After Abraham enters Canaan in Genesis 12, God informs him, “To your offspring I will give this land” (12:7). Shockingly, just one chapter later, Abraham offers to share this very land with his nephew Lot!
One of the hallmarks of ancient Biblical interpretation was the safeguarding of Biblical heroes. At times, interpreters would go to great lengths to ensure that the righteousness of the hero is no longer in question. One finds, for example, this particular practice evident in the interpretation of Abraham’s offer.
In Genesis 13:7–9 we learn of a quarrel between Abraham’s and Lot’s herders and Abraham’s call for a peaceful resolution to the conflict: separation between him and Lot. In the proposal, Abraham tells Lot that they need to separate and offers to share the land with his nephew. Lot looks around, we are told, sees the “well-watered” Jordan plain (possibly north of the Dead Sea), and chooses it “for himself,” and thus the family members “separated from each other” (Genesis 13:10–11).a
What makes the offer problematic is that Lot is not part of God’s promise to Abraham. This is further complicated by the statement in Deuteronomy 23:3 prohibiting Lot’s descendants (the Ammonites and Moabites) from entering the assembly of the Lord (cf. Nehemiah 13:1).
It seems that ancient interpreters were keenly aware of the dilemma. Some early Biblical retellings, such as Jubilees (written c. 150 B.C.E.) and Genesis Apocryphon (written in the second or first century B.C.E.), totally remove both Abraham’s offer and the call for separation and subtly shift the focus of the account from Abraham’s offer to Lot’s choice to separate from Abraham and dwell in Sodom. Others made the shift far more explicit and, in turn, transform Lot from an ambiguous character to a full-fledged wicked individual.
I want to highlight two of the phrases which seem to have provided the necessary space interpreters needed to step in and shift the focus to Lot. The first deals with Lot’s “look” and the second with his “choice.” Genesis 13:10 states that “Lot looked about him.” One could more literally translate this as “And Lot lifted his eyes.” The language of “lifting the eyes” is a common phrase in Genesis for examining one’s surroundings, often with reference to people. It is used when Abraham sees the ram (Genesis 22:13), when Isaac and Rebecca see one another (Genesis 24:63–4), when Jacob sees Esau (Genesis 33:1), and when Joseph sees Benjamin (Genesis 43:29). The phrase is also used of Potiphar’s wife when she “lifted her eyes” to Joseph (Genesis 39:7). The range of usage for this particular phrase is quite broad, being used in contexts of both general observation and more nuanced “looking.”
In Genesis 13:11, we are told that “Lot chose for himself all the plain of the Jordan.” Does the fact that Lot “chose for himself” imply a selfish motive on his part? In 1 Samuel 13:2, Saul “chose for himself” 3,000 Israelite soldiers, and, in 1 Samuel 17:40, David “chose for himself” five stones prior to his encounter with Goliath. The phrase itself, therefore, seems to illustrate the fact that he made a reasoned decision. Both of these phrases are, therefore, quite neutral.
With regard to Lot, however, there is no neutrality for many ancient interpreters. The Early Church Father Chrysostom (c. 349–407 C.E.), for example, comments that Lot’s choice of the plain indicates his selfishness and greed: “[O]n account of his youth and being a prey to waxing greed he usurped what he thought to be the best parts and made his choice on that basis.”1
For others, Lot’s look goes beyond greed and becomes akin to that of Potiphar’s wife. One reads in the Talmud, “The whole of the following verse indicates [Lot’s] lustful character. ‘And Lot lifted up’ is paralleled by, ‘And his master’s wife lifted up her066 eyes upon.’?”2Pesikta Rabbati follows the same tradition but elaborates further, “And the verse goes on to say of Lot that he beheld all the round plain of the Jordan (Gen. 13:10), its roundness conveying a suggestion to him ‘of a whorish woman, of rounded buttocks’ (Proverbs 6:26).”3 Likewise, one reads in Midrash Tanḥuma (Yelammedenu) that Lot “chose Sodom so that he might behave as they did.”4 Some interpreters have noted that it did not bother Lot that Sodom was the home of wicked sinners (though the text provides no indication that he, or Abraham, knew of the moral well-being of its inhabitants). For the above ancient readers, Lot actually wanted to take part in their wickedness.
Genesis 13 states Abraham’s desire for him and Lot to separate but says nothing about Lot’s desire to separate. Some modern readers have noted that Lot’s lack of a counterproposal or deferment to Abraham might indicate his cunning067 manipulation. Maybe, however, Lot’s response demonstrates his submission to his uncle’s wishes. Perhaps he wants to journey a safe distance from Abraham’s herds to avoid further strife. Or perhaps Lot really has no interest in Abraham or the God that he serves. As we read in Genesis Rabbah, “He betook himself from the Ancient (ḳadmon) of the world, saying, I want neither Abraham nor his God.”5
The choice to focus on Lot’s unrighteousness also provides a means to exalt Abraham. He is the selfless antithesis to his selfish nephew. The Early Church Father Ambrose (c. 339–397 C.E.), for example, comments, “[L]ike Abraham, who offered the choice humbly, and like Lot, who claimed the choice presumptuously—virtue abases itself, but wickedness extols itself.”6
As I have briefly discussed above, Abraham’s offer of land appears to have proven problematic for ancient interpreters. The solution was to shift the focus of the narrative by making Lot into a selfish, lustful, God-rejecting character and highlighting Abraham’s generosity, which, in the end, provides further proof of Abraham’s righteousness. Problem solved!
After Abraham enters Canaan in Genesis 12, God informs him, “To your offspring I will give this land” (12:7). Shockingly, just one chapter later, Abraham offers to share this very land with his nephew Lot!
You have already read your free article for this month. Please join the BAS Library or become an All Access member of BAS to gain full access to this article and so much more.
1. Homilies on Genesis 33.13. John Chrysostom, Homilies on Genesis 18-45, trans. Robert C. Hill (Washington D.C.: Catholic Univ. of America Press, 1990).
2. b. Nazir 23a. The Babylonian Talmud, trans. Isidore Epstein, 18 vols. (London: Soncino, 1948).
3. Pesikta Rabbati 3.3. Pesikta Rabbati, trans. William G. Braude, 2 vols. (New Haven: Yale Univ. Press, 1968).
4. Midrash Tanḥuma 4.12. Midrash Tanḥuma—Yelammedenu: An English Translation of Genesis and Exodus, trans. Samuel A. Berman (Hoboken, NJ: Ktav Publishing House, 1996).
5. Genesis Rabbah 41.7. Midrash Rabbah, trans. Harry Freedman and Maurice Simon, 10 vols. (London: Soncino Press, 1961).
6. On Abraham 2.6.33. Saint Ambrose of Milan, On Abraham, trans. Theodosia Tomkinson (Etna, CA: Center for Traditionalist Orthodox Studies, 2000).