My hope in this article is to demonstrate that Psalm 1 was written as a meditation on the personages of Abraham and Lot. The Psalmist’s purpose in opening with such a thought poises the reader to consider every subsequent Psalm in like fashion: a meditation on the Law. In this way, Psalm 1 serves as a rubric for the rest of the Psalter, which is composed of five books, like the Law. This opening Psalm encourages meditation on the Law day and night, and the Psalter’s most lengthy meditation (Psalm 119) expresses a deep love relationship with the Law. Finally, I hope to draw a line from the Psalm to its fulfillment in Jesus Christ.

Let us first consider the Genesis narratives of Abraham and Lot. Within Genesis, the first book of the Law, Moses places these two narratives side by side in such a way that contrasting them is unavoidable.^[1] As each narrative unfolds, we find both parallels between Heaven’s visit to Abraham and its visit to Lot as well as notable contrasts between the two. Both men are visited by heavenly emissaries, yet Abraham is visited in “the heat of the day” while Lot is visited “in the evening” (Gen 18:1; 19:1). The seating locations of each man are noted: Abraham is sitting near trees “at the door of his tent,” while Lot is “sitting in the gate of Sodom” (18:1; 19:1). Their greetings to heaven’s delegates are also detailed: both Abraham and Lot rise to meet the men and bow to the ground, but Abraham runs to them (18:2; 19:1). Abraham seems to have some spiritual comprehension of these men’s identities while Lot does not (18:3; 19:2). The order of their personal households is observed: Abraham demonstrates a commanding presence in his abode, directing Sarah and a young man who act quickly whereas Lot’s sons-in-law take his “commanding” presence to be in jest (18:6–7; 19:14). Each of their wives receive judgment by the Lord, though Lot’s wife’s judgment is exponentially worse (18:13–15; 19:26). Finally, the trajectory of their fruitfulness is considered: Abraham’s wife Sarah is promised fruitfulness, while Lot’s wife is turned into a pillar of salt, an antithesis of agricultural fertility (18:10; 19:26).

With each contrast, Moses’ perspective is more clearly articulated. The contrast in time of day that each is visited (Abraham at full sun versus Lot at evening) reminds us of Jesus’ words, “If anyone walks in the day, he does not stumble, because he sees the light of this world. But if anyone walks in the night, he stumbles, because the light is not in him” (Jn 11:9–10). Evening suggests an absence of spiritual light in Sodom. Further, Abraham, who is living in the light, has greater spiritual apprehensionof these men’s identities than Lot. Abraham calls one of them “Lord” and inquires whether he himself has found “favor in his sight” (Gen 18:3). Lot, on the other hand, appears to have entertained angels unaware (see Heb 13:2). Sodom’s “evening” may also suggest that “the sun is going down on this city” as judgment is about to ensue.^[2] Abraham’s location near the trees and sitting at the door of his tent recalls Eden—as though he lives in a tent because he is awaiting reentry into Eden (see Heb 11:9–10). Lot sits at Sodom’s city gate, where the elders meet to decide important judgments (Gen 34:19–24; 2 Sam 15:2–4; Ruth 4:1–12). One of these men has risen to prominence in the city of Man while the other awaits the city whose architect and builder is God.

Let us now consider Psalm 1 in light of these paired narratives. The Psalmist takes up and thoughtfully considers these scenes, intentionally comparing and contrasting them. The first stanza appears to negatively focus on and observe Lot; the second stanza focuses on Abraham; then the Psalmist concludes with his final commentary.

Blessed is the man who walks not in the counsel of the wicked, nor stands in the way of sinners, nor sits in the seat of scoffers (Ps 1:1).

In consideration of the first persona presented with the progression from walking, to standing, to sitting, we observe the three stations in Lot’s relationship with Sodom. First, in “settl[ing] among the cities of the valley,” he “moved his tent as far as Sodom” (Gen 13:12). A tent is suggestive of a sojourning relationship, which is related to walking, which Lot perhaps would have done in seeking Sodom’s amenities from time to time. Second, as Genesis 19 opens, the reader finds Lot living in a permanent dwelling, a “house,” which may be understood as “standing,” in that he’s chosen to take a more permanent dwelling among them. And finally, he’s seen to be “sitting in the gate of Sodom,” suggesting that he’s finally chosen nearly full identity among them, which is akin to sitting “in the seat of scoffers” (19:1–2). His relationship to Sodom has become more entrenched. As noted, “gate sitting” was the place where significant judgments and business transactions took place, suggesting Lot had become a permanent and perhaps even elevated figure in Sodom. This, according to the Psalmist, is the path to be avoided.

But his delight is in the law of the Lord, and on his law he meditates day and night. He is like a tree planted by streams of water that yields its fruit in its season, and its leaf does not wither. In all that he does, he prospers (Ps 1:2–3).

The second persona highlighted is one whose “delight is in the law of the Lord.” This refers to Abraham. Two significant features of God’s promises to Abraham were the “dust of the earth,” and “number[ing] the stars” of the sky, each illustrative of his future descendants (Gen 13:16; 15:5). Notably, one mediation takes place in the day, and the other in the night. Thus, we see Abraham meditating on the promises within God’s Law “day and night.” In addition, Abraham is the first in Scripture to be associated with what is “just,” which is an integral pillar of the Law (Gen 18:19, 25; see Mic 6:8).^[3] Beyond this, Abraham is found by heaven’s ambassadors “by the oaks of Mamre,” and so he is “like a tree” (Gen 18:1). Later, Abraham will plant a tree, as well as purchase a field with several trees (see 21:33; 23:17). Further, it’s within this episode that Abraham and Sarah’s fruitfulness is considered, “I will surely return to you about this time next year, and Sarah your wife shall have a son” (18:10). Sarah’s fruitfulness, although she considered herself “worn out, and [her] lord old,” is particularly notable in the context of the Psalm (18:12; Ps 1:3). Here, then, Abraham “is like a tree planted by streams of water that yields its fruit in its season, and its leaf does not wither.” Though Sarah is past the point of child-bearing, her “leaf does not wither.” She and Abraham also receive Isaac “at the time of which God had spoken,” as “yield[ing] … fruit in its season” suggests (Gen 21:2). “In all that he does, he prospers” describes Abraham’s blessings throughout Genesis, perhaps most particularly seen in Yahweh’s response to him concerning Ishmael’s welfare, “I will make a nation of the son of the slave woman also, because he is your offspring” (21:13).

The wicked are not so, but are like chaff that the wind drives away. Therefore the wicked will not stand in the judgment, nor sinners in the congregation of the righteous; for the Lord knows the way of the righteous, but the way of the wicked will perish (Ps 1:4–6).

Now the Psalmist gives his own judgment. Sodom is reduced to ash, which is “like chaff that the wind drives away” (Ps 1:4). And in contrast to “the wicked,” who “will not stand in the judgment, nor sinners in the congregation of the righteous,” Abraham actually stands in judgment with the Lord over Sodom amid the presence of his angels. Significantly, Abraham enters into influential dialogue, negotiating with Yahweh, whereas the total absence of the Lord’s presence during Heaven’s visit to Sodom is palpable. This suggests that his presence resides with Abraham in a way that it does not with Lot, who only receives the two destroyer angels. Lot is barred from Eden by the cherubim, while Abraham is found in Eden among trees with the Lord. Furthermore, Lot chooses to dwell within another city instead of in the mountain with Abraham, seeming to accept by his own admission his standing outside Yahweh’s inner circle (see Gen 19:17–22). Finally, Lot’s fruitfulness is contrasted with Abraham’s. In addition to his wife perishing like those in Sodom, Lot’s ending is found in a cave where his line tragically divides into two great adversaries of Yahweh’s people. This is a contrast to the worldwide fruitfulness of Abraham’s descendants.

Finally, Psalm 1 can be seen in and through the lens of Christ. In him, a similar story is at play: like Abraham, Christ is the inheritor of a vast estate who sought to rescue his kin, who had abandoned that inheritance for lesser things. Beyond pleading like Abraham, Christ laid down his life on behalf of his kin. The truth only hinted at in Abraham’s dialogue with the Lord comes to full realization in Christ: one righteous may save many unrighteous. While little righteousness was found in Sodom, abundant righteousness was found in Christ, resulting in salvation for many. Unlike Lot, who had to be pulled from Sodom’s grasp, Christ lived among the scoffers but was not one of them. Like Sarah, Jesus became fruitful amid the land of barrenness—even out of the barrenness of death he would “see his offspring” (Is 53:10).

Ultimately, this Psalm displays the intended transition and standing for all mankind in Christ: reigning with God, even above the angels. The author of Hebrews intimates this movement in his recitation of Psalm 8, utilizing a word for “lower” (brachys), in reference to Man’s being created positionally beneath the angels, with the semantic range allowing for “for a little while lower” (Heb 2:7). Paul affirms this elevation of man when he says, “Do you not know that we are to judge angels?” (1 Cor 6:3). This understanding also complements Jesus’ word to his disciples concerning their transition from “servants” to “friends” (Jn 15:15-16). The status of “friend,” which Abraham received in his dialogue with the Lord—even leading to the subservience of angels—is the status to which God calls all his children in Christ.

^[1] I’m grateful for Alastair Roberts first pointing out this comparison in a Theopolis course entitled “Abraham’s Seed.”

^[2] Again, a point gleaned from Alastair’s class noted above.

^[3] I’m grateful for Christopher Kou pointing this out to me.