Genesis Vol 3.pdf - College Press

,
LOT’S LAST DAYS 19:1-38
had no sons, only daughters, and the reference in v. 12 is
to the soils of his married daughters; (2) that v. 12 had
reference to sons-in-law whom Lot regarded as sons. How
can this be clarified in the light of v. 14, ccsons-in-law, who
married his daughters,” marginal rendering, “were to
marry,” hence only prospective sons-in-law? Rashi holds
that there were two sets of sons-in-law; Ibn Ezra also
explains that other sons-in-law are intended, namely,
married to daughters who had died, as supported by the
phrase, “thy two daughters that we beye,” which implies
that there were others who were no longer here, Le., no
longer alive. (See SC, 95). Speiser points up the am-
biguity of this phrase, “two daughters that are here,” mean-
ing, literally, “within reach, present, at hand,” which, he
says “could mean either pledged but still at home, or un-
attached altogether” (EG, 140). (KD, COPT, 234) : V.
15 “refers not to the daughters who were still in the
father’s house, as distinguished from those who were
married, but his wife and two daughters who were to be
found with him in the house, in distinction from the bride-
grooms, who also belonged to him, but were not yet living
with him, and who had received his summons in scorn,
because in their carnal security they did not believe in any
judgment of God (Luke 17:28-29). If Lot had married
daughters, he would undoubtedly have called upon them
to escape along with their husbands, his sons-in-law.”
‘There need be no significant dilemma here: as stated
(SIBG, 242) : “either Lot’s virgin-daughters had been only
betrothed to them [his sons-in-law,.v. 141, or Lot had
other daughters who perished in the flames.” Lange
(CDHCG, 438) : “We may add that there is no intimation
that Lot had warned married daughters to rise up.” The
consensus seems to be that the two virgin daughters (v. 8)
who were with Lot in his house, and who later escaped,
were about to be married to men of Sodom.
351