THE INFLUENCE OF WEALTH.
By G.
NOTHING in this world yields a greater influence in the exposition of real character than the accumulation of wealth. The widely differing dispositions of Abraham and Lot were not manifested until their great property interests were affected. Not until they returned from Egypt to Canaan with great flocks and herds did the contrast of character become so marked as to be deemed worthy of note in sacred history. Then was the submissive, yielding, peace-loving character of Abraham made conspicuous, as also the covetous, selfish, exacting disposition of Lot. The land was all Abraham’s by promise of God. All the right which Lot had was by the sufferance of Abraham; and all the property which Lot had he had gained by virtue of his association with Abraham, and his sharing in God’s special care of His chosen representative. But the time came when their accumulations of cattle made it inconvenient for them to live in one company. “The land was not able to bear them, that they might dwell together; for their substance was great.” Gen. 13:6. The first intimation we have of coming trouble is that “there was strife between the herdmen of Abram’s cattle and the herdmen of Lot’s cattle.” There is a strong inference that Lot himself was disaffected; at least he talked the matter over with Abraham in such a manner as to cause him to reply, “Let there be no strife, I pray thee, between me and thee, and between my herdmen and thy herdmen; for we be brethren.” As before stated, the whole land was Abraham’s by promise, and by right he could have designated which part Lot might occupy. But Abraham was not jealous of his rights. Even “the Canaanite and the Perizzite dwelled in the land,” and he showed no disposition to dispossess them. He was there first of all as a missionary to them. A strife in the church of the God of heaven concerning the wealth of this world would have been a bad example to set before the heathen. Abraham was not worrying about the land which God had promised him. He just left that to the Lord Himself, “being fully persuaded that, what He had promised, He was able also to perform.” Rom. 4:21. His faith made him liberal, magnanimous, toward all; therefore he said to Lot: “Is not the whole land before thee? separate thyself, I pray thee, from me; if thou wilt take the left hand, then I will go to the right; or if thou depart to the right hand, then I will go to the left.” Gen. 13:9. Lot’s selfishness at once grasped the proposition. It seems that there was not even the customary oriental formality of declining that which he intended to accept. He immediately chose what he deemed to be the best for his financial interest. He chose the plain of Jordan, because it was well watered and consequently favorable to stock-raising. There were also populous cities, affording a profitable market. From Lot’s ungrateful desire to have the best in preference to his benefactor, from the nature of his choice and the reason for it, it is evident that whatever of missionary spirit he may have possessed when he came to Canaan had passed away with his increase of wealth. In such a condition he could not expect to wield a very strong influence over the people excepting in a business way. He could not expect that his family would resist the temptations of gay, pleasure-seeking city life, to which they were gradually subjected. As soon as Lot was separated from Abraham, the Lord appeared unto His faithful, trusting servant again. The promise of a numerous seed and of great inheritance in the earth was repeated, and Abraham continued to dwell in his tents. “By faith he sojourned in the land of promise, as in a strange country, dwelling in tabernacles with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him of the same promise.” Heb. 11:9. His wealth did not turn his head from the main purpose of his sojourn, namely, that of exemplifying the truth of God before the heathen. He did not seek a home in any of the cities corrupted by the evil influences of worldly customs and heathen practises; “for he looked for a city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God.” Verse 10. Abraham maintained his faith, and because of his unselfish use of the means entrusted to him, he was protected in his possession of it all his life, and passed it over to his son. How different the experience of Lot! There was no promise to him, either of land or protection. He went a way of his own choosing. In his quest for more wealth, he too sought a country, but it was a country that promised only worldly gain. He too sought a city, but it was a city which, in great emergency, had no “foundations.” He laid up treasure in the earth, and thieves came and took it all away, together with himself and family. Then Abraham had to take his men and go a long journey to rescue him. But Lot did not learn even by this experience that the things which give the greatest promise of material gain do not yield the true riches. So when the judgment came upon Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities of the plain, his property was all included. He was not given time to take any of it away. Instead of following the example of Abraham, and dwelling in tents away from the allurements of vice, he occupied a house in the city of Sodom itself. His children, excepting two, were married to Sodomites, and his wife was absorbed in her home and surroundings. Even Lot himself had to be plucked as a brand from the burning, by the angels of God, and urged to flee for his life. The influence of wealth depends solely upon the use that is made of it. Abraham’s wealth was a blessing to others. He used it to further the interests of the cause of God, and in the support of those who joined themselves to him in the common interest. But Lot’s wealth was used for the purpose of gaining for himself more perishable wealth. Abraham’s property was identified with the interest of the cause of salvation, and therefore came under the protection of God. Lot’s property was identified with the cities of the plain, therefore it perished with them. The influence of Abraham’s wealth was felt in the communities where he lived in honor of the true God and the weaning of souls from idolatry. The influence of Lot’s prosperity did not turn a single soul from the wickedness prevalent in his field of labor. Indeed, most of those who went in with him were left in the awful ruin of his chosen abode. The responsibilities of wealth are very great, and8 (488)few are able to bear them. O, use wisely what God gives you; for there will be a strict accounting in the day of final reckoning. Hence the wisdom of the Saviour’s advice to lay up our treasure in heaven, where no emergency can deprive us of it. And being only a trust reposed by Him, He, too, can have His own when He calls for it.