The Vexation of the Righteous
Joel Van Hoogen
…and delivered righteous Lot, who was oppressed [vexed] by the filthy conduct of the wicked (for that righteous man, dwelling among them, tormented his righteous soul from day to day by seeing and hearing their lawless deeds)… (2 Pet 2:7-8) [1]
Peter's description of Lot’s righteousness comes as a surprise to those who know the Old Testament. Abraham’s intercession for Sodom and Gomorrah brings us the first hint that Lot was indeed a righteous man [2]. Abraham pleads for the deliverance of the cities of the plain upon the security of ten righteous men. As a result of Abraham’s intercession, only Lot and his family are rescued from their destruction. Peter offers a significant contribution to our understanding of Lot. Lot was righteous, and the evidence of his righteousness was discovered in his reaction to the sin of Sodom. Jude pinpoints the sin of Sodom: "...Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them in a similar manner to these, having given themselves over to sexual immorality and gone after strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire” (Jude 1:7).
Ten years ago, the United States Supreme Court ruled in favor of same-sex marriage, stating that a prohibition against such imposes a stigma that is unjust. In the case of Sodom, the disgrace and dishonor of its sin fell not upon the men of Sodom but upon Lot. He bore the stigma in distress and went so far as to vex himself daily over the “filthy conduct” that surrounded him [3]. God has placed barriers against certain sins that usher people and societies into ruin (Rom 1:26, 27). These include the stigma of language, the stigma of social judgment, and the coercion of conscience against an act. God uses righteous people by their vexation at sin to sustain the stigma that restrains that sin. The Scriptures raise this stigma as a guard for the impressionable mind and against the fallen human nature that would be drawn into the perversity of Sodom’s sin wherever suggestion might allow it. Lessen this stigma, and what is, for many, a proclivity for temptation becomes a legitimate course of corruption. And for those who may not even have the proclivity, it now becomes a legitimate possibility of expression.
Ten years after the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court, what should be our sustained response to the government’s endorsement of homosexual unions? It is Lot's reaction to this sin that Peter emphasizes to a church surrounded by the same evil [4]. The sin of Lot’s community was a great source of pain to him. When one lives in the midst of moral compromise, they often become seared and desensitized to sin. The tendency is to come to terms with even the most disappointing expressions of moral failure, to put them out of our minds for the sake of comfort. This is not what Lot did. Instead, we read not only that the sin of Sodom vexed him but also that, unless he should be at ease in its midst, Lot vexed himself before that sin [5]. Lot tormented himself. He didn't let himself become okay with the conduct accepted around him. And he didn't conceal his disapproval. In Genesis 19:9, Lot attempts to dissuade the men of Sodom from sexually forcing themselves upon his guests (angels), and they respond, “This one came in to stay here, and he keeps acting as a judge; now we will deal worse with you than with them.” Reader, take note: Lot is judging. He has been judging their behavior as sin. He has set himself against their conduct directly, and they know it, and they resent it.
Paul and Peter wrote approximately 2,000 years after the destruction of Sodom. They do not reassess the meaning of words or look for a new social construct regarding the sin of their day. The sin of Sodom had long been prevalent in Roman society. It was Nero who eventually beheaded Paul and crucified Peter. Nero married a castrated male named Sporus. The Roman historian Dio Cassius records, “All the Greeks held a celebration in honour of their marriage, uttering all the customary good wishes, even to the extent of praying that legitimate children might be born to them” [6]. Nero at the same time played the role of wife to another male named Phythagoras. Two-thousand years after Lot’s day, Peter saw it just as Lot had in his day, as “filthy wickedness” (KJV). Now 2,000 years further on, the label has not changed, nor has the righteous response.
We should share Lot’s vexation for this sin.
First, we should be vexed because all sin is not equivalent in its wickedness.
Not every sin is of the same order and brings the same level of ruin. Some come at the end of a downward spiral into our fallen natures. In 2 Peter 2:4, Peter connects God's judgment of rebelling angels cast into hell with the judgment that will one day be rendered on the unrighteous (2 Pet 2:9). The word used for hell, Tartarus, describes a place the Greeks considered the deepest portion of hell, a place reserved for the worst offenders. Some sins drive a person, a people, or a nation ever deeper into the consequences of judgment, not only in this life but in the endless hell to come. Peter knew this. Lot may have known this as well.
Second, we should be vexed because the sin of Sodom is particularly consuming.
We are told in Genesis 19:4 that all the men of Sodom gathered at Lot's door, both young and old. This passion had spread to burn within them all. As they came near to break down the door, the angels struck these men with blindness. And yet this blinding judgement did not stop their quest to satiate their lawless desires. “And they struck the men who were at the doorway of the house with blindness, both small and great, so that they became weary trying to find the door” (Gen 19:11).
Human beings are weak and susceptible to suggestion. Given the idea of the acceptability of a behavior, Satan will lead a person steadily towards sins once thought incomprehensible, after which he will intensify their pursuit of sin to press them into a mad desire that knows no moderation.
Third, we should be vexed because the sin of Sodom was particularly coercive.
The men of Sodom crowded Lot’s door, wanting those in Lot's house to facilitate their actions. Lot was vexed because he knew the coercion of this sin. The coerciveness of this sin is demonstrated in the trajectory of its acceptance in our day: an appeal for toleration, then acceptance, then approval, and now the demand that we advocate for it and perhaps even participate in it.
Fourth, we should be vexed because God’s judgment falls on the Sodomite.
The sin of Sodom is more than a matter of self-identification, as is presently understood in the term “homosexual.” The term “homosexual” today is a non-pejorative statement on an individual’s sexual identity. The language used in Scripture to designate those who carry out this sin is far more descriptive. It sets aside the notion of sexual identity and sets before us the understanding of sexual perversion alone [7]. While we may want to separate the sin from the sinner, we cannot do so altogether. The sinner does not go without his sin, and the sin does not go without the sinner. God’s judgment will fall on no one because of a sexual identity; it will fall upon those whose conduct determines what they are [8].
Fifth, we should be vexed because judgment fell and will fall upon the ungodly.
Lot saw that judgment came. God was establishing a precedent: “…turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah into ashes, condemned them to destruction, making them an example to those who afterward would live ungodly” (2 Pet 2:6). The night the Supreme Court ruled in favor of same-sex marriage, the White House was bathed in the light of the rainbow. It was an expression of approval and identity, at the people's house, with this sin. The rainbow God showed to Noah was a sign of promise that God would never again destroy the earth with a flood of water. Scripture teaches us that one day God will, through Jesus Christ, destroy the earth, not with water but with fire. Today we live under the rainbow of God's promise. When the ancient warrior came home from the battle, he would hang his bow upside down on a hook. Today the bow of the warrior God is hung in the heavens. It lets us know that judgment has been suspended. Now God holds out mercy and grace. But that hung bow also reminds us that the Judge will one day take it up again to pour out fire on the earth. Be vexed!
Sixth, we should be vexed into interceding for the Sodomite.
It is wonderful to remember Abraham’s intercession (Gen 18). He had been visited by God in a Theophany. He was promised, with Sarah, the child Isaac. He interceded with God face-to-face for what was of concern to him. What was it? Petition for a permanent holding of land? Petition for the defeat of his enemies? Petition for health, wealth, or power? No, Abraham interceded for Sodom and Gomorrah! He pleaded for the deliverance of the Sodomites despite their sin [9]. These two things can live in one heart – a direct irritation by and torment over wickedness, and a desire for the wicked to turn from their sins. God says, “‘As I live,’ says the Lord God, ‘I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live’" (Ezek 33:11). So, true love identifies the sin and the sinner, and what Christ bore in sacrifice (Rom 5:8), we may bear in the agonies of intercession (Ezek 9:4).
A Challenge
The Scriptures prove Lot's righteousness by citing his vexation over Sodom's sin. What else is there for the righteous to do but to follow his example? What other expression could be more loving than to mourn the entrapment into judgment that has come upon our neighbors, our friends, our fellow citizens, and our land and then, out of that vexation, to gain ground upon which to intercede on their behalf?
Joel Van Hoogen - Church Partnership Evangelism - Boise, Idaho
[1] Scripture quotations will be in the New King James unless otherwise noted.
[2] We must understand that the righteousness of Lot was acquired in the same manner as that of Abraham. It came to them both by faith (Rom 4:2-3). Though Scripture clearly attests to their moral frailty, it also declares them among the righteous.
[3] ἀσελγείᾳ translated as “filthy conduct” in the NKJV, may be translated as “licentiousness” or “wantonness” (Strongs G766).
[4] William Barclay points out the widespread nature of sexual immorality in the days of Paul and Peter, noting that 14 of the first 15 Roman emperors were homosexuals. William Barclay, The Daily Study Bible, “The Letter to the Romans”, (Edinburgh, St. Andrew Press, 1972) 25. As such, we must recognize that the writings of Paul, Peter, and Jude on the topic do not reflect a softening of their attitudes regarding this common conduct, but a willingness to hold it in derision and to stigmatize it before those to whom they wrote.
[5] Βασανίζω, the imperfect active indicative form of this verb, meaning “to torture” or “torment,” expresses a consistent and ongoing action taken by Lot upon himself in the presence of Sodom’s sin.
[6] Cassius Dio, Roman History, ed. Caroline A. F. (Loeb Classical Library, 1914), “pb_LCL176.159,” LoebClassics.com, accessed October 10, 2025, https://www.loebclassics.com/view/dio_cassius-roman_history/1914/pb_LCL176.159.xml?readMode=recto.
[7] 1 Cor. 6:9 uses two terms to describe the actors in a homosexual sex act. One term, μαλακός, identifies a passive, soft, and effete sensualist, while ἀρσενοκοίτης is an active abuser who defiles himself with another. Strongs g3120 and g733.
[8] Here I would emphasize that the term “homosexual” should not be understood as identifying a “who” but rather as identifying a “what.” “Kennedy, that is, treated ‘homosexual’ or ‘gay’ as describing a class of persons, known by a characteristic as immutable and constitutive of identity as race or sex, and thus entitled to a kind of ‘dignity’ in the law; Scalia, dissenting, treated ‘homosexual’ chiefly as descriptive of acts, behaviors, and inclinations—what people do or desire—which the law may condemn or disapprove on moral grounds” [Matthew J. Franck, “The Legacy of Obergefell, Ten Years Later,” Public Discourse, June 26, 2025, https://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2025/06/98289f]. See also the Nashville Statement, Article 7. “WE AFFIRM that self-conception as male or female should be defined by God’s holy purposes in creation and redemption as revealed in Scripture. WE DENY that adopting a homosexual or transgender self-conception is consistent with God’s holy purposes in creation and redemption” [Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, “The Nashville Statement,” CBMW, accessed October 13, 2025, https://cbmw.org/the-nashville-statement/].
[9] It may be argued that Abraham’s prayer was an intercession for the righteous of Sodom (i.e., Lot). However, it would be better to assume that Abraham’s prayer expressed a reasoned defense for the preservation of all in Sodom on the basis of the righteous within it.