Do you know Dr. Charles Stanley?

[EdSutton]

HP: And what would this truth establish? God has more than likely lost a few billion of His own as well, starting with the rebellion of His first two children. What does losing ones children have directly to do with any unrighteousness on the parents part?

Nothing, per se, but it may give an indication of why Abraham 'stopped' at 10 righteous persons, in his bargaining with God, and interceding for Sodom, which he well knew about. He may well have assumed the Lot had a great influence on his own family, at least, in leading them to righteousness. As I said, Scripture gives Lot as a 'righteous man' 'chronologically' before Abraham.

Lot, Lot's wife, two daughters at home, and three or more married daughters with their husbands, equals a total of at least ten (or more) individuals. I'll grant the Abraham's motives and/or thinking is not revealed in Scripture. I do believe the minimun number of Lot's family is.

Ed

 

[EdSutton]

I didn't try to win any argument either.
Unless you want to start one, then I might join in.

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Ed

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Ed: Nothing, per se,…

HP: I agree with you. Another thing is that I see no indication that Lot was ‘dragged’ out of Sodom. Because an angel takes one by the hand and leads them out is no indication to me of any unwillingness for Lot to be obedient. He may have not understood perfectly the ‘exact’ time frame the destruction was going to start as the angels apparently knew, and might have been simply reluctant to leave behind any family members until all efforts to persuade them was exhausted. No unrighteousness or sin there that I can find in Scripture.

 

[EdSutton]

HP: I agree with you. Another thing is that I see no indication that Lot was ‘dragged’ out of Sodom. Because an angel takes one by the hand and leads them out is no indication to me of any unwillingness for Lot to be obedient. He may have not understood perfectly the ‘exact’ time frame the destruction was going to start as the angels apparently knew, and might have been simply reluctant to leave behind any family members until all efforts to persuade them was exhausted. No unrighteousness or sin there that I can find in Scripture.

Scripture says that Lot 'delayed' or 'lingered' in getting out of Sodom, after the angels told him to "head for the hills", as we would say, and even requested to stay in a small suburb of Zoar.

(Still lingering, the angels took him and his family 'by the hand', and sweetly begged them to 'come on now'?? I don't think exactly that is what is implied.)

Ever wonder why that was, that Lot asked to go to Zoar? Ya' think it mighta' been because he didn't really want to leave?? Only after the destruction of Sodom, did he go on to the hills.

Ed

 

[webdog]

HP: I agree with you. Another thing is that I see no indication that Lot was ‘dragged’ out of Sodom. Because an angel takes one by the hand and leads them out is no indication to me of any unwillingness for Lot to be obedient. He may have not understood perfectly the ‘exact’ time frame the destruction was going to start as the angels apparently knew, and might have been simply reluctant to leave behind any family members until all efforts to persuade them was exhausted. No unrighteousness or sin there that I can find in Scripture.

The Hebrew word for what you refer to as "taking by the hand" is chazaq...which means to seize, bind, restrain, conquer. Doesn't seem to have an indication to gently lead by the hand whatsoever. Definately a physical dragging took place.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Webdog: The Hebrew word for what you refer to as "taking by the hand" is chazaq...which means to seize, bind, restrain, conquer. Doesn't seem to have an indication to gently lead by the hand whatsoever. Definately a physical dragging took place.

HP: When the Holy Spirit physically moved the apostle Paul from one place to another in a manner inconsistent with his natural abilities, does that in any way indicate sin, unrighteousness, or even an unwillingness to obey on Paul’s part?

 

[webdog]

Apostle Paul was not disobedient to the Lord...Lot was. This is comparing apples to oranges.
Lot was living for himself, Paul was living for Christ.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Webdog: Lot was living for himself,

HP: Says who?