Have you ever heard of the theory of the “butterfly effect”?
The butterfly effect is a hypothetical illustration of the sensitive dependence on initial conditions found in chaos theory. It’s a mathematical theory that attempts to explain the large-scale results of minor rounding errors. The butterfly effect illustrates how something small can have considerable repercussions, like if a butterfly flaps its wings in Hong Kong and causes a tornado in Dallas, Texas.
I’m not sure a butterfly has that power, but the theory makes sense. Our lives experience this “butterfly effect” as well. We make seemingly small choices, but they eventually produce considerable consequences. Think of losing weight: small changes add up. That’s the “butterfly effect.”
As we have seen in our ongoing study of Genesis, Abram also made some choices. Like anyone else, these choices added up to waves of consequences. Today, we will see the next series of choices in Abram’s life in Genesis 13:1-13.
1So Abram went up from Egypt to the Negev, with his wife and everything he had, and Lot went with him. 2 Abram had become very wealthy in livestock and in silver and gold.
Genesis 13:1-13, New International Version
3 From the Negev he went from place to place until he came to Bethel, to the place between Bethel and Ai where his tent had been earlier 4 and where he had first built an altar. There Abram called on the name of the Lord.
5 Now Lot, who was moving about with Abram, also had flocks and herds and tents. 6 But the land could not support them while they stayed together, for their possessions were so great that they were not able to stay together. 7 And quarreling arose between Abram’s herders and Lot’s. The Canaanites and Perizzites were also living in the land at that time.
8 So Abram said to Lot, “Let’s not have any quarreling between you and me, or between your herders and mine, for we are close relatives. 9 Is not the whole land before you? Let’s part company. If you go to the left, I’ll go to the right; if you go to the right, I’ll go to the left.”
10 Lot looked around and saw that the whole plain of the Jordan toward Zoar was well watered, like the garden of the Lord, like the land of Egypt. (This was before the Lord destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah.) 11 So Lot chose for himself the whole plain of the Jordan and set out toward the east. The two men parted company: 12 Abram lived in the land of Canaan, while Lot lived among the cities of the plain and pitched his tents near Sodom. 13 Now the people of Sodom were wicked and were sinning greatly against the Lord.
What was the significance of returning to Bethel? This was where Abram built an altar after his journey from Ur. It makes sense that he would return to where he had left the Lord’s presence. Abram’s return to Bethel brought a man who learned some lessons about trusting God.
Abram’s story of leaving and returning is like the story I heard of a little old couple. The wife, sitting on her side of the truck, asked her husband, “Honey, do you remember when I used to sit over there next to you and cuddle up as we’d drive?” The husband, barely able to see over the steering wheel, kept his eyes forward as he smiled and asked, “Who moved?”
It’s always important to remember who left Whom. Did the Lord leave Abram? No, of course not. But Abram had walked from the path God told him to go. Here, however, Abram chose to return to God.
In the meantime, Lot, Abram’s nephew, had also become wealthy. It wasn’t Lot’s ingenuity but his proximity to Abram. Abram’s blessing “spilled over” to Lot.
But soon, a practical problem emerged: the land could not support them both.
So, in verse 8, Abram offers a solution: divide the land between them. After sizing up the land, Lot chooses the better part (verse 10). While it may not been humble, it certainly made sense. Abram was promised by the Lord to be blessed. Lot was blessed because of his proximity to Abram. If Lot were to separate from Abram, trying to get some advantage (for survival) made sense.
In response, Abram picked up his stuff and went the other way. Verse 11 tells us Lot’s choice, and he heads “East.” It is not a good sign in the Old Testament to go East.
In Genesis 19:37–38, Lot is shown to be the father of the Ammonites and the Moabites. Why does that matter? In our text here (Genesis 13), Abram is about to hand the Promised Land over to the same people who, in the author’s day (Moses) and throughout Israel’s history, were the primary obstacle to fulfilling the promise. Those catastrophes unfolded as a result of this pragmatic solution to the problem of having too much wealth and too few resources.
The promise of God seems to teeter on the whim of the father of the Moabites. But, as the narrative shows, Lot chose to go east, so Abram remained in the land. Thus, the Lord’s promise was secure despite Abram’s passivity.
There’s also some stated foreshadowing regarding the impending destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. Lot’s choice to pitch his tent near Sodom is fraught with its “butterfly effect.” We must be mindful of our choices and consider the consequences lest we find ourselves in the tornado of pitching our tent near Sodom.
Are you looking for your 2025 Calendars? Perhaps you’re looking for creative stationery, envelopes, or games to play during the holiday breaks. If so, please consider my sponsor, Calendars.com. If you use the link below (or at the right), you’ll get special discounts, and I will receive a small commission, which I use to maintain this website. Thank you, Calendars.com, for sponsoring! And thank YOU for using them and helping me!
Life Meets Theology 