Lots At Stake: Why Does Peter Call Lot ‘Righteous’?

Published On: August 25, 2025

Lot offered his virgin daughters to a violent mob. He got drunk and committed incest with them. He pitched his tent toward the wicked city of Sodom and lost nearly everything. Yet the apostle Peter calls him “righteous Lot” not once, but twice (2 Peter 2:7-8).

How can Scripture call someone righteous who made such devastating moral compromises? The puzzling passage has troubled readers for centuries. But the Reformed tradition offers a compelling answer that preserves both God’s holiness and His grace—and provides crucial comfort for struggling believers today.

WHAT PETER ACTUALLY SAYS ABOUT LOT

In 2 Peter 2:7-8, Peter writes God “rescued righteous Lot, greatly distressed by the sensual conduct of the wicked (for as that righteous man lived among them day after day, he was tormenting his righteous soul over their lawless deeds he saw and heard).”

Notice three key details. First, Peter calls Lot “righteous” twice, emphasising this wasn’t a slip of the pen. Second, he describes Lot as “greatly distressed” and “tormenting his righteous soul.” Third, this happens in the context of Peter arguing “the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from trials and to keep the unrighteous under punishment until the day of judgement.”

The Greek word for “righteous” here is dikaios, which primarily refers to covenant faithfulness and right standing before God, not moral perfection. The word “tormenting” (basanizo) indicates intense internal conflict—Lot’s conscience was alive and active, recognising wickedness as wickedness even while he lived in the midst of it.

THE REFORMED ANSWER: TWO KINDS OF RIGHTEOUSNESS

The Reformed tradition resolves this apparent contradiction by distinguishing between two types of righteousness: the righteousness of justification and the righteousness of sanctification.

Lot’s justified status before God was secure. He had responded to God’s call, traveling with his uncle Abraham and participating in the covenant promises. Like Abraham, Lot was justified by faith, not by works (Romans 4:5). His moral failures, however severe, didn’t nullify his standing before God any more than David’s adultery and murder disqualified him from being “a man after God’s own heart.”

The detail about Lot being “tormented” is crucial. Unlike the Sodomites whose consciences were seared, Lot retained moral sensitivity. His internal anguish proved the Holy Spirit was still working in his heart. As John Calvin observed, Lot’s failures actually highlight God’s grace rather than negate his spiritual standing. Even while compromising externally, Lot never became comfortable with wickedness.

This wasn’t moral perfection, but it was genuine faith expressing itself in moral conflict. Lot’s righteousness wasn’t based on his performance but on God’s promise received by faith.

WHY THIS MATTERS TODAY

Understanding Peter’s description of “righteous Lot” carries three vital implications for Christians today.

First, it provides assurance for struggling believers. Many Christians secretly fear that their moral inconsistencies disqualify them from salvation. Lot’s story demonstrates that righteousness before God isn’t based on performance consistency. Even believers who make serious compromises remain justified if they maintain faith in God’s promises. Moral failure doesn’t equal spiritual apostasy.
Second, it helps us understand biblical narrative properly. Scripture consistently presents complex, flawed heroes rather than moral exemplars. The Bible is refreshingly honest about sin while maintaining hope in God’s faithfulness. From Noah’s drunkenness to David’s adultery to Peter’s denials, God’s people struggle with sin throughout their earthly pilgrimage.
Third, it gives us a proper view of sanctification. Spiritual growth is often gradual and inconsistent. Positional righteousness (our standing before God) enables progressive righteousness (our moral transformation) rather than depending on it. God’s faithfulness transcends our unfaithfulness, providing the security needed for genuine growth.

ADDRESSING COMMON CONCERNS

Some worry this teaching promotes moral carelessness. But Lot’s constant torment shows sin still matters deeply. His anguish wasn’t pleasant—it was the appropriate response of a regenerate heart to moral compromise.

Others suggest Peter was simply mistaken about Lot’s character. But this undermines the Bible’s authority and creates more problems than it solves. If apostolic testimony about biblical figures is unreliable, how can we trust any scriptural interpretation?

The Reformed position avoids both extremes. Grace doesn’t excuse sin, but it covers sin while gradually transforming the sinner. Lot’s story shows God’s patience with covenant people who struggle with sanctification.

THE GOSPEL IN LOT’S STORY

Ultimately, Lot’s righteousness points beyond himself to the righteousness of Christ credited to all believers. Just as Lot’s standing before God didn’t depend on his moral consistency, our salvation rests entirely on Christ’s perfect obedience credited to our account.

This is wonderfully encouraging news for anyone who has ever felt the gap between their justified status and their actual behavior. Like Lot, we can be simultaneously righteous in God’s sight and deeply flawed in our daily lives. Our standing depends not on our performance, but on God’s unchanging faithfulness to His covenant promises.

That’s a lot at stake indeed—and it’s all secured by grace through faith, just as it was for righteous Lot.

WHY DOES PETER CALL LOT RIGHTEOUS? RELATED FAQs

Did other New Testament writers besides Peter consider Lot righteous? While Peter is the only New Testament author to explicitly call Lot “righteous,” Jesus referenced Lot’s rescue from Sodom as a pattern for God’s deliverance of the faithful (Luke 17:28-32). Paul’s teaching on imputed righteousness in Romans 4 uses the same Greek terminology Peter applies to Lot. The consistent New Testament pattern suggests Lot’s righteousness was understood within the broader framework of justification by faith.

What did major Reformed scholars say about Lot’s righteousness? John Calvin argued Lot’s righteousness demonstrates how God preserves faith even in the most corrupt environments. Calvin wrote, “the Lord wonderfully sustains His people in the midst of the greatest corruptions.” Martin Luther emphasised Lot’s story proves righteousness comes through faith alone, not moral achievement. Luther stated Lot’s failures “magnify the grace of God rather than diminish it.” Both saw Lot as evidence that imputed righteousness remains secure despite personal moral struggles.
How does Lot’s righteousness compare to Abraham’s righteousness in Scripture? Both Abraham and Lot received righteousness through faith, but their stories highlight different aspects of justification. Abraham’s righteousness is presented as the prototype of justifying faith (Romans 4:16-17), while Lot’s righteousness demonstrates how that same faith can survive in hostile environments and personal failure. Abraham shows faith’s potential; Lot shows faith’s resilience under pressure.

Why didn’t Lot’s compromises in Sodom disqualify him from being called righteous? Reformed theology distinguishes between the ground of righteousness (Christ’s perfect obedience) and the fruit of righteousness (moral transformation). Lot’s righteousness was grounded in God’s covenant promise received by faith, not in his personal moral performance. His compromises were real sins that grieved the Spirit, but they couldn’t nullify his justified status because that status depended on God’s faithfulness, not Lot’s consistency.

Was Lot’s “torment” about Sodom’s wickedness or his own sin? The Greek text specifically states Lot was tormented by “their lawless deeds”—referring to the Sodomites’ behaviour rather than his own failures. This distinction is crucial because it shows Lot maintained moral sensitivity and hadn’t become hardened to sin like his neighbours. However, Reformed scholars note this external torment likely included internal conviction about his own compromises, as the Spirit convicts believers of both righteousness and sin (John 16:8).
How do we reconcile Lot’s righteousness with Genesis showing him making selfish choices? Genesis presents Lot’s moral trajectory honestly—from following Abraham faithfully to gradually compromising through selfish choices. The Reformed interpretation sees this as sanctification’s complex reality rather than evidence against justification. Lot’s early faith remained genuine even as his spiritual discernment declined through worldly entanglements. His story warns believers about compromise’s dangers while demonstrating grace’s security.

Does calling Lot “righteous” mean Christians can live however they want? Absolutely not—this misunderstands both Lot’s experience and Reformed teaching on sanctification. Lot’s compromises brought devastating consequences: loss of wealth, wife, and family integrity. His “torment” shows that sin still matters deeply to justified believers. Reformed theology teaches that true faith inevitably produces good works, even if imperfectly and gradually (Ephesians 2:10).

WHY DOES PETER CALL LOT RIGHTEOUS? OUR RELATED POSTS