What Difference Have I Made?

The LORD said, "Shall I hide from Abraham what I am about to do, 18 since Abraham will surely become a great and mighty nation, and in him all the nations of the earth will be blessed?  For I have chosen him, so that he may command his children and his household after him to keep the way of the LORD by doing righteousness and justice, so that the LORD may bring upon Abraham what He has spoken about him."  And the LORD said, "The outcry of Sodom and Gomorrah is indeed great, and their sin is exceedingly grave.  I will go down now, and see if they have done entirely according to its outcry, which has come to Me; and if not, I will know."  Then the men turned away from there and went toward Sodom, while Abraham was still standing before the LORD.  Abraham came near and said, "Will You indeed sweep away the righteous with the wicked?  Suppose there are fifty righteous within the city; will You indeed sweep it away and not spare the place for the sake of the fifty righteous who are in it?  Far be it from You to do such a thing, to slay the righteous with the wicked, so that the righteous and the wicked are treated alike. Far be it from You! Shall not the Judge of all the earth deal justly?"  So the LORD said, "If I find in Sodom fifty righteous within the city, then I will spare the whole place on their account."  And Abraham replied, "Now behold, I have ventured to speak to the Lord, although I am but dust and ashes.  "Suppose the fifty righteous are lacking five, will You destroy the whole city because of five?" And He said, "I will not destroy it if I find forty-five there."  He spoke to Him yet again and said, "Suppose forty are found there?" And He said, "I will not do it on account of the forty."  Then he said, "Oh may the Lord not be angry, and I shall speak; suppose thirty are found there?" And He said, "I will not do it if I find thirty there."  And he said, "Now behold, I have ventured to speak to the Lord; suppose twenty are found there?" And He said, "I will not destroy it on account of the twenty."  Then he said, "Oh may the Lord not be angry, and I shall speak only this once; suppose ten are found there?" And He said, "I will not destroy it on account of the ten."  As soon as He had finished speaking to Abraham the LORD departed, and Abraham returned to his place. (Genesis 18:17-33 NASB)

After discussing the coming child, as Abraham is sending his important guests on their way, they stop along the way '...down toward Sodom' (v.16).  Now the Maker of all matter in the universe asks (I still don't know who) if He should tell Abraham what's about to happen.  Obviously a rhetorical question, but it presents an opportunity to, once again, cover the covenant promise.  It seems that Yahweh has heard the outcry of the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah.  It is so bad that their sin cries out to Yahweh.  It's so sinful, sin doesn't approve any more.  Yet He never says He will destroy the place, Abraham has an idea of what He will find (okay, already knows, but there's a "game afoot" here), and connects the dots.

So, as the two "artillery spotters" leave, Abraham sidles up to Yahweh and begins to negotiate with the Ruler of the universe.  What if there are 50 righteous in the two cities?  Can the Righteous Judge treat the wicked and the righteous the same?  How about 45, 40, 30, 20, and finally, 10.  What is Abraham up to?  I'm not alone is supposing he is trying to save his nephew, Lot.  Lot moved to the valley, right next to Sodom with his entire "household".  Surely, out of such a large household, 50 of them would still be righteous.  But you would think at least 10.  Prior to the next chapter, Lot is never described as being married nor of having daughters old enough to be married.  Much has been added to Lot's household, so surely now, with a wife and daughters, there should be 10 righteous, at least.

In the preceding chapters, we're never told how much contact Abraham had with Lot after the battle of the four Kings of the East.  In fact, we're not told what sort of communication they had.  It might be assumed that there was some sort of contact, but we're never given any indication.  Clearly Abraham cared enough to go to war for his nephew.  Here he is willing to haggle with the Omniscient One, which is tough because He already knows everything you might say.  How do you provide Him "additional" information?  What Abraham is banking on, hoping for, and counting on is that Lot has maintained some sort of influence for righteousness in that place.  Whether he has or not is answered in the next chapter.

So, I'm left with the question for myself, "what sort of influence have I had?"  I don't live in one of Satan's cities (that's 8 hours south of here), but if my Master did want to destroy my town, would I have had enough of an influence for ten righteous to be found here?  This is really a rhetorical question since we already have more than that, and did before I got here.  My point has to do with my level of influence among the people I live near.  How much influence for righteousness have I had?

Now, I can say that I've only been here less than a year.  I can point out that I don't interact much because I work all day in my "inescapable" office, a slave to my IP phone.  I can complain that I'm still getting to know my neighbors.  I can say all that, but the question still remains, because none of these questions excuses me from the responsibility to be an influence for my Master.

In my accountability group, we have a great question, "Did you accomplish things of eternal significance each day?"  Wow!  I have to answer "no" most of the time.  I deal with customers all across the US, and in some foreign countries, and don't really know what sort of "eternal significance" the interactions might have.  But, what about with my family?  What about with my wife?  What about with my daughter?  My church family?  My neighbors?  I have plenty of opportunity to accomplish something of eternal significance, but do I take it?  If someone had to negotiate with the Master of the universe for this city, would I have had enough influence here that my Master would spare it?

Well, now that I've beaten myself up with such demands and challenges, I suppose I should get after it.  I'm burning daylight, and have things of eternal significance to pursue.  Maybe today I will accomplish one or more of them.  Do they carry over to the next day?  I suspect not.

She Who Laughs Second

Then they said to him, "Where is Sarah your wife?" And he said, "There, in the tent."  He said, "I will surely return to you at this time next year; and behold, Sarah your wife will have a son." And Sarah was listening at the tent door, which was behind him.  Now Abraham and Sarah were old, advanced in age; Sarah was past childbearing.  Sarah laughed to herself, saying, "After I have become old, shall I have pleasure, my lord being old also?"  And the LORD said to Abraham, "Why did Sarah laugh, saying, 'Shall I indeed bear a child, when I am so old?'  "Is anything too difficult for the LORD? At the appointed time I will return to you, at this time next year, and Sarah will have a son."  Sarah denied it however, saying, "I did not laugh"; for she was afraid. And He said, "No, but you did laugh." (Genesis 18:9-15 NASB)

So, in chapter 17, we have Abraham falling on his face laughing when El Shaddai tells him Sarah will bear a son.  Because of that the child will be named Isaac.  The child would be born in one year (..."at this season next year." Genesis 17:21b).

Here Sarah laughed "to herself" or literally "inside herself" when Yahweh said she would bear a son.  The timing is very similar to last chapter, "this time next year".  There are enough similarities between these two chapters that it would seem to be different examples of the same event.  That probably bothers some people, in fact it would probably bother a lot of comfortable Sunday school teachers.  But it shouldn't.

The issue winds up being one of inspiration and "inerrancy".  If these are the same event, but two very different perspectives, how can they both be "without error"?  Ironically, the people asking this question seem to be just fine with four different Gospels in the Christian Scriptures.  So why have a problem here?

As I've said before, my view of Scriptures, both Hebrew and Christian is "flexible" enough to incorporate such duplication without a problem.  In fact, in my estimation, that there are two indicates a stronger case for their importance and inspiration.  The Master I serve is not threatened by two different accounts of the same event of Him speaking personally with one of His human creatures.  Something so disruptive to any person's psyche could easily make various impressions at various times.  If He's not threatened, why should I be?

The point of application for me is that this is an example of my Master accommodating His human creatures.  He visits Abram, eats his food, changes his name to Abraham, discusses the covenant and circumcision, asks about Sarai, changes her name to Sarah, predicts her delivering Isaac in one year, they both laugh, the child is to be named Isaac for their laughter, and then comes the discussion of God "nuking Sodom and Gomorrah from orbit".

What makes it into Scripture is this event in two pieces.  In fact, there were probably other things said that didn't make it into the text.  Since there wasn't a transcriptionist hanging on every word, I can't be sure there wasn't more said.  So, my Master doesn't look at what was remembered, and say, "What have you done?! You got it all wrong!  Scrap that and go back and do it again?"  And the people editing this "anthology" of God didn't say, "Oops, we have two versions here.  Which one do we keep?  How do we 'meld' them if we keep both?"  Instead they kept both, and kept them distinct.  They recorded the two versions faithfully because they viewed them as both being inspired accounts of God visiting His servant Abraham.

God inspires the text to be written, but fails to protect the "inerrant" original texts?  Really?  So, He's capable of forming stars and galaxies, and subatomic particles, but protecting His inspired texts is just beyond Him?  That was too hard?  Read the text! "Is anything too difficult for the LORD?"  Is my Master sovereign over all matter except pens?  If these inerrant original texts were all that important for my Master to demonstrate His inspiration of them, is it rational to believe that He would not protect them?  If they no longer exist, then isn't it also rational to believe they're unnecessary to demonstrate inspiration? 

If followers of Jesus can agree that God is sovereign, why can't we also agree that the texts we have are the ones that God wants us to have?  And if we agree on that, why can't we accept them as they are without some sort of reference to non existent texts we don't have because God didn't preserve them?  Why fight over the very thing that reveals to us that our Master wants to bring us together and love each other?  The world going to hell will know our Master by our love for each other?  If there's no love shown, will they still know our Master?

Now, that being said, I still wade into arguments about versions and texts.  I still debate Sianaticus versus Vaticanus versus Alexandrinus.  I am not above weighing various text differences in order to translate a passage from Hebrew and Greek.  So, in a way I too contribute to the "war of words" regarding the words of my Master.  But I still need to live by what I discover as I delve into those words.  I must still open my heart and mind, both, to permit my Master to build faith and teach me obedience.  As I sift, I must also submit.  It does me no good, and is one of the darkest evils of my life, to work with Scripture but not permit it to enter my heart and mind.

The things I do as I study should drive these words of my Master deeper into my soul, not wear them as as a badge of honor on the surface.  If they have no impact on my life, I have wasted the amazing gift given to me by Master, the gift of His Scriptures, the gift given to His children across this globe.  And it is a gift that so many of His children do not have a chance to enjoy.  How can I neglect such an amazing gift?  I live in a land where I have no excuse and have an education that is supposed to impel me even more.  Time to grab the SCUBA gear and pen; I'm diving in!

What Do You Feed the Creator of All Matter?

Now the LORD appeared to him by the oaks of Mamre, while he was sitting at the tent door in the heat of the day.  When he lifted up his eyes and looked, behold, three men were standing opposite him; and when he saw them, he ran from the tent door to meet them and bowed himself to the earth, and said, "My lord, if now I have found favor in your sight, please do not pass your servant by.  "Please let a little water be brought and wash your feet, and rest yourselves under the tree; and I will bring a piece of bread, that you may refresh yourselves; after that you may go on, since you have visited your servant." And they said, "So do, as you have said."  So Abraham hurried into the tent to Sarah, and said, "Quickly, prepare three measures of fine flour, knead it and make bread cakes."  Abraham also ran to the herd, and took a tender and choice calf and gave it to the servant, and he hurried to prepare it.  He took curds and milk and the calf which he had prepared, and placed it before them; and he was standing by them under the tree as they ate.

Chapter 17 begins by saying that God appeared to Abram (v.1) and when He was done speaking to Abraham, He ascended (v.22).  From this I gather that this was a physical appearance.  One thing said in that personal encounter was that Sarah would bear Isaac by this season the following year.  No mention was made of the hospitality of Abraham.  In that conversation, Abram's name is changed to Abraham, the name used in chapter 18.  The impression given is that 18 happens afterward.  Yet in chapter 18, the same comment about Sarah bearing Isaac around this time next year is made again.  It's just weird.  Now the other content is different, like God being called El Shaddai in 17, and Yahweh in 18.  Also circumcision is prescribed in 17, and the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah in 18.  There are obvious glaring differences, but the subtle similarities are also striking.

But whatever is thought about the relationship between the two, one glaring difference which has always arrested my attention is the hospitality of Abraham.  In 18, he sees "three men" so runs, and bows down before them.  The first verse says that Yahweh appeared (much like 17), and Abraham calls Him Lord (not by name).  But Abraham's behavior is not as one to an equal (like Mamre and his brothers) but as to a Sovereign.  It's his behavior that suggests Abraham knows exactly Who has shown up at his tent.  Abraham's response is hospitality.  So, what does one feed the Creator of all matter?

From Abraham's choice of items, it seems that his best beef and fresh bread is what makes the perfect meal served with butter and milk.  He also stood by as their waiter, attending to their every need.  The scene then, as Yahweh informs Abraham of the coming of Isaac (again?) is the three men seated beneath the "Oaks of Mamre", enjoying the fresh meal, Abraham standing to attend to them, and Sarah listening at the tent opening.  It makes an interesting setting.  This account of a personal visit by the Maker of all things has engaging story elements, and visualizing it is much easier than in Chapter 17.  In fact, the whole encounter in Chapter 18 is more experiential or existential (as those terms really should be understood, not as philosophy has redefined them today). 

The point where these verses hit me most personally is in Abraham's immediate response to seeing the three men.  He recognizes his Master and immediately responds with hospitality.  Would I be able to really recognize my Master so well?  If I did, would I be able to keep my wits about me enough to be properly hospitable?  What does "properly hospitable" even mean when my Master comes to visit?  How is it even possible to be properly anything where a personal encounter with God is involved?  He makes stars!  What can I do, what do I feed, what do I say that can "properly" respond to such a One?

Abraham simply does what his cultural traditions dictate is done when an important person comes by.  He is himself in his setting at that time.  And his Master participates.  They wait, they eat (really?), and then have a conversation with Abraham (and Sarah as it turns out).  God is pleased with Abraham's preparations and treatment of Him.  Isn't it important to note that the Creator and Master of billions of galaxies accommodates the traditions and culture of one of His creatures?  I think I get so caught up in what "form" my Master may want, but when He hasn't "prescribed" a "form" I think this passage reveals that He isn't concerned about the form as much as He is the encounter, the relationship.  He does so much concern Himself with what format my prayers are in, as much as He is that I pray.  When I sing in worship, He is not so concerned that I am on key as much as He is concerned that what I sing reflects my adoration of Him.  It's not what's on the plate, it's that I serve it to Him.  Now, that is grace.  Well, I better get cooking, you never know who's coming to Sunday lunch!