II. ABRAHAM AND SODOM AND GOMORRAH

In the 18th chapter of Genesis we find recorded a very singular conversation which Abraham is reported to have held with a superior Being, there called the Lord. It pleased God on this occasion to communicate to the Father of the Faithful his intention to destroy forthwith the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah, of which the cry was great, and the sin very grievous. Now the manner in which Abraham is said to have received the sad tidings is remarkable. He does not bow to the high behest in helpless acquiescence—the Lord do what seemeth good in his sight—but, with feelings at once excited to the uttermost, he pleads for the guilty city, he implores the Lord not to slay the righteous with the wicked; and when he feels himself permitted to speak with all boldness, he first entreats that fifty good men may purchase the city’s safety, and, still encouraged by the success of a series of petitions, he rises in his merciful demands, till at last it is promised that even if ten should be found in it, it should not be destroyed for ten’s sake.

Now was there no motive beyond that of general humanity which urged Abraham to entreaties so importunate, so reiterated? None is named—perhaps such general motive will be thought enough—I do not say that it was not; yet I think we may discover a special and appropriate one, which was likely to act upon the mind of Abraham with still greater effect, though we are left entirely to detect it for ourselves. For may we not imagine, that no sooner was the intelligence sounded in Abraham’s ears, than he called to mind that Lot his nephew, with all his family, was dwelling in this accursed town [Gen. 14:12.] , and that this consideration both prompted and quickened his prayer? For while he thus made his supplication for Sodom, I do not read that Gomorrah and the other cities of the plain [Gen. 19:28; Jude 7.] shared his intercession, though they stood in the same need of it—and why not? except that in them he had not the same deep interest. It may be argued too, and without any undue refinement, that in his repeated reduction of the number which was to save the place, he was governed by the hope that the single family of Lot (for he had sons-in-law who had married his daughters, and daughters unmarried, and servants,) would in itself have supplied so many individuals at least as would fulfil the last condition—ten righteous persons who might turn away the wrath of God, nor suffer his whole displeasure to arise.

Surely nothing could be more natural than that anxiety for the welfare of relatives so near to him should be felt by Abraham—nothing more natural than that he should make an effort for their escape, as he had done on a former occasion at his own risk, when he rescued this very Lot from the kings who had taken him captive—nothing more natural than that his family feeling should discover themselves in the earnestness of his entreaties—yet we have to collect all this for our-selves. The whole chapter might be read without our gathering from it a single hint that he had any relative within ten days’ journey of the place. All we know is, that Abraham entreated for it with great passion—that he entreated for no other place, though others were in the same peril—that he endeavoured to obtain such terms as seemed likely to be fulfilled if a single righteous family could be found there. And then we know, from what is elsewhere disclosed, that the family of Lot did actually dwell there at that time, a family that Abraham might well have reckoned on being more prolific in virtue than it proved.

Surely, then, a coincidence between the zeal of the uncle and the danger of the brother’s son is here detailed, though it is not expressed; and so utterly undesigned is this coincidence, that the history might be read many times over, and this feature of truth in it never happen to present itself.

And here let me observe, (an observation which will be very often forced upon our notice in the prosecution of this argument,) that this sign of truth (whatever may be the importance attached to it) offers itself in the midst of an incident in a great measure miraculous: and though it cannot be said that such indications of veracity in the natural parts of a story prove those parts of it to be true which are supernatural; yet where the natural and supernatural are in close combination, the truth of the former must at least be thought to add to the credibility of the latter; and they who are disposed to believe, from the coincidence in question, that the petition of Abraham in behalf of Sodom was a real petition, as it is described by Moses, and no fiction, will have some difficulty in separating it from the miraculous circumstances connected with it—the visit of the angel—the prophetic information he conveyed—and the terrible vengeance with which he was proceeding to smite that adulterous and sinful generation.