Lot (1) – Lucifer

Lot (1)

lot:

I. Personality.

The man who bore the name Lot (lot; Lot) is mentioned for the first time in Genesis 11:27, at the beginning of that section of Genesis which is entitled "the generations of Terah." After Terah's 3 sons are named, it is added that the third of these, Haran, begat Lot.

The reason for thus singling out but one of the grandsons of Terah appears in the next verse, where we are told that "Haran died before his father Terah in the land of his nativity, in Ur of the Chaldees." For that period in the life of this family, therefore, which begins with the migration from Ur, Lot represents his father's branch of the family (Genesis 11:31). It is hardly probable that the relation between Abraham and Lot would have been what it was, had not Haran died; but be this as it may, we read this introduction of Lot into the genealogy of Terah as an anticipation of the story to which it furnishes an introduction, and in which Lot is destined to play an important part.

The sections of that story in which Lot appears are: in Genesis 11:1–32, the migration from Ur to Haran; in Genesis 12:1–20, Abraham's wanderings; in Genesis 13:1–18, the separation of Abraham and Lot; in Genesis 14:1–24, the campaign of the eastern kings against Sodom and Abraham's recovery of the captives; and in Genesis 19:1–38, the destruction of Sodom.

In Genesis 14:14,Genesis 14:16 Lot is termed the "brother" of Abraham; but that this does not represent a variant tradition is proved by reference to 14:12 of the same chapter (ascribed to "an independent source") and to 13:8 (ascribed to J; compare 11:28 J).

II. Career.

1. First Period:

Lot's life, as the scanty references to him permit us to reconstruct it, falls into four periods. Of the first period--that previous to the migration from Haran--we know nothing save Lot's birth in Ur, the death of his father there, the marriage of his sister Milcah to his uncle Nahor (of another sister, Iscah, we learn only the name), and the journey to Haran in company with Terah, Abraham and Sarah. The fact that Sarah's childlessness and Haran's death are the only two circumstances related of the family history, may serve to explain why Lot went with Abraham instead of staying with Nahor. A childless uncle and a fatherless nephew may well have remained together with the idea that, even if there was no formal adoption, the nephew might become his uncle's heir. Certainly, the promise of a numberless seed, so often repeated to the patriarchs, comes first to Abraham immediately after Lot has separated from him (see Genesis 13:6–18).

2. Second Period:

In the second period of Lot's life, we find him the companion of Abraham on his journeys from Mesopotamia to Canaan, through Canaan to Egypt, and back again to the neighborhood of Beth-el. His position is subordinate, for his uncle is head of the family, and oriental custom is uniform and rigorous in the matter of family rule. Hence, the use of the singular number throughout the narrative. What Abraham did, his whole "clan" did. Yet Lot's position was as nearly independent as these patriarchal conditions admit. When the story reaches the point where it is necessary to mention this fact, the narrator explains, first, the generosity with which Abraham treated his nephew, in permitting him to have "flocks, and herds, and tents" of his own, a quasi-independent economy, and second, that disproportion between their collective possessions and the land's resources which made separation inevitable. Up to this point the only mention of Lot during this period of wandering is contained in Genesis 13:1, in the words "and Lot with him." And even here the words are useless (because stating a fact perfectly presumable here as elsewhere), except as they prepare the reader for the story of the separation that is immediately to follow.

3. Third Period:

That story introduces the third period of Lot's career, that of his residence in the Kikkar (the Revised Version (British and American) "Plain," the Revised Version margin "Circle") and in Sodom. To the fundamental cause of separation, as above stated, the author adds the two circumstances which contributed to produce the result, namely, first, the strife that arose between Abraham's herdsmen and Lot's herdsmen, and, second, the presence in the same country of others--the Canaanites and Perizzites--thus reminding his readers that it was no vacant land, through which they might spread themselves absolutely at will and so counteract the operation of the principal cause and the contributory cause already set forth.

With a magnanimity that must have seemed even greater to minds accustomed to patriarchal authority than it seems to us, and that was in fact much more remarkable than it would be here and now, Abraham offers to his nephew the choice of the land--from the nomad's point of view. In the "we are brethren" (Genesis 13:8), the whole force of the scene is crystallized. Lot, who believes himself to have chosen the better part, is thereupon traced in his nomadic progress as far as Sodom, and the reader leaves him for a time face to face with a city whose men "were wicked and sinners against Yahweh exceedingly," while the narrative moves on with Abraham through that fresh scene of revelation which presented to this man of magnanimity a Divine deed to all the land, and to this man, now left without an heir from among his own kindred (compare Genesis 15:2,Genesis 15:3), a Divine pledge of innumerable offspring.

Lot returns for a moment to our view as the mainspring of Abraham's motions in the campaign of Genesis 14:1–24. We are expressly told that it was "when Abram heard that his brother was taken captive," that he "led forth his trained men .... and pursued." On the one hand we hear that Lot now "dwelt in Sodom," having abandoned the life in tents that he had led since Mesopotamian days, and on the other hand we find in him a foil to the energetic, decisive and successful figure of his uncle--for Lot plays a sorry role, bracketed always with "the women and the goods."

This period of his life ends with the annihilation of his chosen home, his wealth, his companions, and all that was his save two daughters, who, it would seem, might better have perished with the rest. Genesis 19, coming immediately after the intercession of Abraham for Sodom that poignantly impresses on the reader's mind the wickedness of Lot's environment, exhibits to us the man himself in his surroundings, as they have affected him through well-nigh a score of years (compare 12:4; 17:1). What we see is a man who means well (courtesy, 19:1; hospitality, 19:2,3,6-8; natural shame, 19:7; loyalty, 19:14; and gratitude, 19:19), but who is hopelessly bound up with the moral life of the city through his family connections--alliances that have pulled him down rather than elevated others (19:9,14,26,31-35). The language of 2 Peter 2:7,2 Peter 2:8 reminds us that Lot was, even at this time of his life, a "righteous" man. Viewed as a part of his environment (the writer has been speaking of Sodom, 19:6), Lot was certainly entitled to be called a "righteous" man, and the term fits the implications of Genesis 18:23–32. Moreover, Genesis 19:1–38 itself shows Lot "vexed .... with their lawless deeds" and "sore distressed by the lascivious life of the wicked" (compare 19:3,7,8,14). Yet the contrast with Abraham is always present in the reader's mind, so that the most lasting impressions are made by Lot's selfishness worldliness vacillation and cowardice, not to mention the moral effect made by the closing scene of his life (19:30-38).

4. Fourth Period:

The fourth period of Lot's career is of uncertain duration. #Upon the destruction of Sodom he dwelt at first in Zoar, the "little" city, spared as a convenient refuge for him and his; but at some time unspecified, he "went up out of Zoar," for "he feared to dwell in Zoar"--why, we cannot say. This fear was greater than even the evidently great fear he entertained of dwelling in "the mountain" (Genesis 19:19). In this mountain-country of rocks and caves (Driver in HDB, article "Lot," cites Buckingham, Travels in Syria, 61-63, 87, as authority for the statement that people still live in caves in this region), Lot and his two remaining daughters dwell; and the biography of this companion of "the friend of God" ends in a scene of incest, which supplies the logical epilogue to a drama of progressive moral deterioration. This bestial cave-man of Genesis 19:1–38 is the "brother" of Abraham, but he has reached this goal because his path had led down from Beth-el to Sodom. The origin of the two neighboring and kindred nations, Moab and Ammon, is by the Hebrew tradition traced thus to Lot and his daughters.

III. Place in Later Literature.

In the Bible, Lot finds mention only as the father of Moab and Ammon (Deuteronomy 2:9,Deuteronomy 2:19; Psalms 83:8), and in the passage in 2Pe already noticed; and, besides these places, in Luke 17:28–32. Here Lot represents the central figure in the destruction of Sodom, as Noah in the flood in the preceding context (compare the association of these two characters in 2Pe and the Koran). His deliverance is mentioned, the haste and narrowness of that escape is implied, and his wife's fate is recalled. In Jewish and Mohammedan lore (including many passages in the Koran itself), Lot is a personage of importance, about whom details are told which fancy has added to the sober traditions of old Israel. But particularly for Mohammed there was point of attachment in Lot's career, offered in Genesis 19:7,Genesis 19:14. Like Mohammed to the men of wicked Mecca, Lot becomes a preacher of righteousness and a messenger of judgment to the men of wicked Sodom. He is one of the line of apostles, sent to reveal God's will and purpose to his contemporaries.

IV. Critical Theories about the Figure of Lot.

The common view of those who deny the historical reality of Lot is that this name simply stands for the ethnic group, Moab and Ammon. Wellhausen, e.g., expressly calls "Lot" a national name (Volksname). As to what is told of him in Ge he remarks: "Were it not for the remarkable depression in which the Dead Sea lies, Sodom and Gomorrah would not have perished; were it not for the little flat tongue of land that reaches out into the swamp from the Southeast, Lot would have fled at once to the mountains of his sons, Moab and Ammon, and not have made the detour by Zoar, which merely serves the purpose of explaining why this corner is excepted from `the overthrow,' to the territory of which it really belongs" (Prolegomena 6, 323). Meyer confesses that nothing can be made of Lot, because "any characteristic feature that might furnish a point of attachment is entirely lacking." The first of the families of the Horites of Seir was named Lotan (Genesis 36:20,Genesis 36:22), and this writer believes it "probable that this name is derived from Lot; but that Lot was ever a tribal name (Stammname) follows neither from this fact (rather the contrary) nor from the designation of Moab and the bene `Ammon as `Sons of Lot' " (Die Israeliten und ihre Nachbarstamme, 311; Compare 261, 339). If "Horite" was understood as "cave-dweller," the story in Genesis 19:30 might be adduced in support of this combination. But the most recent line of reasoning concerning these patriarchal figures makes their names "neither Divine names nor tribal names, whether in actual use or regarded as such, but rather simple personal names like Tom, Dick and Harry. .... Typical names they became .... so that .... Israel's story-tellers would connect the name of Lot with the overthrow of the cities" (Gressmann, article in ZATW, 1910). These names were chosen just because "they were very common at the time when the narratives were stamped into types"; later they became unfashionable, but the story-tellers held fast to the old names. "One sees from this at once into how ancient a time the proper names Abraham and Lot must reach, and understands therefore the more easily how they could be changed into tribal ancestors." It does not require the cautions, uttered by writers of this way of thinking, against regarding their views as a return to the old historical view of the patriarchs, to remind us that, in spite of all that may be said to the contrary, the present trend of thought among the most radical critics of the Genesis-traditions is much mote favorable to that conservative historical view than were the opinions which they have overthrown. So that it may justly be asserted, as Gressmann writes: "Confidence in tradition is in any case on the rise."

Lot's Wife: This woman, unknown by name, figures in the narrative of Lot that relates his escape from Sodom. She is mentioned in Genesis 19:1–38 only in verses 15-17, where she is commanded to flee from the doomed city with her husband and daughters, and is laid hold upon by the angelic visitors in their effort to hasten the slow departure; and in 19:26, where she alone of the four fugitives disobeys the warning, looks back, and becomes a "pillar of salt" This disobedience, with the moral state it implied and the judgment it entailed, is held up as an example by Christ in Luke 17:32. In the Scriptures this is all that is said of a person and event that furnished the basis for a great deal of speculation. Josephus (Ant., I, xi, 4) adds to the statement derived from Gen, "She was changed into a pillar of salt," the words, "for I visited it, and it still remains even now" (see also The Wisdom of Solomon 10:7).

Among Christian writers contemporary with and subsequent to Josephus, as well as among the Jews themselves and other Orientals, the same assertion is found, and down to recent times travelers have reported the persistence of such a "pillar of salt," either on the testimony of natives or as eyewitnesses. The question of the origin and nature of these "pillars" is a part of the larger question of Sodom and its neighborhood (see SALT; SIDDIM; SLIME); for that no one particular "pillar" has persisted through the centuries may be regarded as certain; nor if it had, would the identification of Lot's wife with it and with it alone be ascertainable. This is just an early, persistent and notable case of that "identification" of Biblical sites which prevails all over the Holy Land. It is to be classed with the myth-and legend-building turn of mind in simple peoples, which has e.g. embroidered upon this Old Testament account of the destruction of Sodom such marvelous details and embellishments.

The principal thing to observe is the vagueness and the simplicity of the story in Gen. For it does not necessarily imply the "metamorphosis" popularly attributed to it, in the strict sense of that word. And it lacks, even in a narrative like this, where the temptation would be greatest, all indications of that "popular archaeology" or curiosity, which according to some critics, is alleged to have furnished the original motive for the invention of the patriarchal narratives. "She became a pillar of salt," and "Remember Lot's wife": this is the extent of the Biblical allusions. All the rest is comment, or legend, or guess, or "science."

J. Oscar Boyd

Lot (2)

See DIVINATION.

Lotan

lo'-tan (loTan): Son of Seir, a chief (the King James Version "duke") of Edom (Genesis 36:20,Genesis 36:22,Genesis 36:29; 1 Chronicles 1:38 f).

Lothasubus

loth-a-su'-bus (Lothasoubos): One of those who stood by Ezra at the reading of the law (1 Esdras 9:44); called "Hashum" in Nehemiah 8:4.

Lots

See DIVINATION.

Lots, Feast Of

See PURIM.

Lotus Trees

lo'-tus (tse'elim; the King James Version shady trees): The trees under which behemoth (the "hippopotams") rests; "He lieth under the lotus-trees," "The lotus-trees cover him with their shade" (Job 40:21,Job 40:22). The Arabic equivalent is the dom tree, Zizyphus lotus, a species of jujube tree (Natural Order Rhamneae); it has many spines and small globular fruit a little bigger than a pea. It is common in the Jordan valley. This plant has nothing to do with the Egyptian lotus.

See LILY.

Love

luv ('ahebh, 'ahabhah, noun; phileo, agapao, verb; agape, noun): Love to both God and man is fundamental to true religion, whether as expressed in the Old Testament or the New Testament. Jesus Himself declared that all the law and the prophets hang upon love (Matthew 22:40; Mark 12:28–34). Paul, in his matchless ode on love (1 Corinthians 13:1–13), makes it the greatest of the graces of the Christian life--greater than speaking with tongues, or the gift of prophecy, or the possession of a faith of superior excellence; for without love all these gifts and graces, desirable and useful as they are in themselves, are as nothing, certainly of no permanent value in the sight of God. Not that either Jesus or Paul underestimates the faith from which all the graces proceed, for this grace is recognized as fundamental in all God's dealings with man and man's dealings with God (John 6:28 Hebrews 11:6); but both alike count that faith as but idle and worthless belief that does not manifest itself in love to both God and man. As love is the highest expression of God and His relation to mankind, so it must be the highest expression of man's relation to his Maker and to his fellow-man.

I. Definition.

While the Hebrew and Greek words for "love" have various shades and intensities of meaning, they may be summed up in some such definition as this: Love, whether used of God or man, is an earnest and anxious desire for and an active and beneficent interest ins the well-being of the one loved. Different degrees and manifestations of this affection are recognized in the Scriptures according to the circumstances and relations of life, e.g. the expression of love as between husband and wife, parent and child, brethren according to the flesh, and according to grace; between friend and enemy, and, finally, between God and man. It must not be overlooked, however, that the fundamental idea of love as expressed in the definition of it is never absent in any one of these relations of life, even though the manifestation thereof may differ according to the circumstances and relations. Christ's interview with the apostle Peter on the shore of the Sea of Tiberias (John 21:15–18) sets before us in a most beautiful way the different shades of meaning as found in the New Testament words phileo, and agapao. In the question of Christ, "Lovest thou me more than these?" the Greek verb agapas, denotes the highest, most perfect kind of love (Latin, diligere), implying a clear determination of will and judgment, and belonging particularly to the sphere of Divine revelation. In his answer Peter substitutes the word philo, which means the natural human affection, with its strong feeling, or sentiment, and is never used in Scripture language to designate man's love to God. While the answer of Peter, then, claims only an inferior kind of love, as compared to the one contained in Christ's question, he nevertheless is confident of possessing at least such love for his Lord.

II. The Love of God.

First in the consideration of the subject of "love" comes the love of God--He who is love, and from whom all love is derived. The love of God is that part of His nature--indeed His whole nature, for "God is love"--which leads Him to express Himself in terms of endearment toward His creatures, and actively to manifest that interest and affection in acts of loving care and self-sacrifice in behalf of the objects of His love. God is "love" (1 John 4:8,John 4:16) just as truly as He is "light" (1 John 1:5), "truth" (1 John 1:6), and "spirit" (John 4:24). Spirit and light are expressions of His essential nature; love is the expression of His personality corresponding to His nature. God not merely loves, but is love; it is His very nature, and He imparts this nature to be the sphere in which His children dwell, for "he that abideth in love abideth in God, and God abideth in him" (1 John 4:16). Christianity is the only religion that sets forth the Supreme Being as Love. In heathen religions He is set forth as an angry being and in constant need of appeasing.

1. Objects of God's Love:

The object of God's love is first and foremost His own Son, Jesus Christ (Matthew 3:17; Matthew 17:5; Luke 20:13; John 17:24). The Son shares the love of the Father in a unique sense; He is "my chosen, in whom my soul delighteth" (Isaiah 42:1). There exists an eternal affection between the Son and the Father--the Son is the original and eternal object of the Father's love (John 17:24). If God's love is eternal it must have an eternal object, hence, Christ is an eternal being.

God loves the believer in His Son with a special love. Those who are united by faith and love to Jesus Christ are, in a different sense from those who are not thus united, the special objects of God's love. Said Jesus, thou "lovedst them, even as thou lovedst me" (John 17:23). Christ is referring to the fact that, just as the disciples had received the same treatment from the world that He had received, so they had received of the Father the same love that He Himself had received. They were not on the outskirts of God's love, but in the very center of it. "For the father himself loveth you, because ye have loved me" (John 16:27). Here phileo is used for love, indicating the fatherly affection of God for the believer in Christ, His Son. This is love in a more intense form than that spoken of for the world (John 3:16).

God loves the world (John 3:16; compare 1 Timothy 2:4; 2 Peter 3:9). This is a wonderful truth when we realize what a world this is--a world of sin and corruption. This was a startling truth for Nicodemus to learn, who conceived of God as loving only the Jewish nation. To him, in his narrow exclusiveism, the announcement of the fact that God loved the whole world of men was startling. God loves the world of sinners lost and ruined by the fall. Yet it is this world, "weak," "ungodly," "without strength," "sinners" (Romans 5:6–8), "dead in trespasses and sins" (Ephesians 2:1 the King James Version), and unrighteous, that God so loved that He gave His only begotten Son in order to redeem it. The genesis of man's salvation lies in the love and mercy of God (Ephesians 2:4 f). But love is more than mercy or compassion; it is active and identifies itself with its object. The love of the heavenly Father over the return of His wandering children is beautifully set forth in the parable of the Prodigal Son (Luke 15:1–32). Nor should the fact be overlooked that God loves not only the whole world, but each individual in it; it is a special as well as a general love (John 3:16, "whosoever"; Galatians 2:20, "loved me, and gave himself up for me").

2. Manifestations of God's Love:

God's love is manifested by providing for the physical, mental, moral and spiritual needs of His people (Isaiah 48:14,Isaiah 48:20,Isaiah 48:21; Isaiah 62:9–12; Isaiah 63:3,Isaiah 63:12). In these Scriptures God is seen manifesting His power in behalf His people in the time of their wilderness journeying and their captivity. He led them, fed and clothed them, guided them and protected them from all their enemies. His love was again shown in feeling with His people, their sorrows and afflictions (Isaiah 63:9); He suffered in their affliction, their interests were His; He was not their adversary but their friend, even though it might have seemed to them as if He either had brought on them their suffering or did not care about it. Nor did He ever forget them for a moment during all their trials. They thought He did; they said, "God hath forgotten us," "He hath forgotten to be gracious"; but no; a mother might forget her child that she should not have compassion on it, but God would never forget His people. How could He? Had He not graven them upon the palms of His hands (Isaiah 49:15 f)? Rather than His love being absent in the chastisement of His people, the chastisement itself was often a proof of the presence of the Divine love, "for whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth" (Hebrews 12:6–11). Loving reproof and chastisement are necessary oftentimes for growth in holiness and righteousness. Our redemption from sin is to be attributed to God's wondrous love; "Thou hast in love to my soul delivered it from the pit of corruption; for thou hast cast all my sins behind thy back" (Isaiah 38:17; compare Psalms 50:21; Psalms 90:8). Ephesians 2:4 f sets forth in a wonderful way how our entire salvation springs forth from the mercy and love of God; "But God, being rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us, even when we were dead through our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ," etc. It is because of the love of the Father that we are granted a place in the heavenly kingdom (Ephesians 2:6–8). But the supreme manifestation of the love of God, as set forth in the Scripture, is that expressed in the gift of His only-begotten Son to die for the sins of the world (John 3:16; Romans 5:6–8; 1 John 4:9 f), and through whom the sinful and sinning but repentant sons of men are taken into the family of God, and receive the adoption of sons (1 John 3:1 f; Galatians 4:4–6). From this wonderful love of God in Christ Jesus nothing in heaven or earth or hell, created or uncreated or to be created, shall be able to separate us (Romans 8:37 f).

III. The Love of Man.

1. Source of Man's Love:

Whatever love there is in man, whether it be toward God or toward his fellowman, has its source in God--"Love is of God; and every one that loveth is begotten of God, and knoweth God. He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love" (1 John 4:7 f); "We love, because he first loved us" (1 John 4:19). Trench, in speaking of agape, says it is a word born within the bosom of revealed religion. Heathen writers do not use it at all, their nearest approach to it being philanthropia or philadelphia--the love betweeen those of the same blood. Love in the heart of man is the offspring of the love of God. Only the regenerated heart can truly love as God loves; to this higher form of love the unregenerate can lay no claim (1 John 4:7,John 4:19,John 4:21; John 2:7–11; John 3:10; John 4:11 f). The regenerate man is able to see his fellow-man as God sees him, value him as God values him, not so much because of what he is by reason of his sin and unloveliness, but because of what, through Christ, he may become; he sees man's intrinsic worth and possibility in Christ (2 Corinthians 5:14–17). This love is also created in the heart of man by the Holy Ghost (Romans 5:5), and is a fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22). It is also stimulated by the example of the Lord Jesus Christ, who, more than anyone else, manifested to the world the spirit and nature of true love (John 13:34; John 15:12; Galatians 2:20; Ephesians 5:25–27; 1 John 4:9 f).

2. Objects of Man's Love:

God must be the first and supreme object of man's love; He must be loved with all the heart, mind, soul and strength (Matthew 22:37 Mark 12:29–34). In this last passage the exhortation to supreme love to God is connected with the doctrine of the unity of God (Deuteronomy 6:4 f)--inasmuch as the Divine Being is one and indivisible, so must our love to Him be undivided. Our love to God is shown in the keeping of His commandments (Exodus 20:6; 1 John 5:3; 2 John 1:6). Love is here set forth as more than a mere affection or sentiment; it is something that manifests itself, not only in obedience to known Divine commands, but also in a protecting and defense of them, and a seeking to know more and more of the will of God in order to express love for God in further obedience (compare Deuteronomy 10:12). Those who love God will hate evil and all forms of worldliness, as expressed in the avoidance of the lust of the eyes, the lust of the flesh and the pride of life (Psalms 97:10; 1 John 2:15–17). Whatever there may be in his surroundings that would draw the soul away from God and righteousness, that the child of God will avoid. Christ, being God, also claims the first place in our affections. He is to be chosen before father or mother, parent, or child, brother or sister, or friend (Matthew 10:35–38; Luke 14:26). The word "hate" in these passages does not mean to hate in the sense in which we use the word today. It is used in the sense in which Jacob is said to have "hated" Leah (Genesis 29:31), that is, he loved her less than Rachel; "He loved also Rachel more than Leah" (Genesis 29:30). To love Christ supremely is the test of true discipleship (Luke 14:26), and is an unfailing mark of the elect (1 Peter 1:8). We prove that we are really God's children by thus loving His Son (John 8:42). Absence of such love means, finally, eternal separation (1 Corinthians 16:22).

Man must love his fellow-man also. Love for the brotherhood is a natural consequence of the love of the fatherhood; for "In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother" (1 John 3:10). For a man to say "I love God" and yet hate his fellowman is to brand himself as "a liar" (1 John 4:20); "He that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, cannot love God whom he hath not seen" (1 John 4:20); he that loveth God will love his brother also (1 John 4:21). The degree in which we are to love our fellow-man is "as thyself" (Matthew 22:39), according to the strict observance of law. Christ set before His followers a much higher example than that, however. According to the teaching of Jesus we are to supersede this standard: "A new commandment I give unto you, that ye love one another; even as I have loved you, that ye also love one another" (John 13:34). The exhibition of love of this character toward our fellow-man is the badge of true discipleship. It may be called the sum total of our duty toward our fellow-man, for "Love worketh no ill to his neighbor: love therefore is the fulfillment of the law"; "for he that loveth his neighbor hath fulfilled the law" (Romans 13:8,Romans 13:10). The qualities which should characterize the love which we are to manifest toward our fellow-men are beautifully set forth in 1 Corinthians 13:1–13. It is patient and without envy; it is not proud or self-elated, neither does it behave discourteously; it does not cherish evil, but keeps good account of the good; it rejoices not at the downfall of an enemy or competitor, but gladly hails his success; it is hopeful, trustful and forbearing--for such there is no law, for they need none; they have fulfilled the law.

Nor should it be overlooked that our Lord commanded His children to love their enemies, those who spoke evil of them, and despitefully used them (Matthew 5:43–48). They were not to render evil for evil, but contrariwise, blessing. The love of the disciple of Christ must manifest itself in supplying the necessities, not of our friends only (1 John 3:16–18), but also of our enemies (Romans 12:20 f).

Our love should be "without hypocrisy" (Romans 12:9); there should be no pretense about it; it should not be a thing of mere word or tongue, but a real experience manifesting itself in deed and truth (1 John 3:18). True love will find its expression in service to man: "Through love be servants one to another" (Galatians 5:13). What more wonderful illustration can be found of ministering love than that set forth by our Lord in the ministry of foot-washing as found in John 13:1–38? Love bears the infirmities of the weak, does not please itself, but seeks the welfare of others (Romans 15:1–3; Philippians 2:21; Galatians 6:2; 1 Corinthians 10:24); it surrenders things which may be innocent in themselves but which nevertheless may become a stumbling-block to others (Romans 14:15,Romans 14:21); it gladly forgives injuries (Ephesians 4:32), and gives the place of honor to another (Romans 12:10). What, then, is more vital than to possess such love? It is the fulfillment of the royal law (James 2:8), and is to be put above everything else (Colossians 3:14); it is the binder that holds all the other graces of the Christian life in place (Colossians 3:14); by the possession of such love we know that we have passed from death unto life (1 John 3:14), and it is the supreme test of our abiding in God and God in us (1 John 4:12,John 4:16).

William Evans

Love, Brotherly

See BROTHERLY LOVE.

Love-Feast

luv'-fest.

See AGAPE.

Lovely

luv'-li ('ahabh, 'ahebh; prosphiles): "Lovely" occurs only 4 times. In 2 Samuel 1:23 it is the translation of 'ahebh, "to be loved" ("Saul and Jonathan were lovely and pleasant (the King James Version margin "sweet") in their lives"), where it seems to mean "loving" or "lovable." Two other words are so translated in the Old Testament: machmadch, "desire" a "desirable thing" (Song of Songs 5:16, "He is altogether lovely," that is, "lovable," "to be desired," literally, "all of him lovableness," or "desirableness"); `aghabhim "loves," or "charms" (Ezekiel 33:32, "Thou art unto them as a very lovely song," the King James Version margin "a song of loves," the Revised Version margin "a love-song"; in 33:31 the same word is translated "much love," the King James Version margin "They make loves or jests"); in Philippians 4:8 we have prosphiles, "very lovely," or "lovable," "whatsoever things are lovely."

W. L. Walker

Lover

luv'-er ('ohebh, 'ahebh): In the Old Testament 'ohebh, from 'ahebh, "to love," is sometimes "lover" in the sense of "friend," in the older English sense of the word (1 Kings 5:1, "Hiram was ever a lover of David"; Psalms 38:11; Psalms 88:18; Lamentations 1:2); more frequently it has the meaning of "lover" in the special sense, sometimes in the evil sense of the word (Jeremiah 22:20,Jeremiah 22:22; Jeremiah 30:14; Ezekiel 16:33,Ezekiel 16:36 f, etc.; Hosea 2:5,Hosea 2:7,Hosea 2:10, etc.); `aghabh, "to love" (Jeremiah 4:30), rea`, "companion" (Jeremiah 3:1), and ahabhim, "loves" (Hosea 8:9), are also translated "lovers" in this sense.

In the New Testament the simple word "lover" does not occur, but we have various compound words, philotheos "lover of God" (2 Timothy 3:4); philagathos, "lover of good," and philoxenos, "lover of hospitality" (Titus 1:8); philautos, "lover of self" (2 Timothy 3:2); philedonos, "lover of pleasure" (2 Timothy 3:4).

In the Revised Version (British and American) we have, for "a lover of hospitality" (Titus 1:8), "given to"; for "covetous" (Luke 16:14; 2 Timothy 3:2), "lovers of money"; for "not covetous" (1 Timothy 3:3), "no lover of money"; for "despisers of them that are good" (2 Timothy 3:3), "no lovers of good."

W. L. Walker

Loves

luvz (Psalms 45:1, title).

See PSALMS.

Lovingkindness

luv-ing-kind'-nes (hecedh): "Lovingkindness" in the King James Version always represents this word (30 times), but of hecedh there are many other renderings, e.g. "mercy" (frequently), "kindness" (38), "goodness" (12). The word is derived from chacadh, meaning, perhaps, "to bend or bow oneself," "to incline oneself"; hence, "to be gracious or merciful." the English Revised Version has not many changes, but in the American Standard Revised Version "lovingkindness" is invariably employed when checedh is used of God, and, as a rule, "kindness" when it is used of man, as in Genesis 21:23; Judges 1:24 (the King James Version "mercy," the Revised Version (British and American) "deal kindly"); Ruth 3:10; 2 Chronicles 32:32; 2 Chronicles 35:26 (the King James Version "goodness,"'); margin "Hebrew: kindness" the Revised Version (British and American) "good deeds"); Job 6:14, etc. Of the uses of the word as on man's part toward God, the only occurrences are: Jeremiah 2:2, "I remember for thee the kindness of thy youth, the love of thine espousals," etc.; Hosea 6:4,Hosea 6:6, "Your goodness (the Revised Version margin "or kindness") is as a morning cloud," "I desire goodness (the King James Version "mercy," the Revised Version margin "Kindness"), and not sacrifice," which last passage may denote kindness as toward man.

When used of God checedh denotes, in general, "the Divine Love condescending to His creatures, more especially to sinners, in unmerited kindness" (Delitzsch). It is frequency associated with forgiveness, and is practically equivalent to "mercy" or "mercifulness" (Exodus 20:6), "showing lovingkindness (the English Revised Version "mercy") unto thousands of them that love me"; Exodus 34:6 f, "slow to anger, and abundant in lovingkindness (the English Revised Version "plenteous in mercy")"; (34:7) "keeping lovingkindness (the English Revised Version "mercy") for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin" (compare Numbers 14:18); Micah 7:18, "He retaineth not his anger for ever, because he delighteth in lovingkindness" (the English Revised Version "mercy"). This quality in Yahweh was one by which He sought to bind His people to Himself. It is greatly magnified in the Old Testament, highly extolled and gloried in, in many of the psalms (Ps 136 has the constant refrain, "For his lovingkindness endureth forever"). In Deuteronomy 7:12 it is associated with the covenant, and in 2 Samuel 7:15 with the covenant with David (compare Isaiah 55:3, etc.). It was something that could always be relied on.

Being such an essential and distinctive quality of God, the prophets taught that it should also characterize His people. It is part of the Divine requirement in Micah 6:8, "to love kindness" (compare Zechariah 7:9, "Show kindness and compassion every man to his brother"). The want of it in the nation was a cause of Yahweh's controversy with them, e.g. Hosea 4:1, "There is no truth, nor goodness (checedh) (the King James Version and the English Revised Version "mercy"), nor knowledge of God in the land"; Hosea 12:6, "Therefore turn thou to thy God: keep kindness (the King James Version and the English Revised Version "mercy") and justice, and wait for thy God continually." Cheyne (Encyclopedia Biblica) regards [~checedh as denoting paternal affection on God's part, answered by filial and loyal affection and brotherly love on man's part (philadelphia in the New Testament).

The word "lovingkindness" does not occur in the New Testament, but as its equivalents we have such terms as "mercy" "goodness," "kindness," "brotherly love" (see special articles).

W. L. Walker

Low Country

See SHEPHELAH.

Lowland

lo'-land (shephelah; compare Arabic sufalat, "the lowest part"): The western part of Palestine, including the maritime plain and the foothills. There has been an attempt to restrict the term to the foothills, at least as far as the more ancient documents are concerned, but there can be little doubt that the maritime plain should be included. the Revised Version (British and American) has "lowland" throughout for shephelah, while the King James Version has "low country" (2 Chronicles 26:10; 2 Chronicles 28:18), "low plains" (1 Chronicles 27:28; 2 Chronicles 9:27), "plain" (Jeremiah 17:26; Obadiah 1:19; Zechariah 7:7), "vale" or "valley" (Deuteronomy 1:7; Joshua 9:1; Joshua 10:40).

See COUNTRY; SHEPHELAH.

Alfred Ely Day

Lozon

lo'-zon (Lozon): Head of a family of Solomon's servants (1 Esdras 5:33); called "Darkon" in Ezra 2:56; Nehemiah 7:58.

Lubim

lu'-bim (lubhim): A people mentioned in the Old Testament (2 Chronicles 12:3; 2 Chronicles 16:8; Daniel 11:43; Nahum 3:9). In all these cases the word is translated in the King James Version "Libyans"; in the Revised Version (British and American) only in Daniel 11:43. The people so named had their seat in North Africa, West of Egypt (compare Acts 2:10, "the parts of Libya about Cyrene"). See LIBYA. On three different occasions the Libyans invaded Egypt, and at length, in the 10th century BC, succeeded in founding an Egyptian dynasty under SHISHAK (which see).

Lucas

lu'-kas, loo'-kas. In Philemon 1:24 the King James Version, for "Luke" (Revised Version).

Lucifer

lu'-si-fer, loo'-si-fer: The morning star, an epithet of the planet Venus.

See ASTROLOGY, 11.