who was oppressed by the filthy conduct of the wicked (for that righteous man, dwelling among them, tormented his righteous soul from day to day by seeing and hearing their lawless deeds)... (2Pt 2,7-8)

When looking back at the end of life, it is customary to reflect on the milestones that have mostly determined the course of a person's life. In Lot's case it was undoubtedly the moment of his separation from Abram.

Lot broke with him after the fiasco in Egypt. Abram was banished there in disgrace after the scandal, and his star lost its brilliance. He did get rich in Egypt, but thanks to Sarah, and so others could argue that it was almost a pointless scramble back and forth, a disgusting experience, and a return to an arid land. (Abram originally wanted to escape the famine, but had to return to Canaan earlier than planned, and the land still hasn't recovered from the drought.) Not surprisingly, Lot now viewed his uncle more critically than he ever had before. There were snide remarks in the caravan and tensions that began to flare into arguments between the shepherds. Only, if Lot had an attitude of exclusive respect for Abram, the shepherds would have known they couldn't afford it, and Lot would have silenced them. But things were different now, and Abram had no choice but to withdraw - he was guilty of it all. It was obvious he could not be relied upon 100% to always know where to go and what to do. And so, as they returned to arid Canaan and he headed for the heights again, Lot tapped his forehead. Suddenly he knew many things better than Abram did: for example, that now was the time to go elsewhere, to the irrigated places! Why is Abram making up nonsense again?

It was no wonder that the tension and loss of respect had resulted in their parting. The fact that it wasn't quite smooth was evidenced by the fact that they apparently didn't see each other much after that, and might not even see each other anymore.

And it was this watershed moment that determined what Lot would definitively lose, and what he would gain, later in life.

For he definitely lost contact with his uncle, the tribe that was then the only place where the true God was worshipped in Canaan. Abram was certainly not perfect, but he was seeking God. Lot did not have a living relationship with God, and so from then on he lost the motivation and guidance to God that being with Abram gave him. Slowly but surely, he has moved to a form of living by inertia, with a belief in an admittedly honorable moral culture, but one that no longer has the inner power to further transform, nor can it influence his own descendants or those around him.

He never lost prosperity, and may even have gained from it by parting, for i Sodom he was in more fertile places than before. He also gained a house in this Beverly Hills of that time and fellowship with its inhabitants, which he evidently greatly desired.

But Scripture is mercilessly true: he also gained a lifetime of tribulation. "Day by day his soul was afflicted," Peter says. Always, with no escape. If Lot took looked back now in the cave, the sight was pitiful. The part of his life that he had been most proud of so far, the part that was sovereignly his own, that he could make happen and didn't need Abram to do it - that had been taken away from him completely. Perhaps his eyes were now opened to see that, in the end, apart from the blissful moments of enjoying his wealth and hanging out with his neighbours, it had brought him nothing but misery, the disintegration of his family and the loss of his wife. What kind of life was it, anyway? Wasn't I a bit of a fool when I lived it?

But if the past was depressing, what is the present? As Lot looked around, it occurred to him that it was as dark as this cave.

 

Thus both the daughters of Lot were with child by their father. The firstborn bore a son and called his name Moab; he is the father of the Moabites to this day. And the younger, she also bore a son and called his name Ben-Ammi; he is the father of the people of Ammon to this day. (Gen 19,36-38)

We're coming to the end of Lot's story, and unfortunately it's really no happy ending. When we see what the course of Lot's life has come to, we may find the attempt to interpret the daughters' action as a desire to become the progenitors of the Messiah all the more amusing - for the fruit left behind on this earth was the nations of Moab and Ammon. If we trace the references to them further in Scripture, then it is indeed true: no way Messiah, but often a virulent hostility towards the promised seed, the descendants of Isaac. A hostility that was like that of foreign nations who had no kinship with the Israelites.

The Moabites and Ammonites may be viewed in the same way as Ishmael: they are the product of human carnality. Nevertheless Abraham and Sarah, in spite of it, had  a longing for God and appreciated His ways at least in the end. Ishmael is thus a sign of the period when they fell into unbelief, failing the test. But because they wanted to be God's followers, they came back and later prevailed! However, we see no such thing as a desire for the things of God in Lot or his daughters, and no resit. And if we look even deeper: if Lot had not separated from Abram then, or even otherwise, if he had not at least gone to Sodom, the center of the then "world," after his separation, the Moabites and Ammonites would not be on earth.

How many things are born in our lives because our heart is pulled in a different direction than God would lead it... Lot's story can serve as a warning to us because we then have to live with our Ammonites and Moabites. Indeed, they remained unpleasant neighbors to the Israelites, just as Abraham was later unable to completely preserve Isaac's offspring by sending Ishmael far to the east.

Then Lot went up out of Zoar and dwelt in the mountains, and his two daughters were with him; for he was afraid to dwell in Zoar. And he and his two daughters dwelt in a cave. Now the firstborn said to the younger, “Our father is old, and there is no man on the earth to come in to us as is the custom of all the earth. Come, let us make our father drink wine, and we will lie with him, that we may preserve the lineage of our father.” (Gen 19,30-32)

It is remarkable (and sad) to see the generational progression of spiritual decay when parents lose a living relationship with God. What would not have been acceptable to them becomes normal for the children. First, the person stops actively living out his faith and freezes in a certain state where he does not do much good, but neither does he do much evil; he still has some notion of God and a basic moral discernment. But then come another generation or two in which the reins are loosened and not only are they lacking any consciousness of God, but the moral ruin is plainly visible.

The laws of Mesopotamia of Abraham's time, the earliest Assyrian principles, and the later Code of Hammurabi, regarded incest as an abominable thing, especially between mother and son. But even for incest between father and daughter, the guilty party could be excommunicated. It is therefore somewhat amusing to encounter even an interpretation of the actions of Lot's daughters that claims that they resorted to incest because they "desired to be in the line of the Messiah," since Lot was of the tribe of Sheth, to which the Messiah was promised. This is an interpretation a la "wish fathered by thought", for there is really nothing to suggest it when looking at the whole story. Lot's daughters cannot be seen as following God's ways, quite the opposite. Lot had a clue about morality, he once lived in Sodom internally separate from Sodom and did not accept her ways. But his daughters no longer consider them forbidden if they see no other way out. They may have come out of Sodom, but they took Sodom with them. Even if they did not do so for pleasure, they still saw it as legitimate to resort to such abominable ways if it appeared to be the way to solve their problem. Not that such things didn't occur then, but they were mostly despised. They didn't even try to talk to their father about it, they straight away got him drunk.

Of course, Lot himself certainly viewed his family's plight with a sense of hopelessness and despair. In the cave, isolated from the surroundings, he ended up living there alone with his two daughters, without much chance of a reasonable future. He was certainly struggling, and the contrast between his rich life (and rich social life) in Sodom and their present reality must have been glaring. Lot suffered, but he did not resort to the same means as his daughters, deception and incest. There is a kind of despair, a depression if you will, that leads to throwing off one's inhibitions, as the epistle of Ephesians 4 puts it: ...having their understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God, because of the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart; who, being past feeling, have given themselves over to lewdness, to work all uncleanness with greediness. (v. 18-19)

 We have already said that Lot may not have been a worse man than Abraham. At least, we can't make any judgment about that from the Scriptures, but we certainly don't see that Lot did anything wrong. He was an excellent farmer, a good citizen, and the father of a family that he managed to provide for and protect well until that fateful evening. How is it that there was such a difference between his end and Abraham's end, how is it that the goodness of good people does not in itself ensure that they turn out well before God?

We have said many times that Lot did not actively seek God and subordinate his judgments and ways to anything higher than his own benefits. If we have two similar people at the beginning of the journey, then by them both then operating in different internal settings, (a "mode" if you will), their mindsets and actions gradually change. As Emperor Marcus Aurelius once rightly said, "our life is the result of our thinking", and this is where things start to break. Lot stayed with his family in the mindset of consumerism, Abraham, after all, was getting into the mindset of a worshiper of God, and that (interesting to note) never ended in his life. There wasn't some set benchmark that he was to reach, to have enough and be done with seeking God - we will yet witness him moving higher and higher on this journey. He actually reached the highest points of his pilgrimage at the age of a hundred years or even later!

Lot, on the other hand, was going no higher; rather, he was spinning in a vicious circle. From an unchanging, carnal mindset, this led to an incomprehension of God; as a result, he was blind to the situation and the times, so that he was in the wrong place at the wrong time and had no comprehension of it. Consequently, he did come to a reluctant obedience to come out, but no longer to where he was instructed to go. Bargaining with God ensued, going to Zoar, until perhaps in a cave on a mountain he finally realized how wrong he had actually been about everything in his life before God. Perhaps then he glimpsed what the fruit of his life really was. However, can we expect that he got an insight, and then lived differently - that he changed his internal "mode"?

If only he had, but we know nothing of this; the Scriptures do not reveal it to us. For the question whose answer we would need to know is not whether he saw it, but whether he personally acknowledged it and deeply regretted it, so that it led him to an inner transformation. It seems to me, however, that if this had happened, the Scriptures would not have failed to give us at least a brief mention of such a happy ending. This, however, is sadly lacking here.

Then Lot went up out of Zoar and dwelt in the mountains, and his two daughters were with him; for he was afraid to dwell in Zoar. And he and his two daughters dwelt in a cave. (Gen 19,30)

Do you remember how Lot convinced God that he wanted to go to Zoar, not to the mountain where God was sending him? He thought he knew better, or at least that even though God was giving him a very specific instruction, it didn't really matter if he obeyed it, he thought he had a choice. Lot hadn't learned in his entire life to obey God and put His will above his own. As long as he didn't get into a crisis, he could go through life paying no price for this ignorance of the higher ways. It might even have seemed to him that Abraham, on the contrary, was paying too great a price for it by avoiding the cities and remaining on the uncomfortable mountains. But in the end it was just the opposite: it was Lot who paid with all he had.

So Lot arrived in Zoar, but very quickly left from there - but where to? To the very place where God had originally sent him, to the mountain. Why did he leave the city? We don't have an answer to that, except that the Scriptures tell us that "he was afraid to settle there." We can only surmise that it was most likely for one of the following two reasons.

Lot, on arriving at Zoar, may have found that the city was in exactly the same condition as Sodom, whose final destruction he had experienced the night before. For God told him: "I have favored you concerning this thing... I will not overthrow this city" (19:21), which means that Zoar was on the "black list" with God, and the moral conditions there must have been very similar to those in Sodom. Lot may have realized upon arriving that the same thing was likely to happen here sooner or later, and he feared the destruction of the city.

Or he may simply have noticed shortly after his arrival the clear indications that he could very quickly become a target for violence similar to what God's messengers had experienced in Sodom and fled quickly.

In any case, Lot left Sodom reluctantly; he was reluctant to admit that God was right about the change of destination and that it was a waste of time to argue about it. And in the end, he was just as reluctant to get to where God had wanted to take him from the beginning. Something like this can hardly be called a path of pursuit of God, only a virtue out of necessity. And if only at least some virtue...

So when God destroyed the cities of the plain, he remembered Abraham, and he brought Lot out of the catastrophe that overthrew the cities where Lot had lived. (Gen 19,29)

One is almost breathless: God remembered... not Lot, whose life was at stake, but Abraham! Lot was a righteous man, and did not have just some showy form of piety. Scripture says he was "afflicted" by the reality of Sodom (2 Pet. 2:7). Not only did he have the façade of a better man, but we have already seen that while he believed in God, we do not see in him a living relationship with Him, a familiarity, or a conscious willingness to obey. Lot resembles a believer who is morally higher than those around him, he does not commit iniquity, people see his righteous exterior; but unlike with Abraham, no longer the substance from which it flows.

But how shocking is the discovery that Lot would not have been saved because of this righteousness! Until a man knows God (not in moral doctrines and commandments, but as a person), such a world view must be repugnant to him, because it is contrary to simple human righteousness. Will not the better among us be saved? And am I not one of them? (He usually says it differently: I am certainly not among the worst. They may belong in the burning hell, but me? Who else could possibly go to heaven, if not me?)

But to be saved it is not enough to be a good person outwardly, but to enter into a specific relationship with God in which one experiences forgiveness and transformation. A friend of mine once pondered the question, who will actually be in heaven one day? A simple answer came to him: only those who want to be there can be sure. And therein lies the fundamental difference between Abraham and Lot. Not in the external level of morality they held. Perhaps they were very similar in this, and perhaps Lot was even outwardly better, as we have already mentioned, because he had not yet committed so many blunders. But Abraham, in spite of his failures, wanted to be where his God led him, on the heights where he found Him, and when he lost Him, sought Him again. Lot made no choice toward God in his life because he had no living relationship with Him, no desire for Him. He stayed where it suited his disposition - in a place of comfort and ostentatious luxury, far from the God he did not miss, for whom he did not thirst. If he consoled himself that he was morally superior to his surroundings, and God must respect that, it appeared that in the moment of judgment this alone would not save him - nor any other man.

And Abraham went early in the morning to the place where he had stood before the Lord. Then he looked toward Sodom and Gomorrah, and toward all the land of the plain; and he saw, and behold, the smoke of the land which went up like the smoke of a furnace. And it came to pass, when God destroyed the cities of the plain, that God remembered Abraham, and sent Lot out of the midst of the overthrow, when He overthrew the cities in which Lot had dwelt. (Gen 19,27-29)

Abraham returned to the place of his remarkable prayer, where he had last spoken face to face with God. We know that the patriarchs were in the habit of erecting an altar at some of the places of their encounters with God, but we cannot simply conclude that this is always the way to do it because "it is in the Bible." For even Old Testament figures did not always have the correct theology - after all, their lives, if they were positive examples at all, show us the gradual transformation of idolaters in mind or soul (or both) into worshippers of the living God. They commemorated those places for various reasons - sometimes as a reminder of that precious moment, sometimes out of a (maybe rather superstitious) belief that God dwelt in a special way in certain places on earth (while the whole earth belongs to Him Ps. 24:1), and often simply because it was their confession against the deities of the surrounding tribes. The people always erected sacred signs to their idols, especially on the tops of mountains. "Our God is here too," the patriarchs meant to say - and unlike yours, He is indeed alive.

Abraham came back, and it is not wrong for us too to return to the moments when God last visited us. It's worth reflecting on whether it ultimately had the meaning for us that God intended. Abraham went to see what was going on in Sodom because he foresaw its fall. And indeed - he saw its destruction in the far plains. It was like seeing rocket missiles falling on a city where we would have relatives today - his heart suddenly clenched at the thought of Lot and his family. At that moment, he didn't know if he was dying there at the moment. Was he looking to God for an answer? Had he been assured of his salvation? Although the text doesn't say so, we can rightly assume that he did. For we know that God revealed His mind to him as to His friend and told him of His intention to destroy Sodom. If there was anything Abraham needed to know now, it was what would happen to Lot. That was the most important thing concerning Sodom to him, and very likely he was looking to God for reassurance in his spirit.

But "when God destroyed the cities of the plain, He remembered Abraham, and sent Lot out of the midst of the overthrow..." This phrase is a unique evidence that God did indeed bring out Lot mainly for Abraham's sake, as we have mentioned several times. - Only eternity will tell how many of those who would not have gone out on their own were saved because of the intercession of God's friends.

See now, this city is near enough to flee to, and it is a little one; please let me escape there (is it not a little one?) and my soul shall live.” And he said to him, “See, I have favored you concerning this thing also, in that I will not overthrow this city for which you have spoken. Hurry, escape there. For I cannot do anything until you arrive there.” (Gen 19,20-22)

"I can't do anything..." What is meant by "can't"? Isn't he God, so he can do whatever? Of course he can, but he won't, because he has placed the principle of the salvation of his people above the principle of the judgment of the world. See 1 Peter 3:20 - until Noah stepped aboard the ark, the world was not flooded. Until Lot came out of Sodom, it would not be destroyed.

But God can't either because a friend stands in the way. Abraham pleaded for the salvation of Sodom up to the number of ten righteous. They were not found, and therefore Sodom will not be saved, but God will not let his nephew perish, whom Abraham no doubt had in mind. God limits his will because he has respect for the will of his friend. So the word "I cannot" here more accurately means "I do not want". God's friends influence events on this earth, even though they are mostly unknown to the world. After all, who then knew of Abraham's prayer on the high place above Sodom? No one who was concerned - none of the Sodomites, but not even Lot himself. And it is possible that he may even never have known about it.

Certain things will be different in the world if God's friends cry out to God. But that order cannot be skipped. First one must become a friend; then he comes and asks. It doesn't work the other way around, simply because a friend pleads like no one else - out of familiarity, out of a closeness that a stranger doesn't have.

Lot wandered out of Sodom at the end of the night, from "morning to dawn." He was ascending to a city that was, in his words, "near." The climb was not easy, but it certainly seemed easier to him than going up the mountain where God had sent him. But God rarely sends us on a journey about which we exclaim: sure, this is easy, why not give it a go? We often think: and why only not somewhere closer? Isn't there a more comfortable way? And why not somewhere else that's not so high?

A group of four people were leaving the city, but none of them with joy in their hearts. As its destruction began, Lot's wife, who (as characteristically described) "walked behind", looked back at Sodom. That was where her heart remained, her life belonged there, and she wanted no other. The pillar of salt into which she was transformed remains a memento that without consciously stepping out, one does not escape the fate of this world.

Indeed now, your servant has found favor in your sight, and you have increased your mercy which you have shown me by saving my life; but I cannot escape to the mountains, lest some evil overtake me and I die. See now, this city is near enough to flee to, and it is a little one; please let me escape there (is it not a little one?) and my soul shall live.” (Gen 19,19-20)

Scripture gives Lot credit for his righteousness (2 Peter 2:7). Let us ask a provocative question: is it not possible that, from an external perspective, he was morally superior even to Abraham? It is not entirely impossible. Why? Because with other people we perceive above all their falls - and so, while we know much about Abraham's, we actually know nothing about Lot in this respect. We don't read that he lied out of fear, preferring to leave his wife in someone else's harem, or fathered children with his maidservant. But beware - even he would have had reason to do so, for he had no son, no heir! He stayed, however, with his two daughters, and their prospective bridegrooms must have considered themselves fortunate at the thought of the size of the farm that would be theirs once.

Lot may not have committed so many blunders in his life, but that is also due to the fact that he did not undertake so many things, take so many risks, try to go further. A decorated horse, who only stays in the stable all the time, seems more plausible and safer than one who throws out his hooves and falls, sometimes quite wildly. The former doesn't make mistakes, but he's not going anywhere. He hardly falls, but learns nothing. He's been stagnant all his life.

Lot was a moral man, a believer, but he didn't know God personally. What better evidence can there be for this claim than to observe his conversation with God? We have already said that we do not discuss with a rescuer who is coming out of a burning house, but we listen to his instructions. But Lot talks back to God as a little child - to the God who came to save him, and Lot knows well with whom he is dealing. And yet he thinks he knows how things ought to be. He wants to go back to the city, not the mountain. His thinking remains along the same tracks in which he has spent his whole life. He doesn't want change, no matter what. Although he is supernaturally brought out of the city of destruction, he doesn't believe that God understands his path and knows what is best for him.

So it came to pass, when they had brought them outside, that he said, “Escape for your life! Do not look behind you nor stay anywhere in the plain. Escape to the mountains, lest you be destroyed.” Then Lot said to them, “Please, no, my lords! (Gen 19,17-18)

"Escape to the mountains". In interpreting a particular story in Scripture, it is good to be somewhat sober so as not to interpret pragmatic passages too figuratively, but in this case it suggests directly to say that when God saves a person, brings him out of his old existence, He lifts him up. What a contrast with Lot's choice of long ago - he chose for his life the lowlands of Sodom, where destruction would eventually await him. God now urges him to go out, and he is to go - up to the mountain. Mountains have always been the meeting place with God - for Moses, the prophets, Jesus and the apostles. Only under very specific conditions has God sent a man down to meet him - as a sign, with the valley symbolizing the trial or humiliation.

Man must find his high places and learn to stay on them in order to be able to stand against the pressures of this world and triumph. God therefore teaches us to walk in higher ways, "The Lord God is my strength; He will make my feet like deer’s feet, And He will make me walk on my high hills. (Hab. 3:19)"...and yet shew I unto you a more excellent way." 1 Kor 12:31)

Lot, however, is not accustomed to heights; the idea terrifies him. Having lived in a vibrant city for the last few years, always among people, he and his wife would clearly prefer Sodom and life there to the discomfort of the heights. The loneliness, the eerie silence - Lot was not used to seeking God and spending time in communion with Him. The high places are not at all something he is drawn to, where he wants to be. And again, as he did all those years ago, he believes he can choose his own path, and his choice will be better than God's. How could this all end?

Then Lot said to them, “Please, no, my lords! Indeed now, your servant has found favor in your sight, and you have increased your mercy which you have shown me by saving my life; but I cannot escape to the mountains, lest some evil overtake me and I die. (Gen 19,18-19)

It seems incredible, but Lot is really serious, really bargaining with God! Let us recall again that Lot had no idea of the situation he was in, did not understand anything, not even himself, and therefore could not save a single member of his family. And now, when God sends His messengers to him with the intention of saving him, and they tell him what to do and where to go - Lot argues with Him that this is wrong, and it would be better to go elsewhere. As if it weren't obvious that God has good intentions for him - only Lot doesn't like those very much, his own opinion seems better tohim. How often in life we witness that the one who cannot see on the contrary thinks he can see much further than others...

In Lot's case, it is not the result of excitement or fatigue. On the contrary, in extreme situations, when life is at stake, many people come out of their lethargy and act very decisively. But Lot seems to remain all the time in a kind of lethargy  How is this possible?

It is necessary to realize that what we are today is not determined by the present moment, but is the result of a long process of the past. Back then, often in difficult situations, our character was formed by having to make certain choices, to overcome discomfort, to grow. Two people can be in the same situations - and yet, one grows because he faces them, the other does not, because he runs away from them, avoids every discomfort. The first has become internally stronger in them, the other has remained unchanged.

Lot was with Abram for a long time. However, he did not choose the Abram´s way, the higher one, and so he remained without inner change. Because he was prosperous in his business and basically everything he stood for in life was working out, he did not have to work on himself. Now the time of crisis had come, and the truth about him was revealed. Lot is now reaping the fruits of his past, and it turns out that he doesn't have a lot of them.

So it came to pass, when they had brought them outside, that he said, “Escape for your life! Do not look behind you nor stay anywhere in the plain. Escape to the mountains, lest you be destroyed." Then Lot said to them, “Please, no, my lords"! (Gen 19,17-18)

If a politician or a stranger on the street were to say this cautionary phrase to us, we might first wonder if he or she was up to something nefarious. If a friend or a philosopher said the same thing to us, we would probably be tempted to discuss: and why? Are you not wrong? Is it really that serious? Do I really have to do this, and without any further ado?

But if we are told the same thing by a fireman or a paramedic pulling us out of a burning house, we probably won't discuss with him. In that moment, when life is at stake, there is no second-guessing, no questioning, no asking follow-up questions - at that point, it's all about carrying out the order as quickly as possible, and everyone understands that.

Sodom was not yet burning when God told Lot. But it was already near, so near that it was necessary to act immediately and come out quickly to be saved. After all, what future did Sodom hold for Lot after the events of the previous night? Waiting for the blinded mob or their relatives to take revenge on him or for his daughters to be raped?

And here we are at the heart of Lot's problem, as we described last time: now, when he needs to obey and act, he begins to bargain with God instead. For Lot has not learned to obey God in his entire life of faith thus far. He has not put his mind under the rule of God, he has not gained respect for His wisdom, he has not felt that it surpasses him, so he assumes that God's words can be corrected in some way. God was real to him, but not as the sovereign Lord of his life, perhaps more like someone whose opinions are worthy of serious reflection from time to time. Lot did not understand the urgency of the time, that now was not really a time for discussion - into which he ventures at a wholly inappropriate moment. "Not so, please, Lord." Though a believer, Lot was not ready to be saved, and were it not for Abraham's prayer and the coercion of the messengers, it is certain that he would have perished in Sodom.

When the morning dawned, the angels urged Lot to hurry, saying, “Arise, take your wife and your two daughters who are here, lest you be consumed in the punishment of the city.” And while he lingered, the men took hold of his hand, his wife’s hand, and the hands of his two daughters, the Lord being merciful to him, and they brought him out and set him outside the city. (Gen 19,15-16)

The messengers told Lot in no uncertain terms that they were coming from the Lord and that the city would be utterly destroyed. Lot knew full well that he was not dealing with strange men preaching nonsense. He knew this for a fact, and not just because of what they said themselves. (In that case they could still have been just a kind of hustlers). But that they weren't must have been clear to him, at least from the moment he witnessed them blinding the crowd that had converged on his house. From that moment on, he could be one hundred percent certain that he was in the center of God's action, that these men had been sent to him by God to save him and his loved ones. It's a strange feeling when a man realizes that his story becomes the story of God Himself, that God has His eyes on him right now, perhaps hitherto nameless and neglected.

Lot had that feeling, and yet - he was unable to walk away. "But he hesitated." How is this possible? Did he doubt whether what the messengers announced would happen? Surely he was utterly bewildered in such a situation. But this confusion came primarily from the fact that he was not inwardly in tune with God. We have already shown that he had no idea how God thought of him and Sodom, how He viewed things. He did not know because he did not have a living inner contact with God, and so he took what the messengers told him as external information. The kind of information that we ponder whether it is correct or not, that we consider. We may accept it, we may reject it, because it is alien in content to what we have within us. It is similar to the gospel reaching a person who does not know God. At the beginning it is a message from outside, it is unfamiliar to him, it surprises him, perhaps it humbles him. He has not yet heard it, he has not yet thought about it in this way, it does not yet correspond to the way he himself thinks inwardly. This is the normal state of every fallen being. But it's not normal if it remains so even years later.

Someone said that Lot is the only one in the whole Bible who was saved against his will. Here again, it should be added that this insistence of God towards him was only and only due to Abraham's intercessory prayer. The messengers used "mild coercion" when they took him by the hand and led him out. But if we were talking about salvation against one's will, it would apply more to his wife and daughters; with him, it was more a chronic inability to make a decision different from those around him, because after all, he trusted the messengers (otherwise he wouldn't have gone to warn his sons-in-law). God always and without exception honors the will of man. We can decide whether and to what extent we will submit to Him, and if we want to leave, He does not hinder us from doing so (Jn 6:67). In fact, God usually respects our will far more than we respect it in others or even in ourselves.

If we can get something from this story, it is how important it is that God's mindset resonates within us. Then it will not be necessary to use any violence toward us regarding accepting God's way. For as we will see in the later fates of Lot's family, those who listen to God more or less as a kind of outside information but do not know His heart wander in confusion and the outcome is destruction.

 

So Lot went out and spoke to his sons-in-law, who had married his daughters, and said, “Get up, get out of this place; for the Lord will destroy this city!” But to his sons-in-law he seemed to be joking. (Gen 19,14)

We have said that Lot believed in the right God, but he had no living contact with Him and therefore lacked spiritual sensitivity. He had no idea how God felt about what was going on around him, what the state of the world was like; he knew, of course, that it was very bad, he sensed the growing violence in the streets of the city, but all because it was affecting him personally, not because of any sensitivity to what God was thinking. Abraham, on the other hand, knew this without being personally involved. Because of his living contact with God and through revelation from God, he knew things that remained hidden from Lot.

The reaction of Lot's family to the arrival of the messengers is an apt illustration of how man perceives God. At the very least, the believing Lot was aware of the moral ruin of Sodom and, humanly speaking, was not comfortable in it (cf. 2 Pet. 2:7-8). It did not move him to action, but he at least honored God's messengers and was inclined to do what they said. That, after all, was his problem. He was permanently inclined to do something without doing it: inclined to reconcile with Abraham, inclined to obey God wholeheartedly, inclined to break definitively with Sodom. He was not able to do something about it himself, and was unable even to make up his mind to leave. But at least he listened to what the messengers were telling him and, as the classic would say, he seriously considered it.

But his sons-in-law, apparently native Sodomites with no faith in his God, took seriously nothing; when Lot recounted to them his appalling situation and the words of the messengers, they were unaware of any danger. They were completely deaf to their warning and laughed at it.

It sometimes happens to a man that he does not understand his situation and the times. He commits various mistakes, arising from a wrong estimate of things; all our lives we learn a certain caution about our own judgment. But as far as the ability to perceive heavenly things is concerned, this obviously corresponds to the deep communion one cultivates with God. If he lacks it, he will also be deaf and blind to the message from above. And he will often find it quite ridiculous.

Then the men said to Lot, “Have you anyone else here? Son-in-law, your sons, your daughters, and whomever you have in the city—take them out of this place! (Gen 19,12)

Abraham prayed for at least ten righteous men to save Sodom from destruction. It was certain that there were not even that many members of Lot's extended family, or Sodom would have been saved. No, that will not happen, and yet - how remarkable that the messengers have in mind not only Lot himself, but also his relatives, precisely and only because they are his relatives.

It is clear from the history of Scripture that God does indeed want to save not only the individual, but also his family, his tribe, his nation. After all, from the descendants of Abraham a tribe will later be formed and then the promised nation. In ancient times, God also saved not only Noah, but also his family, although one of his sons eventually brought a curse upon himself. And yet to him, as now to Lot's children and future sons-in-law, a hand was extended in the moment of crisis to save them. This is the meaning of the offer that comes through the individual to his family: Lot alone could not save his children and sons-in-law without their will. They could still choose for good or evil, to stay or go. But through one member of the family the hand of grace was extended to the others. Lot thus became the instrument of God's offer, and his loved ones were reached with a message that was enough to receive. What the daughters did, but the sons-in-law did not.

"Go home to your friends, and tell them what great things the Lord has done for you, and how He has had compassion on you." (Mk 5,19)