\n<\/p>\n
There\u2019s an interesting story in Genesis that shows God to be
\nunprincipled. And I like it.<\/p>\n
In Genesis 18, God comes to Abraham to announce that he will
\nhave a son. As an aside, it\u2019s undecided whether YHWH came to Abraham or whether
\nGod simply sent three angelic beings to represent YHWH, since the text says
\n\u201cYHWH appeared to Abraham\u201d and then \u201cAbraham looked up and saw three men
\nstanding nearby.\u201d The Talmud gets even more specific and says the three men
\nwere the angels Raphael, Michael, and Gabriel (Bava Metzia 86b). Not only that,
\nbut this same section of the Talmud tells us the meal Abraham prepares is three
\ncalf tongues, with mustard, \u201ca particular delicacy.\u201d<\/p>\n
Sorry, nerdy tangent. <\/p>\n
The point is God comes to Abraham and then, as God is
\nleaving, God decides to let Abraham in on a little secret: the Almighty is
\nheaded to Sodom to see if things are as bad as the press reports are saying. <\/p>\n
Then, I love this verse, <\/p>\n
\n\u201cThe men turned away and went toward Sodom, but Abraham remained standing before YHWH.\u201d Genesis 18:22<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
And the negotiations begin:<\/p>\n
Abraham: \u201cWill you spare the city if there are 50 good
\npeople living there?\u201d<\/p>\nGod: \u201cSure, why not.\u201d<\/p>\n
Abraham: \u201cI stood up to God and haven\u2019t been struck by
\nlightning, so, what if it\u2019s less than 50? God, would you destroy the whole city
\nbecause of a technicality, of say, 5 less people?\u201d<\/p>\nGod: \u201cFine, if I find 45 people, I won\u2019t destroy the city.\u201d<\/p>\n
Abraham: \u201cDo I hear a 40?\u201d<\/p>\n
God: \u201cFine.\u201d<\/p>\n
Abraham: \u201cWould you be mad if I asked about 30?\u201d<\/p>\n
God: \u201cOkay okay, if I find 30 I won\u2019t smite the city.\u201d<\/p>\n
Abraham: \u201c20?\u201d<\/p>\n
God: \u201cFor those 20, I won\u2019t destroy the city.\u201d<\/p>\n
Abraham: \u201cDon\u2019t get angry, but, what if there\u2019s only 10?\u201d<\/p>\n
God: \u201cFor the sake of ten, I will not destroy it.\u201d <\/p>\n
Let\u2019s forget for a minute that we know what happens in the
\nnext chapter. Spoiler Alert: There was not 10 and things did not go well for
\nfolks. <\/p>\nI want to focus for a minute on this exchange all the way back in the first book of the Bible. Those who say the God of the Old Testament<\/a> is about rigid rules and laws haven\u2019t read their Genesis 18 (or see again in Exodus 32 when Moses does something similar to Abraham here).<\/p>\n
Here, from the beginning, the text invites us to stand up to God, even when others are \u201cjust following orders.\u201d Here, from the outset, God is willing to change God\u2019s Word for the sake of people. <\/p>\n
But it took a person taking a stand.<\/h2>\n
What is the firm ethical foundation<\/a> we find in Genesis 18? What absolute principle of morality do we find here? We do not find any such thing. We find a conversation, a negotiation, a back-and-forth between a clever man who is trying to do the right thing and a God who isn\u2019t deaf by pure law-and-order to listen.<\/p>\n
When we move from pronouncements and prostration to listening and responding, we are moving from rules to wisdom, from immaturity to maturity. And, as Pete talks about in his book How the Bible Actually Works<\/a><\/em>, this is a great model for how our relationship with the whole Bible can look.<\/p>\n
In fact, perhaps we see Jesus carrying this story to its logical conclusion in the first book of the New Testament, again in chapter 18:<\/p>\n
\u201cWhat do
\nyou think? If a man owns a hundred sheep, and one of them wanders away, will he
\nnot leave the ninety-nine on the hills and go to look for the one that wandered
\noff? 13\u00a0<\/sup>And if he finds it, truly I tell you, he is happier
\nabout that one sheep than about the ninety-nine that did not wander off. 14\u00a0<\/sup>In
\nthe same way your Father in heaven is not willing that any of these little ones
\nshould perish.\u201d (Matt. 18:12-14)<\/p>\n<\/div>\n