ask ourselves whether our religion is any better than Lot's, which
was second-hand, and was much more imitation of Abram than obedience
to God.

Lot teaches us that material good may tempt and conquer, even after
it has once been overcome. His early life had been heroic; in his
young enthusiasm, he had thrown in his portion with Abram in his
great venture. He had not been thinking of his flocks when he left
Haran. Probably, as I have just said, he was a good deal galvanised
into imitation; but still, he had chosen the better part. But now he
has tired of a pilgrim's life. There are men who cut down the
thorns, and in whom the seed is sown; but thorns are tenacious of
life, and quick growing, and so they spread over the field and choke
the seed. It is easier to take some one bold step than to keep true
through life to its spirit. Youth contemns, but too often middle-age
worships, worldly success. The world tightens its grasp as we grow
older, and Lot and Demas teach us that it is hard to keep for a
lifetime on the heights. Faith, strong and ever renewed by
communion, can do it; nothing else can.

Lot's history teaches what comes of setting the world first, and
God's kingdom second. For one thing, the association with it is sure
to get closer. Lot began with choosing the plain; then he crept a
little nearer, and pitched his tent 'towards' Sodom; next time we
hear of him, he is living in the city, and mixed up inextricably
with its people. The first false step leads on to connections
unforeseen, from which the man would have shrunk in horror, if he
had been told that he would make them. Once on the incline, time and
gravity will settle how far down we go. We shall see, in subsequent
sections, how far Lot's own moral character suffered from his