Genesis 14:12

Gen 14:12 And they took Lot, Abram’s brother’s son, who dwelt in Sodom, and his goods, and departed.

Ver. 12. And they took Lot.] God passeth not by the sins of his dearest saints, without a sensible check. Lot, for his affecting the first choice, had soon enough of it. Strong affections bring strong afflictions; as hard knots require hard wedges. Earthly things court us, that they may cut our throats: these hosts welcome us into our inn with smiling countenance, that they may despatch us in our beds. Beware of the world’s cut-throat kindnesses; consort not with Sodomites, lest ye partake of their plagues. Hamath lies nigh to Damascus in place, and fares the worse for its neighbourhood. {Zec 9:2} Lot loseth his goods and liberty; Jehoshaphat had well-nigh lost his life, for "loving those that hated the Lord." {2Ch 18:31; 2Ch 19:2}.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

The godly are plagued many times with the wicked: therefore their company is dangerous.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

they took Lot . . . and his goods, and departed--How would the conscience of that young man now upbraid him for his selfish folly and ingratitude in withdrawing from his kind and pious relative! Whenever we go out of the path of duty, we put ourselves away from God's protection, and cannot expect that the choice we make will be for our lasting good.

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 12. They took Lot, c.] The people, being exceedingly wicked, had provoked God to afflict them by means of those marauding kings and Lot also suffered, being found in company with the workers of iniquity. Every child remembers the fable of the Geese and Cranes; the former, being found feeding where the latter were destroying the grain, were all taken in the same net. Let him that readeth understand.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

12. And they took Lot. It is doubtful whether Lot remained at home while others went to the battle, and was there captured by the enemy; or whether he had been compelled to take arms with the rest of the people. As, however, Moses does not mention him till he speaks of the plundering of the city, the conjecture is probable, that at the conclusion of the battle, he was taken at home, unarmed. We here see, first, that sufferings are common to the good and the evil; then, that the more closely we are connected with the wicked and the ungodly, when God pours down his vengeance on them, the more quickly does the scourge come upon us.

John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.

12. Lot, Abram’s brother’s son] Notice this minute description of Lot and the mention of his residence in Sodom, as if chap. 13 had not immediately preceded. In Gen_14:14; Gen_14:16, Lot is spoken of as Abram’s brother.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

And they took Lot, Abram's brother's son,.... The son of Haran, his elder brother, who was now, as the Jews say (x), fifty years of age:

who dwelt in Sodom, or near it, in the country adjacent to it, see Gen 13:12; and so being a neighbour of the men of Sodom, and a sojourner among them, he partakes of their punishment; and this was a just correction of him for choosing to dwell among such a people: and they took

his goods, and departed; as him and his family, so all his substance, his cattle, wealth, and riches of every sort, and went off with it: Eupolemus (y), an Heathen writer, makes mention of this circumstance in his relation of this war, and says, that the Armenians, as he calls the four kings, baring conquered the Phoenicians, carried away captive the brother's son of Abram.

(x) Shalshalet Hakabala, fol. 77. 1. (y) Apud Euseb. Evangel. Praepar. l. 9. c. 17. p. 418.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Lot now suffered for his cohabitation with bad neighbours.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

12. Took Lot — This fact our writer is careful to note. Lot and all his family and possessions (comp. Gen_14:16) were taken, and it is also stated that Lot now dwelt in Sodom. He had first “pitched his tent toward Sodom,” (Gen_13:12,) but now has come to dwell in the city. “It does not seem that Lot had taken part in the revolt, or in the war; but as a prominent man his capture may have been deemed the more important.” — Jacobus.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

And they took Lot, Abram"s brother"s son, who dwelt in Sodom. The last view of Lot saw him driving off his flocks and herds from Bethel. It betokens a considerable declension in spiritual life to behold him a citizen of Sodom. And his goods (all the property he had acquired through his selfish choice of the Jordan circle), and departed.

HOMILETICS.

The capture of Lot, or Nemesis pursuing, sin.

I AN EXAMPLE OF THE BITTER FRUITS OF WAR.

1. War is sometimes justifiable in its origin and objects. When undertaken to achieve or preserve national independence, to vindicate the liberties and secure the rights of men, or to repel the aggressions of ambitious despots, even war with all its bloody horrors may become an imperious and fierce necessity. It is difficult to determine whether on either side the campaign in the vale of Siddim was entitled to be so characterized. The kings of the Pentapolis were fighting for emancipation from a foreign yoke, and so far perhaps were entitled to be regarded as having right upon their side; yet

2. they had themselves been invaders of a land which had originally been assigned to the tribes of Shem. But however the question of right may be settled as between these ancient warriors, it is certain their successors on the battle-fields of earth have much more frequently had the wrong upon their sides than the right.

3. Victory does not always favor those who seem to have the best cause. The maxim of the great Napoleon, that God is always on the side of the strongest battalions, is as wide astray from the exact truth on this important subject as is the prevailing sentiment that God always defends the right. The doctrine of Scripture is that the Lord of Hosts is independent of both regiments and rifles, can save by many or by few, and giveth the victory to whomsoever he will; and that not always does he choose to render these arms triumphant which are striking for the holiest cause, but sometimes, for reasons of his own (it may be to chastise a nation for its sins, or to move them to faith and prayer, or to teach them some important lesson), permits the wrong to trample down the right. The history of Israel and the records of modern warfare supply numerous examples.

1. Disastrous and terrible are the usual concomitants of war. Not that God does not frequently overrule the hostilities of contending nations, and evolve from the murderous designs of monarchs results the most beneficial, making war the pioneer of civilization, and even of religion; but the immediate effects of international strife are ever ruinous and appalling fruitful fields devastated, fair cities sacked, valuable property destroyed, lives of men wasted, a nation"s blood and treasure poured out like water, lamentation: mourning, and woe commissioned to many homes, and a burden of care and sorrow laid on all. All this was exemplified in the present instance.

2. When war arises the innocent largely suffer with the guilty. Had the campaign against the kings of the Pentapolis not been prepared, it is probable that the Rephaims, Zuzims, Emims, Horites, Amalekites, and Amerites would not have suffered at the hands of Chedorlaomer, and it is certain that Lot would not have been made a prisoner by the victorious monarch. Now, so far as the primal reason of this invasion was concerned, all these were innocent of any offence against the Asiatic king, and yet they were amongst the victims of his wrath against the rebels of the Jordan circle.

II AN INSTANCE OF DIVINE RETRIBUTION.

1. Deserved. Although Lot was a righteous man, he had egregiously sinned,

(1) in choosing the Jordan circle as his portion,

(2) in making his abode in Sodom,

(3) in continuing amongst the inhabitants when he ascertained their ungodly character.

Consequently God avenged himself upon his erring servant by allowing him to lose his property, and to come near the losing of his life as well in the sacking of the city. So "the face of the Lord is set against them that do evil.

1. Unexpected probably as to its cause, Lot thinking he had committed nothing worthy of chastisement, for sin has a strange power of obscuring the moral vision and deadening the voice of conscience; almost certainly as to its time, God"s judgments for the most part taking men unawares, (cf. Psa_73:18, Psa_73:19) and evil-doers being commonly snared in an evil time, like the fishes of the sea, (Ecc_9:12) walking like blind men because they have sinned against the Lord; (Zep_1:17) and more than likely as to its form, those who anticipate the outpouring of Divine indignation being seldom able to discern beforehand the special character it will assume.

2. Appropriate. Lot had chosen the Jordan circle as the most advantageous locality for thriving in his flocks and herds, and Chedorlaomer"s armies swept his folds and stalls entirely clean. He had elected to live among the filthy Sodomites, and so he is compelled to fare as they. God"s recompenses to evil-doers (whether saints or sinners) are never unsuitable, though man"s often are.

3. Merciful. He might have lost his life in the general massacre of the city"s inhabitants, but he only lost his property, or rather it was not yet lost, although, doubtless, Lot imagined that it was; only pillaged and carried off along with himself, his wife, and daughters. So God ever mingles mercy with judgment when dealing with his people.

4. Premonitory. Though all retribution is not designed to admonish and reprove, this was. The vengeance taken on the wicked at the Day of Judgment will be purely punitive; that which falls upon transgressors while on earth is aimed at their amendment. Unhappily, however, as in the case of Lot, it is sometimes inefficacious. Instead of taking warning at what might have proved his ruin, Lot was no sooner rescued than he returned to Sodom. So great providential judgments and great providential mercies are often equally despised.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

והוא ישב בסדם FOR HE DWELT IN SODOM — What made this happen to him? The fact that he was dwelling in Sodom (Genesis Rabbah 42:7).

Rashi on the Tanakh — English translations: “The Judaica Press complete Tanach with Rashi, translated by A. J. Rosenberg” (CC BY 4.0); “Pentateuch with Rashi's commentary by M. Rosenbaum and A.M. Silbermann, 1929-1934” (public domain); “The Metsudah Tanach series, Lakewood, N.J” (CC BY 4.0); and “The Book of Joshua, Metsudah Publications, 1997” (CC BY 4.0). Text via Sefaria.

ויקחו..והוא יושב בסדום. The Torah had already told us in 13,12 where Lot had settled. This was only meant to tell us that he had not moved from these since he took up residence there in the first place. Or, whereas at the beginning he had actually not resided within the city, by now he had moved into Sodom proper.

Radak on the Tanakh — English translations: “Sefaria Community Translation” (CC0 1.0 (public-domain dedication)); “Eliyahu Munk, HaChut Hameshulash” (CC BY 4.0); “Rabbi Mike Feuer, Jerusalem Anthology” (CC BY 4.0); and “R. David Kimhi on the first book of Psalms, Translated by R.G. Finch, London, 1919” (public domain). Text via Sefaria.