STUDY THEME: FAMILY MEMBERS SHARING GRACE 5-11-03

"MAKING PEACE IN MY FAMILY. GEN. 13: 1-2, 5-18.

GENESIS 13:1-2, 5-7, 8-9, 10-13, 1-18.

PLEASE OPEN YOUR BIBLE TO GENESIS 13.

Some time this week you may wish to go back to Gen. 11:10 and trace the genealogy of Abraham from the son of Noah named Shem. In 11:23 you will find Nahor, Abraham’s grandfather, the father of Terah who had three sons; Abram, Nahor, and Haran. They lived in Ur of the Chaldeans in southern Mesopotamia near the Persian Gulf. Haran died before the family left Ur to travel northward to Haran. Abram assumed the care of his nephew Lot, the son of Haran. Nahor and his wife Milcah evidently stayed in Ur.

When Terah was 205 years old he died in Haran. It was then that Abram was commanded by the Lord to leave Haran and go to a land that God would show him. Abram was 75 years old when he left Haran with his wife Sarai, his nephew Lot and the people he had acquired. In Gen 12:10 there was a famine in Canaan so Abram and his family went down into Egypt to find food.

Last Sunday’s lesson was drawn from the experience of Jeremiah. The Lesson this Sunday is drawn from an experience of hundreds of years earlier. It focuses our attention on an experience between Abram (Abraham) and his nephew Lot. They lived between 2000 and 1900 BC. Both Abraham and his nephew had become very wealthy but that within itself created a problem. Grass and water for their increasing herds became scarcer. Competition became fiercer between the shepherds who had to provide for the larger and larger flocks. There was about to be a civil war between the servants of Abraham and the servants of Lot. But Abraham took the initiative and made a suggestion that resolved the hostile situation.

Abraham proposed that they go to different areas in order to avoid further strife. He gave Lot the privilege of choosing which area he wanted. Lot decided on the rich Jordan Valley, which contained the wicked city of Sodom. God promised to give Abram the land and innumerable descendants.

The three points in the Focal Passage Outline are ways to achieve the Life Impact of helping you work for peace in your family. (1) Demonstrate Generosity, (2) Reject selfishness. (3) Rely on the Lord.

The suggested "Biblical Truth" for the lesson is that by relying on the Lord, family members can work together to resolve conflicts peaceably. The suggested "Life Impact" is that we will

work for peace in our families. In the e-mail this week a man said that he knew he was eating in a genuine family caf=E9 when he noted there was an argument going on at every table. This brings us to the first Scripture passage for today.

Genesis 12:10-20 tells the reason for Abram’s being in Egypt and the low point in his life while there. He had failed the test of character by compromising the integrity of his wife Sarai out of fear for his own life. After being in Egypt for a while, Abram left to go back toward Palestine with his wife and nephew Lot. Both Lot, and Abram had accrued much wealth on the slow trip from Ur via Haran and Egypt to the Bethel-Ai region. Wealth in the ancient world was measured, not by the land owned, but by the size of one’s herds and the possession of silver, gold, and jewels.

After moving from place to place, possibly seeking pasture for their animals, the tribe arrived at Bethel, which literally means "The House of God." It was at Bethel that Abram built an altar to worship the Lord when he first arrived in the "Promised Land." Perhaps seeking to rediscover that closeness to the Lord after his moral failure in Egypt, Abram returned to his spiritual roots. Renewing his commitment to God. "Abram called on the name of the Lord., "This simple statement not only describes personal worship, but also indicates sincere submission to the Lord. Perhaps he asked forgiveness for what he had done while in Egypt. No mention is made of Lot’s worship, but then Abram may have prayed for the entire family.

Lot too had flocks, and herds, and tents. Lot’s wealth may have been his inheritance from his father or it may have come from his association with Abram. Possessions can be a blessing, but they also can be the occasion for trouble. The livestock of the uncle and his nephew became so many that the land was not able to bear or support them. The result was that they could not dwell together. One evidence of this, was the strife that erupted between the herdsmen of the two men.

Wealth and prosperity had created tensions between Abram and Lot. Many people mistakenly believe that wealth is the solution to the problems of life. They believe that if they have plenty of money, all of their problems will be solved. Those who are rich in material goods know that this is a myth. Worries and fears often accumulate with the acquisition of wealth. Prosperity often breeds greed, arrogance, selfishness, covetousness and fear. Money cannot buy the most important things in life, such as salvation, peace of mind, and loving relationships.

Because of the huge number of livestock owned by both Abram and Lot, the family had difficulty finding a lush enough pasture-land to feed all the animals. In addition, the Canaanites and Perizzites also inhabited the land. The Canaanites were those native to the country. Not much is known about the Perizzites. Their importance to this context lies in the fact that too many people and animals were trying to live off the same land.

Several factors may have contributed to the quarreling that arose between Abram’s herdsmen and the herdsmen of Lot. Fist, there may have been the natural rivalry between two branches of one family. Second, the spiritual renewal of Abram was not matched in the life of Lot. Third, because of the poverty of the land and the vastness of the flocks and herds, the two camps were not able to stay together, since the land could not support them while they stayed together.

This reminds us that strife often threatens families today. As far as we know, it had not yet infected the relation of Abram and Lot: however, strife among their workers was bound to strain their family ties. The causes of family strife are many and varied. Relations are fragile and under tensions of many kinds. Tensions always have the potential for strife and its dire consequences. Certain tensions are normal in the best of families. For example, some tension exists when children pass through adolescence to adult status. These tensions can lead to strife if all family members do not work together to make this transition as smooth as possible. Adjustments in marriage are necessary as the nature of the relationship passes through its many stages. Family members do not always agree, therefore, they need to have some guidelines for handling potential strife.

Tensions can develop into actual strife. These can infect all kinds of family relationships: between spouses, between parents and children, between siblings, and between members of the extended family. The strife is often verbal, but sometimes it becomes physical. The consequences include alienation, divorce, and abuse of all kinds. Strife in families is always serious and dangerous. It makes members of the family miserable. When it happens in a believing family it is a bad example to non-believers. In Abram’s and Lot’s day, the Canaanites and the Perizzites would have seen any strife between them.

The competition for resources by Abram and Lot demonstrated whether money or relationships was more important to them. Competition for material possessions continues to challenge the unity of families and churches today. The priorities individuals choose determine whether unity is preserved or sacrificed for the love of money.

How Abram and Lot resolved their differences would be a positive or negative witness to the Canaanites and Perizzites. Christians today have an obligation to resolve their differences in a loving way. A failure to be reconciled to one another in the body of Christ presents a damaging witness to a lost world. We cannot lead others to accept the forgiveness of God if we are not willing to extend forgiveness to others.

The initiative to solve the problem should have come from Lot. As the nephew of Abram, he should have offered to yield and should have given preference to the older man. However, it was Abram who demonstrated his unselfishness in resolving the conflict. Abram wanted to stop the bickering before it moved to the next level. Apparently the strife between the herdsmen was still only verbal at this time.

Those who truly are interested in being peacemakers do not demand their rights. Sometimes we talk about marriage requiring a 50/50 give-and-take commitment. The efforts shown in successful marriages are rarely that even. Sometimes one must give more than the other to resolve differences. We should be willing to give whatever it takes to restore godly relationships.

Abram pointed out that it was not right to have quarreling between them because they were relatives. The principle is that family members ought to get along with one another and work through their differences. This is true of the physical family and the spiritual family, the church. Reconciliation is the proper response for family members who disagree.

Even though God had promised Abram the whole land, Abram allowed Lot to live in whatever part he chose. If Lot chose to take the left hand, Abram would go to the right. If Lot chose to depart to the right hand, Abram would go to the left.

Abram also was humble in stepping aside and allowing another to go first. He showed a spirit of self-giving love for his nephew. Families in which self-fulfillment is the primary goal set themselves up for strife. Only those who give of themselves unselfishly can have a family where peace and love prevail.

Abram was a peacemaker. He took the initiative in seeking to end the strife. Often when strife occurs, both parties are hurt and angry. Each one waits for the other to reach out and seek reconciliation. Pride keeps many family disputes alive for years.

Alienated family members sometimes refuse to speak to one another or they never speak words of love and concern for the other person. One of the saddest tragedies is when someone dies before things are made right with family members. Love needs to be expressed now. Jesus said to take the initiative in disputes where your brother has a complaint against you. (Matt 5:23-24) or you have a complaint against your brother (Matt. 18: 15-17).

Lot missed an opportunity to show respect for Abram. He should have turned down the offer to choose the land he wanted and waited for Abram to choose. The attitude of the godly person is to consider giving more blessed than receiving. (Acts 20:35)Lot had a decision to make. He could settle in any part of the land. Life is filled with decisions, and many of them are crucial. You are who you are to a great extent because of decisions you made in the past. Decisions you make now will determine who you will be in the future. Choices make habits. Habits become character. Character becomes destiny.

Lot looked toward the plain of Jordan. This was his first step in backsliding. He saw that it was well watered everywhere. This of course was before the Lord destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah. That terrible judgment changed the geography of the area. When Lot viewed it, the area was like the garden of the Lord and like the most fertile areas of Egypt. In other words it was well suited for grazing livestock. Since this was the source of Lot’s wealth, the area seemed ideal. Thus Lot chose…all the plain of Jordan. Lot journeyed east from the hill country of Canaan. Abram stayed in the hill country of Canaan, but Lot pitched his tent toward Sodom.

What kind of man was Lot? Most Bible students interpret these verses as evidence that he was selfish, greedy, and ungrateful. He agreed with Abram that they should avoid strife and separate. He quickly chose for himself what appears to be the better part of the land. An unselfish person would have recognized the self-giving of his uncle.

At the very least, he could have thanked his uncle for giving him first choice. He might even have refused to make the decision and given it to Abram. However, even if he had, Abam might have chosen the hill country of Canaan. He and Lot didn’t have the same values. Abram defined the better part of the land as something other than its potential for greater wealth. But Lot was defining the better choice in materialistic terms. He felt that he could get richer faster in that area.

Lot probably justified his decision as the right one for his family. There would be abundant water and pasture for his livestock. The large population of Sodom and Gomorrah would provide a market for his products. However, he did not take into account the spiritual danger of living near and later in such a wicked city. He did not realize that his selfish choice would bring ruin to the very family he thought his decision would benefit. Lot’s choice would end in the death of his wife (vs. 26) and in incestuous relationships with his daughters (vs. 36).

Sodom is mentioned three times in Vs. 10-13. and each reference has a sense of coming doom. Its future destruction is mentioned in Vs. 10. Lot’s moving toward Sodom, in which he soon dwelt(14:12), is mentioned in Vs. 12. He continued to stay there until the city was destroyed (Ch. 19). Vs. 13 states clearly the evil for which it was known: The men of Sodom were wicked and sinners before the Lord exceedingly. Sodom’s reputation was well known throughout the land. Even if Lot did not know its wickedness when he made his choice, he soon would have discovered it. Yet he moved to Sodom knowing full well what it was like.

Actually, Lot’s character is an enigma. Although Ch. 19 is not in the Focal Passage, this is an important source for evaluating Lot. When the angels visited Sodom, Lot welcomed them. When the Sodomites came to his house and demanded that the two guests be given to them for sexual abuse, Lot refused and rebuked the mob at his door.

Although Lot was disturbed by the immorality of Sodom, he moved there and stayed there. When the angels told him to take his family and flee, they had to force him to leave Sodom behind (Gen. 19:16).

What a contrast between Lot and Abraham. Except for 1 Peter 1:7-8. we should have hardly credited Lot with any vital religion. Although righteous, he is yet living by sight, seeking only his own advantages and pleasure: worldliness is his dominant characteristic, his one thought is the well-watered plains. He is a type and illustration of the Christian who is not fully consecrated—one who is trying to make the best of both worlds, endeavoring to stand well with God, while pushing to the full his own earthly interests.

Abram had done the right thing by unselfishly allowing Lot to choose first. The Lord would reward him for his faith. The Lord told Abram to look north and south, east and west. He then promised Abram that all he saw would be given to him and his offspring forever. The promise that his offspring would be as numerous as the dust of the earth must have been difficult for Abram to comprehend. He and Sarah were childless in their old age. How could they possibly be the parents of a great multitude? God often does the seemingly impossible for those who trust Him. In due time He exalts the humble and He brings down the proud.

Abram settled near the great trees of Mamre at Hebron, located about 20 miles south of what would later be known as Jerusalem. There he built an altar to the Lord. Abram worshipped the Lord and expressed faith in His care; His promise of descendants, and His possession of the land. Lot sought to secure his future by setting his eyes on the best land. Abram sought to secure his future by setting his eyes on the Lord and His promises. Their different futures demonstrate the blessings of faith and the failures of selfishness.

When we choose to do what is right, God will always take care of us. Many believe that they should always demand everything they believe is rightfully theirs. Others, such as Abram, are willing to yield to others, counting peace more important than possessions. Jesus Christ is the supreme example of someone who gave up His rights in order to bring reconciliation between God and sinners (Phil. 2:1-11). The Son of God came to earth and served our needs even though He is the King of Kings, and Lord of Lords.

A final note is important as we conclude the study of the urgency of making peace in our physical and spiritual families. Peace and reconciliation can only occur when both opposing parties are willing to be reconciled. Our willingness to reconcile with another may not be met with a similar response. When we offer to make peace and it is rejected, know that God understands the situation. He too has made peace possible with all sinners through the death of His Son (2 Cor. 5:19). Sadly, not everyone will accept God’s offer of salvation and reconciliation. We must be ready to establish peace but often we must wait for another to change his or her heart. Be ready to make peace with everyone; show unconditional love to those who oppose you and you will imitate your Heavenly Father.

NEXT WEEK FROM ACTS 4:32-5:11 WE LOOK AT THE EXPERIENCE OF ANANAS AND HIS WIFE SAPPHIRA AS WE STUDY "UNSELFISH GIVING TO GOD’S WORK"

A. V. DAUGHERTY 5-11-03.