Allah the Exalted said: << قال إن فيها لوطا قالوا نحن أعلم بمن فيها لننجينه وأهله إلا امرأته كانت من الغابرين >

This is in the accusative case because it is the name of deferred, yes. That is, the messengers. His statement: This is a superlative noun. Where is the one being compared to? What does "min" mean? .... The word appears to be a superlative noun, and if it is a superlative noun, the one being compared to is certainly ... Ibrahim. But what is the basis for that? The basis is that such an expression is used to address those who are intended to be informed of what the speaker knows, as the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) said: Ibrahim (peace and blessings be upon him) said: The Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) said: Is there any doubt regarding the superlative noun here, considering the one being compared and the one being compared to? No. But the meaning is that if there were doubt in Ibrahim, we would be more deserving of it. Just as we do not doubt, Ibrahim does not doubt. So the meaning is: We know better, meaning just as you are knowledgeable, we have knowledge of that. And his statement: includes Lot and others because is a relative pronoun from the forms of generality. With lightening and heaviness. "Two canonical readings,

We will save

نُنَجِّي

from the doubled verb "najja" (to save),

We will save

نُنْجِي

from the augmented verb with hamza from

We will save

أنجَى

, and both are correct and the meaning is the same. And his statement:

We will surely save him

لَنُنَجِيَنَّه

Salvation means rescue from destruction.

We will save him and his family

لننجينه وأهله

is conjoined to the pronoun, and the sentence, as you see in his statement

We will save him

لننجينه

, is affirmed by three affirmers: the implied oath, the lam, and the nun of affirmation. Yes.

and his family, except his wife

وأهله إلا امرأته

Except his wife, which is an exception from his statement:

and his family

وأهله

, and the woman referred to here is the wife.

she was of those who remained [with the evildoers].

كانت من الغابرين

[Al-A'raf 7:83]

the rest in the punishment." And his statement: Do we say that it is a past tense verb stripped of temporality, as we said in several verses such as: ? It has been established for us that in such verses is stripped of temporality.
The student: ...

The Shaykh : A moment. The intended meaning is that her name is described by its predicate. Here, We say: both are possible and there is no contradiction between them. If you wish, say: she was in the knowledge of Allah among those who remained. If you wish, say: she was, meaning she was described as being among those who remained, i.e., those who stayed in the punishment, meaning she was not saved.
The student: ....

The Shaykh : There is no difference if it is said "the wife of so-and-so" ...
The student: The wife of Pharaoh...

The Shaykh : Meaning his wife.
The student:.....

The Shaykh : And the wife of Noah and the wife of Lot require [this rule] if this rule is not contradicted, then it is sound if it is not contradicted.
The student: ...

The Shaykh : He says that the word "woman" is not used to mean "wife" if she differs from her husband in religion, ... but what 'Abd al-Rahman said is that "woman" is used for a wife with agreement in religion, like his saying in the Qur'an regarding Abu Lahab: meaning his wife. Yes. So the meaning is that this rule is not sound. And always, in reality, it appears to a person sometimes that this thing is consistent, and it is hidden from him that it may be contradicted. And in such cases, a person should be cautious and say: "Generally," so that if it is contradicted, there is no flaw in his expression. Yes, he said.
The student: ....

The Shaykh : There is no danger in it if it is in the sense of generality, meaning it means that Ibrahim may not know everyone in it, but Lot addressed them on behalf of Lot, understood? So if we say considering the group, Lot and his people, then there is no barrier to the angels knowing better than Ibrahim, because we do not assert that he knows everyone in it. But if we say the intent is what happened to him or what was objected to, which is his statement that Lot is in it, then it is ... So the meaning is that we know, just as you know.
The student: ...

The Shaykh : But we know better ...