Rev. David Holwick G
Nobleboro Baptist Church
Nobleboro, Maine
August 4, 2024
Genesis 18:16-33
DICKERING WITH THE DIVINE
I. The Mideast dilemma.
A. Two bad guys and a few thousand civilians.
On July 13, 2024, the Israeli Defense Forces had intelligence
that two leaders of Hamas were hiding in a civilian compound.
Rafa Salama was the commander of Hamas in the key city of
Khan Yunis.
Mohammed Deif was a bigger target - he was considered the main
planner of the October 7 attack on Israel.
He had survived so many Israeli assassination attempts they
called him "the cat with nine lives."
One near-miss took out his eye and a hand and a foot.
Another attempt killed his wife and infant son.
The compound was in the al-Mawasi area, which the Israelis had
designated a humanitarian zone for displaced persons.
Tens of thousands of civilians were camped nearby.
The Israeli forces dropped eight 2,000-pound bombs on the
compound.
According to the Palestinians, the Israelis also targeted the
ambulance vehicles that were sent in after the attack.
Rafa Salama was killed.
This week, Israel confirmed that Mohammed Deif was also killed.
90 Palestinian civilians were killed, and 300 others wounded.
Could you justify the attack? Would God? [1]
B. Sarah Palin interview in 2008.
In 2008, Republican presidential nominee John McCain's campaign
had just 72 hours to vet Sarah Palin to be his vice-president.
The then-44-year-old Alaska governor was asked by McCain's aides
how she would react in a national security crisis where the
president had been temporarily incapacitated by surgery.
Under this scenario, the director of national intelligence
comes to Acting-President Palin and tells her they have
pinpointed Osama Bin Laden.
A plane is overhead ready to kill the al-Qaeda leader.
But there'll be multiple civilian casualties.
Do you take the shot? she was asked.
Yes, she said, I would take the shot because I'm the President
of the United States.
This is our archenemy who took the lives of 3,000-plus Americans.
And then I would get down on my knees and ask for forgiveness
for the innocent souls whose lives I would be taking.
The vetters were highly impressed with her answer. [2]
C. The real key to today's passage.
1) I have preached this passage before with an emphasis on
intercessory prayer which is appropriate and fits nicely.
2) However, the real theme here is justice, God's justice.
a) Will God always do what is right?
b) And, is that a good system for us?
II. The story begins with an auspicious visit by a holy trio.
A. It is soon revealed that they are God and two angels.
1) (Unlikely to be the Trinity)
2) Abraham shows them extravagant hospitality.
B. God has a two-fold purpose.
1) Announce the birth of Isaac within a year.
2) Reveal God's impending judgment of Sodom and Gomorrah.
a) The three have come to inspect the situation.
1> A literary convention, not doubt of omniscience!
2> Even so, God doesn't judge on the basis of hearsay.
A> He must see the evidence, the proof.
B> And God wants to teach Abraham about his
character (v. 19) because Abraham is going to
be the one to teach righteousness and justice
to his heirs - and the whole world.
b) If the cities are guilty as charged, judgment is assumed.
1> Sodom and Gomorrah are notorious in history.
2> Homosexual sin is often noted, but the prophet
Isaiah sees a lack of justice, and Jeremiah
points to their adultery, lying and failure
to condemn gross immorality.
3) Since Abraham's nephew Lot is in the city, Abraham has a
natural concern about this plan.
a) The New Testament says Lot was a righteous man, and
was upset with all the sin in his city. 2 Pet 2:7
b) Abraham also has a wider concern.
III. Abraham's challenge to God.
A. Abraham would be a bad Baptist.
1) When God revealed his plans concerning impending judgment,
Abraham is supposed to say, "Yes, God, do it!"
2) You don't talk back to God. But that is exactly what
Abraham does.
a) He uses his understanding of God's character to clarify
God's actions.
b) Abraham does this by a series of questions.
1> He does it humbly, though - he is God's friend, but
never makes himself equal to God.
B. Will the righteous be killed along with the wicked? 18:23
1) Principle: Judgment must be deserved.
2) Distinction must be maintained between guilty and innocent.
C. Shouldn't 50 righteous people exempt the city? 18:24
1) Principle: Mercy has greater weight than justice.
a) The innocent should carry more weight than the guilty.
1> This is why many oppose the bombings in Gaza.
A> Yes, many guilty fighters have been killed.
B> But even more women & children have been killed.
C> Recall, Abraham would let 10,000 guilty go free
if only 50 righteous were endangered.
2> This principle also influences American law.
A> In trials, many guilty people are let off the
hook because not enough evidence can be found.
B> But we would rather let ten guilty go free
rather than convict one innocent person.
C> (You may disagree - unless that innocent person
is YOU!)
An article in this week's New Yorker magazine looks
at a notorious mass murder in England.
A person was convicted, but there is doubt about his
guilt.
A scholar of law in Bristol, England, said,
"People tend to say terrible things about America,
but they have this real commitment to innocent
people not being convicted.
We don't have that focus on innocence in this
country." [3]
b) Abraham shows concern for sinners as well as saints.
2) Those who DESERVE punishment will be spared if there are
enough innocent.
D. God, the Ultimate Judge, must do right. 18:25
1) Principle: God cannot contradict his morality and character.
2) Note that it is presented as a question, not a statement.
IV. Is God's will negotiable?
A. Some argue "covenant" requires equal obligations.
1) Famous Jewish lawyer Alan Dershowitz:
a) Abraham is on an equal footing with God here.
2) As partners in the covenant, both can learn and adapt.
B. Much of modern ideas about God hinge on this possibility.
1) The Bible is clear that we are not mere robots.
a) We can, and should, interact with God.
b) God cares about our needs and our pleas.
2) But are we "equal" with God?
a) Some argue we can be more than equal.
V. The moral dilemma of a fudging God.
A. Is Abraham MORE moral than God?
1) Alan Dershowitz argues God is reneging on his vow to
Noah not to destroy the Earth again. Gen 9:8
2) God can only justify destroying Sodom by relying on
lawyerly "technicalities."
3) Abraham is setting God back on the right path.
B. There are two approaches to God's justice.
1) Fundamentalist approach.
a) Whatever God does, no matter how unjust it seems to us,
is by definition just.
1> God must be obeyed without question or challenge.
2> Most Baptists believe this.
b) Example of Job.
1> Job is truly innocent, but suffers greatly.
A> Indistinguishable from punishment.
B> Job appeals for a chance to confront God, hear
what God has against him.
2> God's answer: I am God, you are not. So shut up!
A> Job submits to this, and is blessed again.
c) Modern society hates this view!
2) Liberal approach.
a) Humans must evaluate God's justice in human terms.
b) Gen. 18 shows that God submits himself to human judgment.
1> It is almost as if justice is greater than God.
c) Ver. 25 has been taken as support for natural moral law.
1> Concept that morality is evident in the universe,
apart from any divine revelation of rules.
2> In this view, God is hemmed in by morality even
when he wishes to do otherwise.
VI. Does God need to be straightened out?
A. Injustice has vexed many religious people.
Dershowitz tells the true story of Rabbi Levi Yitzchak, an
eighteenth-century Hasidic master.
The rabbi gained fame for accusing God for injustice because
of the suffering of the Jewish people.
On one Yom Kippur, a simple tailor sought forgiveness from
the great rabbi for having talked disrespectfully to God.
The rabbi asked him what he had said, and the tailor told him:
I declared to God: You wish me to repent of my sins,
but I have committed only minor offenses.
I may have kept leftover cloth, or I may have eaten in a
non-Jewish home, where I worked, without washing my hands.
But you, O Lord, have committed grievous sins:
You have taken away babies from their mothers, and
mothers from their babies.
Let us call it quits: May You forgive me, and I will
forgive You.
The great rabbi's response?
He looked at the tailor and said: "Why did you let God off so
easily?"
#29187
1) In our day and age, God always seems to be on trial.
2) But by placing ourselves in judgment on God, we make
ourselves into God.
3) This is the true liberal conceit.
B. God remains God.
1) His judgment is just and inevitable.
a) Abraham and God negotiate down to ten righteous people.
1> Why not down further? Abraham probably figured Lot
and his extended family could get at least 10.
2> Unfortunately, Sodom doesn't even have ten.
3> God destroys the city, just as he originally
intended. (Genesis 19)
b) This reinforces the principle that sin leads ultimately
to death - eternal death.
2) We will always reap what we sow.
a) Sodom is an example for our world.
1> The world remains corrupt and will be judged.
b) We won't be able to talk our way out of it.
1> There will be no technicalities.
2> Each of us here deserve this punishment.
3) God's mercy triumphs over his judgment.
a) Judgment is not God's final word.
1> His ultimate goal is to save us.
b) The righteous are spared in Sodom.
1> Abraham assumed that the whole city would have to
be spared, but God sent a special mission to
save his righteous ones.
2> Lot was rescued even as the destruction descended.
3> God will spare us too - if we believe and repent.
C. Surrender to God's mercy now.
1) Just as God sent a rescue mission to save Lot from Sodom,
he sent a rescue mission to save us.
a) It happened 2,000 years ago when God sent his Son to
teach us his ways, and to die for us on a cross.
2) It is important to accept Jesus as your Savior, but don't
stop there - walk in his ways.
3) Be a positive influence in a corrupt culture, warning them
to not take God's mercy for granted.
=========================================================================
SOURCES FOR ILLUSTRATIONS USED IN THIS SERMON:
1. Wikipedia, "13 July 2024 al-Mawasi attack,"
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/13_July_2024_al-Mawasi_attack>.
Also: "Hamas military chief was killed in July strike, Israel says,"
by Tom Bennett, BBC News, 1 August 2024. Other sources also used.
2. "Sex, money, social media - how VP contenders are vetted," by Jude
Sheerin, BBC News, 31 July 2024,
<https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cpv30gx7xkko>.
3. "Blood Relatives," by Heidi Blake, The New Yorker, 5 August 2024,
page 47.
#29187 "The Genesis of Justice," Alan Dershowitz, Warner Books: 2000,
page 73.
These and 25,000 others are part of a database that can be downloaded,
absolutely free, at http://www.holwick.com/database.html
=========================================================================
Alan Dershowitz
The Genesis of Justice
Chapter: Abraham Defends the Guilty - And Loses
I. God's judgment on Sodom reneges promise made to Noah.
A. Details differ but principle does not.
B. Abraham challenges God on it.
II. Abraham's right to challenge God.
A. Covenantal relationship binds both parties to conditions.
1) God is not an absolute but a conditional monarch.
B. Abraham has to remind God of his obligations. Gen 18:25
1) (Jacob goes further, making his acceptance of God
conditional on God's doing his part of the bargain
first.)
2) God must be seen as a contractual partner.
III. Can God's justice be judged by human beings?
A. Fundamentalist approach.
1) Whatever God does, no matter how unjust it seems to us,
is by definition just.
2) God must be obeyed without question or challenge.
B. Liberal approach.
1) Humans must evaluate justice in human terms.
2) Genesis 18 shows that God submits himself to human
judgment.
IV. The confrontation.
A. Abraham challenges God to be just.
1) God does not silence him, but negotiates.
B. Story of Job shows fundamentalist approach.
1) God cannot be challenged.
2) Divine justice cannot be judged by human standards.
3) Job caves in, even though he has been punished for
being innocent.
4) God wins, not because he is right, but because he is God.
V. Reconciling Job and Abraham.
A. Abraham had a covenant and Job did not.
B. God did not answer Job because there is no answer.
1) No divine justice could ever explain the Holocaust.
C. Job represents bad religion.
1) Silence in the face of injustice - even God's
injustice - is a sin.
VI. The legal argument.
A. The conundrum:
1) Wiping out evil city with some good people in it is bad.
2) Sparing the evil ones for the sake of a few good is also
bad.
B. God accepts Abraham's moral argument.
1) The whole purpose of the story is to instruct Abraham
in human justice.
2) We need a legal system or process to distinguish the
guilty and the innocent.
C. Just regimes should favor the innocent over the guilty.
1) A popular ratio is 1 to 10, the number the story stops at.
Copyright © 2026 by Rev. David Holwick
Created with the Freeware Edition of HelpNDoc: Free Web Help generator