To many, Lot is one of the primary biblical examples of a backslidden believer.
When a strife breaks out between Abraham and Lot’s herdsmen, Abraham quickly offers Lot the choice of the land, fearing that the strife would be seen by the ungodly around them.
Looking around, Lot decides on the plain of Jordan. It was like Eden, and reminded Lot of Egypt (he had been wrongly taken there by Abraham).
The problem was, the plain of Jordan was home to two ungodly cities, Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen 13:13). It’s from this time the scriptures record things going from bad to worse in Lot’s life.
Here is a brief overview of the progression of departure from God and great crimes we find:
- He pitched his tent toward Sodom, (Gen 13:12).
- We then find him in Sodom, (Gen19:1).
- He offers his virgin daughters to the men of Sodom, (Gen 19:8).
- He got drunk, (Gen 19:33).
- He slept with his daughters, (Gen 19:36).
Not a pretty picture.
As has been said by many a preacher, if it were not for the N.T. record, we may conclude that Lot was an ungodly man.
But, Peter records an altogether different conclusion than what we might, 2 Peter 2:7-8.
He was “vexed” [oppressed, or wearied] with the conversation he heard in Sodom, and he was “vexed” [tormented] in his soul with what they were doing.
Interesting.
This great backslider (and I’m not denying that he was) was deeply grieved over the sin going on in his generation.
I don’t find that attitude among many Christians.
Many Christian’s are far from grieved over the sins of their generation. In fact, they consider it as entertainment.
Yes.
Movies and various T.V. shows are watched, which glamorise adultery, fornication, sodomy, lies, blasphemy, idolatry, murder, and everything God hates.
Backslidden Lot was tormented by this stuff. Today’s Christians are entertained by it.
Makes me wonder.
I think we’re so far away from living for God it’s frightening. Few preachers/pastors/ministers/elders are truly grieved over sin, never mind the ‘regular’ Christian.
Thinking on this has slightly shaken me.
It’s one thing to realise you’re not living up to the standards of Joseph, Daniel, Paul, etc. It’s a more petrifying thought to realise you’re spiritually miles away from one of the most pathetic examples of godliness in the scriptures.
Am I a Christian if I find sin entertaining?
I’m off to repent, remove, and rededicate.
Repent of being entertained by sin.
Remove anything which encourages me to be entertained by sin.
Rededicate my heart to God, who owns me (1 Cor 6:20), and has not bought me with the price of His Son’s blood in order for me to be entertained by sin, but that I might be holy (Eph 1:4), and do good works (Eph 2:10).
Perhaps you should do the same.
Do you forget to visit the blog? Get free updates via email. Or via RSS if you use a feedreaderWant to read other articles? Try these...
Want to pray intelligently for this preacher? Go here to learn more!
Added Commentary
By Andrew
on 28.07.09
A distressing trend is Christian’s taking Christian liberty as a lump of elastic and running with it to see how far they can make it stretch and keep running long after it has snapped.
Yet I must qualify these remarks with respect to television and films.
Not all sins, for want of a better way to speak, are alike on screen. Two examples, nudity and taking the name of the Lord in vain. The actor/actress involved in these are actually sinning.
When it comes to things like murder and theft (where the sin itself is not committed) I am not so sure a general rebuke is in order, here I believe it to be a matter of liberty. In other words, can I watch such things without sinning myself or bringing temptation to sin upon myself. I imagine this will be different for different people.
It could be argued, of course, that those who can watch such without a troubled conscience are not walking with God as they ought and so the fact proves the point. I would disagree with this though.
The Christian philosopher Gordon Clark, in his essay on Calvinistic Ethics, had this to say on the subject:
‘In the United States Arminian [Fundamentalist, I suppose] churches have often required their members to avoid the movies on the ground that Hollywood was lascivious. At present (1973) the movies are sometimes worse than that: outright pornographic. But then, some books and magazines are pornographic. Should a church then forbid all books and magazines? Calvinism stays with the Bible and outlaws neither movies nor books in general; but prohibits “lascivious songs, books, pictures, dancing, and stageplays” [Question 139 of the Larger Catechism].’ pg 5 Essays on Ethics and Politics, Gordon H. Clark.
This seems to me to capture the point exactly. Content is all important. If 1973 was bad today is a hundred times worse, so perhaps there is not much left a Christian could watch without sin. Yet the experience of one believer is not normative for the experience of another and so with certain exceptions this is a moot point.
Legalism in part is making sin what God has not made sin and binding the conscience of the believer with it. This is as undesirable as a Christian Liberty which means ‘anything goes’.
By Armen
on 28.07.09
Andrew,
I dealt in part with antinomianism/excessive Christian liberty here.
The main thrust of this article, was to point out Lot’s godly example of grievance over the sins of other people.
But, even where no literal sin is being committed (pretending to murder), isn’t it weird to find this entertaining?
If we sing of the joy there is when communing with Jesus Christ through the scriptures and prayer, isn’t there something wrong when we turn to watch ungodly people act out murder scenes?
In the movies that I’ve watched in my life (a much too extensive number) most of the murders, or thefts, or other things ‘acted’ (but not really committed), are glorified in some way.
No condemning. No judgment.
I agree in general with your point. Movies are not sinful. The cinema is not sinful. But, if these things contain sin, or glorify sin, then I think it’s a reasonable argument to suggest that the man walking with God will be grieved by them, not entertained.
Perhaps lack of grief is not always sin. I’m not 100% sure. But, surely it’s a reflection of how little we are like Christ? Which, is in opposition to 1 John 2:6
I have made allowance for far too many things in my life, before I accepted Christ, and after. Though I may put all these failures under the blood (praise God), yet, they often have lasting consequences.
Too often, the Christian never thinks of the consequences, or seems willing to live with them, content in the knowledge that they are forgiven, or can repent later. This isn’t right.
By julius mickel
on 28.07.09
Very good application!
I was just editing something I wanted to youtube from Paul Washer and he was lamenting and pointing out the danger of being precise in theology and vague in ethic (how common this is today). I’ve often said that I think the cry of the Puritans would have been ‘what can we give up?’ while the cry of today seems to be ‘what’s permissable?’
Lord deliver us (me) from our hardness of heart!
By Mel the Dietitian
on 28.07.09
Andrew,
I see where you’re coming from when you say, ” Legalism in part is making sin what God has not made sin and binding the conscience of the believer with it.”
But, the main question I need to ask myself is this, would Christ watch such things? If the answer is “no!” (and I cannot imagine how it can be anything else) then how can we, as those who are trying to be more like Christ, do so?
By Andrew
on 29.07.09
I realise I commented quite narrowly on your article, perhaps this was unfair of me. I certainly agree that we should be grieved over sin in our place (where we are).
I also agree that too much allowance is made in general and share your frustration with the consequences which are not so easily overcome.
I think caution is required. Storytelling of all kinds will involve a negative principle, call it sin or otherwise. If the argument goes that no Christian should watch/read the depiction of sin then I would suggest that storytelling of all kinds becomes inaccessible to the Christian.
Yet it is within the context of storytelling that we must think about the depiction of sin. The Christian that watches a movie is not watching because they want to see people being murdered, or whatever you would like to insert, they are going to watch, what they hope, is an engaging story. The murder is a conduit through which a resolution is found, it is narrative, it is storytelling.
This is not saying, ’sure it’s only pretend, I can watch what I want’. There are things Christians should not be watching and reading but an individual Christian can exercise their discernment with regard to all else.
If watching movies becomes detrimental to your Christian life then stop watching. But the experience of one does not belong to another and so they cannot bind the conscience of another.
By Ruth
on 29.07.09
The continuing prayer of our hearts should be that God the Holy Spirit would touch the hearts of his true blood bought people in these days and enable us to recognise and be sensitiv e to sin and therefore avoid temptation.
May He give us that loathing for sin in any shape or form.
Also, God teaches his children different things at different times trom others, so ,when he convicts us of something , may we be truely thankful and in turn be able to share it with others if God gives us the opportunity. So thankyou Armen.
How much we need to be in prayer for our brethern and sisters. May we get a real deep burden to pray the Holy Ghost will come down.
By Armen
on 29.07.09
Welcome Julius,
Our hearts are certainly prone to find liberties beyond what’s becoming of the follower of Christ.
As soon as we stop putting to death ’self,’ then we’re likely to wonder where we should never be.
I enjoy Washer. He’s a breath of passionate fresh air amidst a day where preaching has become much too professional.
Mel,
Thank you for your thoughts sweetheart.
May God move both of us to yearn to be more like Him.
Andrew,
I did grasp where you were coming from the first time.
I too, hate legalism. Going over to Australia to preach had a real impact on how I handle the scriptures in regards to Christian conduct. There I was as young preacher with no pastoral training or experience, among a people with a totally different culture. How should I deal with the differences?
Many of the men didn’t wear a suit with shirt and tie on Sunday. Not every woman came to church with a skirt every week.
This is quite unheard of in the churches of our denomination in Northern Ireland. What was I to do?
I said nothing.
I became acutely aware of my need to preach the scriptures alone, not preferences. Mindful that I should be able to back up every statement with book, chapter, and verse.
Likewise, I don’t preach against TV, though I may point out the benefits of not having one. I don’t preach against movies, though I may warn against watching certain material.
If a movie tells a story unto our edification, or perhaps even if it adds to our knowledge in a way which will help us forward the cause of Christ, then there is nothing wrong with it.
I agree that movies are a type of story telling, and that there is nothing wrong with telling stories per se, and I also submit to what you’re saying concerning the Christian’s right to use their own discernment.
To refer to a movie character I know of from many years ago, I would never want to be someone else’s ‘Jiminy Cricket.’
I was struck with the thought contained in this post over the weekend. It really humbled me.
I thought I’d share it, and if it’s used to prompt others to repentance and increased desire for holiness, then so be it. If it speaks to no one but me, then that’s okay too.
I won’t be judging anyone’s spirituality by their reaction to this post
Ruth,
God does teach us all differently. He also uses different ways to teach us differently. Sometimes he convicts through the scriptures, sometimes a sermon, sometimes through something another person says, sometimes through prayer, etc, etc.
Our duty is to listen and obey.
The strange thing is, when the Christian is out of touch with God, he rarely hears from God on matters of his conduct and life. But, the Christian walking close with God, will find himself being constantly prodded and pruned.
If you grieve the Spirit, you won’t experience the full sanctifying effects of His influence upon your conscience.
Far too many times have I been there.
By Davey Boyd
on 29.07.09
Thank you so much for your post. I get what your saying and must be off to repent and change and not repeat.
By Andrew
on 30.07.09
I didn’t mean for my comments to be censorious of your article. I hope they didn’t come across that way. Neither was I accusing you of legalism, but I think I made that less clear. As I said previously, I agree with the thrust of the post, Christian’s today are too accommodating by far.
I am urging caution on this subject because it seems to me to be supremely a matter of conscience.
There are some very good arguments for not watching television and films, I am persuaded that many of them are correct.
Church dress code is a bizarre subject, I cannot seem to make up my mind about it. I know what I prefer but I don’t think I could defend that preference if pressed. Cultural preferences, if that is what they are, are difficult to accept when not your own.
By Armen
on 30.07.09
Davey,
You’re welcome, bro.
Must get a chat with you soon
Andrew,
No, I know you didn’t. But, it’s good to flesh out in discussion the dangers in both extremes.
I do think though, that if anyone has any experience of widespread spiritual awakening, they probably have a heightened spiritual awareness to what God demands of his people.
The present western world generation doesn’t know anything about genuine revival, or what it costs.
On the subject of church dress code, I agree. Modesty is certainly something which can be preached, but little else is clearly taught in scripture.
By James
on 27.03.10
I’ve always believed Lot was better than what many think, so thanks for vindicating that too. Are we feeling like Lot today? I do not think so.
Notice Abraham did not pray directly for Lot, let alone mention his name when interceding for Sodom and Gomorrah, but God considered Lot worthy anyway.
Haven't you got anything to say?