And Abram went up out of Egypt, he, and his wife, and all that he had, and Lot with him, into the south.
1. went up out of Egypt ] Cf. Gen 12:10, “went down into Egypt.” Egypt is always regarded as the low-lying country; and Palestine as the high ground.
Lot with him ] Lot was not mentioned in the previous chapter, but it is here implied that Lot had been with Abram in Egypt.
into the South ] i.e. into the Negeb: see note on Gen 12:9. This is a good illustration of the meaning of Negeb. Abram’s journey from Egypt into the Negeb was by a route leading N.E. The English reader, not understanding the technical meaning of “the South,” might suppose that Abram’s journey from Egypt into “the South” would have led in the direction of the Soudan.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Gen 12:10 to Gen 13:2. Abram in Egypt. (J.)
The narrative in this section should be compared with the similar ones in 20, 26. It is repellent to our sense of honour, chivalry, and purity. It is true that Abram’s cowardice is reproved, and that the action of the Egyptian Pharaoh is represented in a more favourable light. On the other hand, Abram, though dismissed from the court, leaves Egypt enriched with great spoil. By a subterfuge he had hoped to save his own life at the cost of his wife’s honour. His cowardly deceit is detected: and his life is not imperilled. Sarai’s honour is spared; and the patriarch withdraws immensely enriched in possessions. This story, doubtless, would not have appeared so sordid to the ancient Israelite as it does to us. Perhaps the cunning, the detection, and the increase of wealth, may have commended the story to the Israelite of old times. Its popularity must account for its re-appearance in 20, 26.
It would be gratifying, if, in this story and in its variants, we were warranted in recognizing under an allegorical form the peril, to which nomad tribes of the Hebrew stock were exposed, of being absorbed among the inhabitants of a civilized community. Such a tribal misadventure might well be commemorated under the imagery of such a story. It is more probable, however, that the story illustrates the Divine protection over the patriarch amid the dangers of a foreign country. God’s goodness, not Abram’s merit, averts the peril.
In the present sequence of patriarchal narratives, this section shews how the fulfilment of the Divine promise is first imperilled through the patriarch’s own failure in courage and faith. The very qualities for which he is renowned, are lacking in the hour of temptation. God’s goodness and grace alone rescue him and his wife. A heathen king of Egypt upholds the universal law of virtue more successfully than the servant of Jehovah. The story reveals that Jehovah causes His will to be felt in Egypt no less than in Palestine. But the moral of the story does not satisfy any Christian standard in its representation either of Jehovah or of the patriarch. The knowledge of God is progressive.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
– Abram and Lot Separate
7. perzy, Perizzi, descendant of Paraz. paraz, leader, or inhabitant of the plain or open country.
10. kkar, circle, border, vale, cake, talent; related: bow, bend, go round, dance. yarden, Jardan, descending. Usually with the article in prose. tsoar, Tsoar, smallness.
18. mamre’, Mamre, fat, strong, ruler. chebron, Chebron, conjunction, confederacy.
Lot has been hitherto kept in association with Abram by the ties of kinmanship. But it becomes gradually manifest that he has an independent interest, and is no longer disposed to follow the fortunes of the chosen of God. In the natural course of things, this under-feeling comes to the surface. Their serfs come into collision; and as Abram makes no claim of authority over Lot, he offers him the choice of a dwelling-place in the land. This issues in a peaceable separation, in which Abram appears to great advantage. The chosen of the Lord is now in the course of providence isolated from all associations of kindred. He stands alone, in a strange land. He again obeys the summons to survey the land promised to him and his seed in perpetuity.
Gen 13:1-4
Went up out of Mizraim. – Egypt is a low-lying valley, out of which the traveler ascends into Arabia Petraea and the hill-country of Kenaan. Abram returns, a wiser and a better man. When called to leave his native land, he had immediately obeyed. Such obedience evinced the existence of the new power of godliness in his breast. But he gets beyond the land of promise into a land of carnality, and out of the way of truth into a way of deceit. Such a course betrays the struggle between moral good and evil which has begun within him. This discovery humbles and vexes him. Self-condemnation and repentance are at work within him. We do not know that all these feelings rise into consciousness, but we have no doubt that their result, in a subdued, sobered, chastened spirit, is here, and will soon manifest itself.
And Lot with him. – Lot accompanied him into Egypt, because he comes with him out of it. The south is so called in respect, not to Egypt, but to the land of promise. It acquired this title before the times of the patriarch, among the Hebrew-speaking tribes inhabiting it. The great riches of Abram consist in cattle and the precious metals. The former is the chief form of wealth in the East. Abrams flocks are mentioned in preparation for the following occurrence. He advances north to the place between Bethel and Ai, and perhaps still further, according to Gen 13:4, to the place of Shekem, where he built the first altar in the land. He now calls on the name of the Lord. The process of contrition in a new heart, has come to its right issue in confession and supplication. The sense of acceptance with God, which he had before experienced in these places of meeting with God, he has now recovered. The spirit of adoption, therefore, speaks within him.
Gen 13:5-7
The collision. Lot now also abounded in the wealth of the East. The two opulent sheiks (elders, heads of houses) cannot dwell together anymore. Their serfs come to strife. The carnal temper comes out among their dependents. Such disputes were unavoidable in the circumstances. Neither party had any title to the land. Landed property was not yet clearly defined or secured by law. The land therefore was in common – wherever anybody availed himself of the best spot for grazing that he could find unoccupied. We can easily understand what facilities and temptations this would offer for the strong to overbear the weak. We meet with many incidental notices of such oppression Gen 21:25; Gen 26:15-22; Exo 2:16-19. The folly and impropriety of quarreling among kinsmen about pasture grounds on the present occasion is enhanced by the circumstance that Abram and Lot are mere strangers among the Kenaanites and the Perizzites, the settled occupants of the country.
Custom had no doubt already given the possessor a prior claim. Abram and Lot were there merely on sufferance, because the country was thinly populated, and many fertile spots were still unoccupied. The Perizzite is generally associated with, and invariably distinguished from, the Kenaanite Gen 15:20; Gen 34:30; Exo 3:8, Exo 3:17. This tribe is not found among the descendants of Kenaan in the table of nations. They stand side by side with them, and seem therefore not to be a subject, but an independent race. They may have been a Shemite clan, roaming over the land before the arrival of the Hamites. They seem to have been by name and custom rather wanderers or nomads than dwellers in the plain or in the villages. They dwelt in the mountains of Judah and Ephraim Jdg 1:4; Jos 17:15. They are noticed even so late as in the time of Ezra Ezr 9:1. The presence of two powerful tribes, independent of each other, was favorable to the quiet and peaceful residence of Abram and Lot, but not certainly to their living at feud with each other.
Gen 13:8-9
The strife among the underlings does not alienate their masters. Abram appeals to the obligations of brotherhood. He proposes to obviate any further difference by yielding to Lot the choice of all the land. The heavenly principle of forbearance evidently holds the supremacy in Abrams breast. He walks in the moral atmosphere of the sermon on the mount Mat 5:28-42.
Gen 13:10-13
Lot accepts the offer of his noble-hearted kinsman. He cannot do otherwise, as he is the companion, while his uncle is the principal. He willingly concedes to Abram his present position, and, after a lingering attendance on his kinsman, retires to take the ground of self-dependence. Outward and earthly motives prevail with him in the selection of his new abode. He is charmed by the well-watered lowlands bordering on the Jordan and its affluents. He is here less liable to a periodical famine, and he roams with his serfs and herds in the direction of Sodom. This town and Amorah (Gomorrah), were still flourishing at the time of Lots arrival. The country in which they stood was of extraordinary beauty and fertility. The River Jordan, one of the sources of which is at Panium, after flowing through the waters of Merom, or the lake Semechonitis (Huleh), falls into the Sea of Galilee or Kinnereth, which is six hundred and fifty-three feet below the level of the Mediterranean, and thence descends into the basin of the Salt Sea, which is now thirteen hundred and sixteen feet beneath the same level, by a winding course of about two hundred miles, over twenty-seven threatening rapids.
This river may well be called the Descender. We do not know on what part of the border of Jordan Lot looked down from the heights about Shekem or Ai, as the country underwent a great change at a later period. But its appearance was then so attractive as to bear comparison with the garden of the Lord and the land of Egypt. The garden of Eden still dwelt in the recollections of men. The fertility of Egypt had been recently witnessed by the two kinsmen. It was a valley fertilized by the overflowing of the Nile, as this valley was by the Jordan and its tributary streams. As thou goest unto Zoar. The origin of this name is given in Gen 19:20-22. It lay probably to the south of the Salt Sea, in the wady Kerak. And Lot journeyed east mqedem. From the hill-country of Shekem or Ai the Jordan lay to the east.
Gen 13:12
The men of Sodom were wicked. – The higher blessing of good society, then, was missing in the choice of Lot. It is probable he was a single man when he parted from Abram, and therefore that he married a woman of Sodom. He has in that case fallen into the snare of matching, or, at all events, mingling with the ungodly. This was the damning sin of the antediluvians Gen 6:1-7. Sinners before the Lord exceedingly. Their country was as the garden of the Lord. But the beauty of the landscape and the superabundance of the luxuries it afforded, did not abate the sinful disposition of the inhabitants. Their moral corruption only broke forth into greater vileness of lust, and more daring defiance of heaven. They sinned exceedingly and before the Lord. Lot had fallen into the very vortex of vice and blasphemy.
Gen 13:14-18
The man chosen of God now stands alone. He has evinced an humble and self-renouncing spirit. This presents a suitable occasion for the Lord to draw near and speak to His servant. His works are re-assuring. The Lord was not yet done with showing him the land. He therefore calls upon him to look northward and southward and eastward and westward. He then promises again to give all the land which he saw, as far as his eye could reach, to him and to his seed forever. Abram is here regarded as the head of a chosen seed, and hence, the bestowment of this fair territory on the race is an actual grant of it to the head of the race. The term forever, for a perpetual possession, means as long as the order of things to which it belongs lasts. The holder of a promise has his duties to perform, and the neglect of these really cancels the obligation to perpetuate the covenant. This is a plain point of equity between parties to a covenant, and regulates all that depends on the personal acts of the covenanter. Thirdly, He announces that He will make his seed as the dust of the earth. This multitude of seed, even when we take the ordinary sense which the form of expression bears in popular use, far transcends the productive powers of the promised land in its utmost extent. Yet to Abram, who was accustomed to the petty tribes that then roved over the pastures of Mesopotamia and Palestine, this disproportion would not be apparent. A people who should fill the land of Canaan, would seem to him innumerable. But we see that the promise begins already to enlarge itself beyond the bounds of the natural seed of Abram. He is again enjoined to walk over his inheritance, and contemplate it in all its length and breadth, with the reiterated assurance that it will be his.
Gen 13:18
Abram obeys the voice of heaven. He moves his tent from the northern station, where he had parted with Lot, and encamps by the oaks of Mamre, an Amorite sheik. He loves the open country, as he is a stranger, and deals in flocks and herds. The oaks, otherwise rendered by Onkelos and the Vulgate plains of Mamre, are said to be in Hebron, a place and town about twenty miles south of Jerusalem, on the way to Beersheba. It is a town of great antiquity, having been built seven years before Zoan (Tanis) in Egypt Num 13:22. It was sometimes called Mamre in Abrams time, from his confederate of that name. It was also named Kiriath Arba, the city of Arba, a great man among the Anakim Jos 15:13-14. But upon being taken by Kaleb it recovered the name of Hebron. It is now el-Khulil (the friend, that is, of God; a designation of Abram). The variety of name indicates variety of masters; first, a Shemite it may be, then the Amorites, then the Hittites Gen. 23, then the Anakim, then Judah, and lastly the Muslims.
A third altar is here built by Abram. His wandering course requires a varying place of worship. It is the Omnipresent One whom he adores. The previous visits of the Lord had completed the restoration of his inward peace, security, and liberty of access to God, which had been disturbed by his descent to Egypt, and the temptation that had overcome him there. He feels himself again at peace with God, and his fortitude is renewed. He grows in spiritual knowledge and practice under the great Teacher.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Gen 13:1-4
Abraham went up out of Egypt
The believer learning from his great enemy
It is an old saying that It is lawful to learn from an enemy.
The patriarch had sojourned in the worlds kingdom, and had learned those solemn lessons which, as it too often happens, only a bitter experience can teach. He returned a sadder, but a wiser man. The believer who has fallen into the worlds snares, or comes dangerously near to them, learns–
I. THAT IT IS NOT SAFE TO LEAVE THE PATHS MARKED OUT BY DIVINE PROVIDENCE.
1. While we are in the path of Providence, we may expect Divine direction.
2. When we leave the paths of Providence, we are thrown upon the resources of our own wisdom and strength, and can only expect failure.
3. Every step we take from the paths of Providence only increases the difficulty of returning.
II. THAT THE FRIENDSHIP OF THE WORLD INVOLVES DEEP SPIRITUAL LOSS. In Abrahams ease–
1. The delicacy of the moral principle was injured.
2. There was actual spiritual loss.
III. THAT THE SOULS SAFETY IS BEST SECURED BY REVISITING, IN LOVING MEMORY, THE SCENES WHERE GOD WAS FIRST FELT AND KNOWN.
1. He is aided by remembering the strength and fervour of his early faith and love.
2. Memory may become a means of grace. It is well for us to look backwards, as well as forwards by the anticipations of hope. What God has done for us in the past is a pledge of what He will do in the future, if we continue faithful to His grace. We may use memory to encourage hope.
IV. THERE MUST BE A FRESH CONSECRATION TO GOD. Abram went at once to Bethel, where at the beginning he had pitched his tent, and built an altar to God. There he called on the name of the Lord. This implies a fresh consecration of himself, and points out the method by which we may recover our spiritual loss. Such a fresh consecration is necessary, for there are no other channels of spiritual blessing, but those by which it first flowed to us. There is no new way of restoration. We must come back to Him who first gave us our faith and made reconciliation. This renewed consecration of ourselves to God involves–
1. The acknowledgment of our sin. It was sin that made, at first, our reconciliation with God necessary, and fresh sin renews the obligation to seek His face.
2. The conviction that propitiation is necessary to obtain the favour of God.
3. The open profession of our faith. (T. H. Leale.)
Abrams return, etc
I. THE RETURN OF ABRAM.
1. Forgiven.
2. Favoured.
II. THE REQUEST OF ABRAM.
1. Forbearing.
2. Foregoing.
III. THE REWARD OF ABRAM.
1. Forgetting the earthly inheritance.
2. Foreshadowing the heavenly inheritance. (W. Adamson.)
Abraham and Lot
I. THE PERFECTNESS OF GODS RESTORING GRACE.
1. God brought him back to Bethel.
2. The effect on Abraham. We find him no longer self-seeking and self-dependent. He asks counsel of God; he defers to others; is meek under provocation; and leaves himself wholly to God.
II. A BEAUTIFUL PICTURE OF A PIOUS RICH MAN. You will observe two things about Abraham as a rich man.
1. His conduct in relation to God.
2. His conduct toward Lot.
1. In regard to God, he worshipped Him in every place (Gen 13:4; Gen 18:1-33). This involves more than at first sight appears. Abraham was living in the midst of idolaters. To worship God was a bold act. It was also a public act. It was one which involved much expense.
2. In regard to Lot. His conduct displays disinterestedness, love to his nephew, and firm faith in God. From this narrative we may learn two subordinate truths–
1. The children of God may come to acquire much worldly property.
2. The saints of God may possess property.
III. THE FOLLY OF SELF-SEEKING. We see this in the case of Lot. (T. G.Horton.)
Lessons
1. Gods saints delay not to follow Gods Providence, opening a way to them from the place of trial.
2. God knoweth how to deliver His fully, that nothing of theirs shall be wanting (Gen 13:2).
3. Weight of riches in the world is sometimes Gods portion given to His.
4. Not possession of wealth, but inordinate affection and abuse of it, is the sin (Gen 13:2).
5. Riches cannot hinder believers from going after God where He calleth them.
6. Saints breathe after their first communion with God, after distractions from it (Gen 13:3).
7. No place contents a gracious heart but where God may be enjoyed.
8. The name of the Lord is that which draweth the hearts of saints from all enjoyments, to delight in it, publish it, and call upon it (Gen 13:4). (G. Hughes, B. D.)
Practical repentance
By retracing his steps and returning to the altar at Bethel, he seems to acknowledge that he should have remained there through the famine in dependence on God. Whoever has attempted a similar practical repentance, visible to his own household and affecting their place of abode or daily occupations, will know how to estimate the candour and courage of Abram. To own that some distinctly marked portion of our life, upon which we entered with great confidence in our own wisdom and capacity, has come to nothing and has betrayed us into reprehensible conduct, is mortifying indeed, To admit that we have erred and to repair our error by returning to our old way and practice, is what few of us have the courage to do. If we have entered on some branch of business or gone into some attractive speculation, or if we have altered our demeanour towards some friend, and if we are finding that we are thereby tempted to doubleness, to equivocation, to injustice, our only hope lies in a candid and straightforward repentance, in a manly and open return to the state of things that existed in happier days and which we should never have abandoned. Sometimes we are aware that a blight began to fall on our spiritual life from a particular date, and we can easily and distinctly trace an unhealthy habit of spirit to a well-marked passage in our outward career; but we shrink from the sacrifice and shame involved in a thoroughgoing restoration of the old state of things. We are always so ready to fancy we have done enough, if we get one heartfelt word of confession uttered; so ready, if we merely turn our faces towards God, to think our restoration complete. Let us make a point of getting through mere beginnings of repentance, mere intention to recover Gods favour and a sound condition of life, and let us return and return till we bow at Gods very altar again, and know that His hand is laid upon us in blessing as at the first. (M. Dods, D. D.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
CHAPTER XIII
Abram and his family return out of Egypt to Canaan, 1, 2.
He revisits Beth-el, and there invokes the Lord, 3, 4.
In consequence of the great increase in the flocks of Abram
and Lot, their herdmen disagree; which obliges the patriarch
and his nephew to separate, 5-9.
Lot being permitted to make his choice of the land, chooses
the plains of Jordan, 10,11,
and pitches his tent near to Sodom, while Abram abides in
Canaan, 12.
Bad character of the people of Sodom, 13.
The Lord renews his promise to Abram, 14-17.
Abram removes to the plains of Mamre, near Hebron, and builds
an altar to the Lord, 18.
NOTES ON CHAP. XIII
Verse 1. Abram went up out of Egypt – into the south.] Probably the south of Canaan, as In leaving Egypt he is said to come from the south, Ge 13:3, for the southern part of the promised land lay north-east of Egypt.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
i.e. Into the southern part of Canaan, from whence he came, Gen 12:9, and which in Scripture is called simply the south, Jos 10:40; 11:16. Otherwise he went rather into the north: but the Scripture being written for the Jews, doth frequently accommodate the names of the quarters of the world to them.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
1. went up . . . southPalestinebeing a highland country, the entrance from Egypt by its southernboundary is a continual ascent.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And Abram went up out of Egypt,…. That country lying low, and so more easy to be watered by the river Nile, as it was, and Canaan being higher; whither he went, but not till the famine in Canaan ceased: he went out of Egypt, as the Jewish p chronologers say, after he had been there three months; but Artapanus q an Heathen writer, says, he stayed there twenty years:
he and his wife, and all that he had; servants and cattle:
and Lot with him: from whence it is clear that he went down with him into Egypt, and it is highly probable had great respect and favour shown him on account of his relation to Abram and Sarai; for it appears by what follows, that he was become very rich: and they all went up
into the south; into the southern part of the land of Canaan, for otherwise they came to the north; for as Egypt lay south with respect to Canaan, Canaan was north from Egypt; but they journeyed to that part of that land which was commonly called the south, either Negeb, as here, or Daroma; [See comments on Zec 7:7].
p Seder Olam Rabba, p. 2. q Apud Euseb. Evangel. Praepar. l. 9. c. 18. p. 420.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Abram, having returned from Egypt to the south of Canaan with his wife and property uninjured, through the gracious protection of God, proceeded with Lot “ according to his journeys ” (lit., with the repeated breaking up of his camp, required by a nomad life; on to break up a tent, to remove, see Exo 12:37) into the neighbourhood of Bethel and Ai, where he had previously encamped and built an altar (Gen 12:8), that he might there call upon the name of the Lord again. That (Gen 13:4) is not a continuation of the relative clause, but a resumption of the main sentence, and therefore corresponds with (Gen 13:3), “ he went…and called upon the name of the Lord there, ” has been correctly concluded by Delitzsch from the repetition of the subject Abram.
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
| Abram’s Removal to Canaan. | B. C. 1918. |
1 And Abram went up out of Egypt, he, and his wife, and all that he had, and Lot with him, into the south. 2 And Abram was very rich in cattle, in silver, and in gold. 3 And he went on his journeys from the south even to Beth-el, unto the place where his tent had been at the beginning, between Beth-el and Hai; 4 Unto the place of the altar, which he had made there at the first: and there Abram called on the name of the LORD.
I. Here is Abram’s return out of Egypt, v. 1. He came himself and brought all his with him back again to Canaan. Note, Though there may be occasion to go sometimes into places of temptation, yet we must hasten out of them as soon as possible. See Ruth i. 6.
II. His wealth: He was very rich, v. 2. He was very heavy, so the Hebrew word signifies; for riches are a burden, and those that will be rich do but load themselves with thick clay, Hab. ii. 6. There is a burden of care in getting them, fear in keeping them, temptation in using them, guilt in abusing them, sorrow in losing them, and a burden of account, at last, to be given up concerning them. Great possessions do but make men heavy and unwieldy. Abram was not only rich in faith and good works, and in the promises, but he was rich in cattle, and in silver and gold. Note, 1. God, in his providence, sometimes makes good men rich men, and teaches them how to abound, as well as how to suffer want. 2. The riches of good men are the fruits of God’s blessing. God has said to Abram, I will bless thee; and that blessing made him rich without sorrow, Prov. x. 22. 3. True piety will very well consist with great prosperity. Though it is hard for a rich man to get to heaven, yet it is not impossible, Mar 10:23; Mar 10:24. Abram was very rich and yet very religious. Nay, as piety is a friend to outward prosperity (1 Tim. iv. 8), so outward prosperity, if well-managed, is an ornament to piety, and furnishes an opportunity of doing so much the more good.
III. His removal to Beth-el, Gen 13:3; Gen 13:4. Thither he went, not only because there he had formerly had his tent, and he was willing to go among his old acquaintance, but because there he had formerly had his altar: and, though the altar was gone (probably he himself having taken it down, when he left the place, lest it should be polluted by the idolatrous Canaanites), yet he came to the place of the altar, either to revive the remembrance of the sweet communion he had had with God in that place, or perhaps to pay the vows he had there made to God when he undertook his journey into Egypt. Long afterwards God sent Jacob to this same place on that errand (ch. xxxv. 1), Go up to Beth-el, where thou vowedst the vow. We have need to be reminded, and should take all occasions to remind ourselves, of our solemn vows; and perhaps the place where they were made may help to bring them afresh to mind, and it may therefore do us good to visit it.
IV. His devotion there. His altar was gone, so that he could not offer sacrifice; but he called on the name of the Lord, as he had done, ch. xii. 8. Note, 1. All God’s people are praying people. You may as soon find a living man without breath as a living Christian without prayer. 2. Those that would approve themselves upright with their God must be constant and persevering in the services of religion. Abram did not leave his religion behind him in Egypt, as many do in their travels. 3. When we cannot do what we would we must make conscience of doing what we can in the acts of devotion. When we want an altar, let us not be wanting in prayer, but, wherever we are, call on the name of the Lord.
Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary
GENESIS – CHAPTER THIRTEEN
Verses 1-4:
On his expulsion from Egypt, Abram returned to the Land of Canaan. He first travelled through the south part of the Land, thence to the central highlands and the place he had first camped on is arrival from Haran. There between Bethel and Hai, he renewed his vows to Jehovah.
Abram’s wealth had increased greatly. This wealth consisted of silver and gold, as well as “cattle,” mikneh (from kana, to acquire by purchase). This term may apply to slaves as well as to livestock, as slaves were considered chattel in the same sense as livestock.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
1. And Abram went up out of Egypt. In the commencement of the chapter, Moses commemorates the goodness of God in protecting Abram; whence it came to pass, that he not only returned in safety, but took with him great wealth. This circumstance is also to be noticed, that when he was leaving Egypt, abounding in cattle and treasures, he was allowed to pursue his journey in peace; for it is surprising that the Egyptians would suffer what Abram had acquired among them, to be transferred elsewhere. Moses next shows that riches proved no sufficient obstacle to prevent Abram from having respect continually to his proposed end, and from moving towards it with unremitting pace. We know how greatly even a moderate share of wealth, hinders many from raising their heads towards heaven; while they who really possess abundance, not only lie torpid in indolence, but are entirely buried in the earth. Wherefore, Moses places the virtue of Abram in contrast with the common vice of others; when he relates that he was not to be prevented by any impediments, from seeking again the land of Canaan. For he might (like many others) have been able to flatter himself with some fair pretext: such as, that since God, from whom he had received extraordinary blessings, had been favorable and kind to him in Egypt, it was right for him to remain there. But he does not forget what had been divinely commanded him; and, therefore, as one unfettered, he hastens to the place whither he is called. Wherefore, the rich are deprived of all excuse, if they are so rooted in the earth, that they do not attend the call of God. Two extremes, however, are here to be guarded against. Many place angelical perfection in poverty; as if it were impossible to cultivate piety and to serve God, unless riches are cast away. Few indeed imitate Crates the Theban, who cast his treasures into the sea; because he did not think that he could be saved unless they were lost. Yet many fanatics repel rich men from the hope of salvation; as if poverty were the only gate of heaven; which yet, sometimes, involves men in more hindrances than riches. But Augustine wisely teaches us, that the rich and poor are collected together in the same inheritance of life; because poor Lazarus was received into the bosom of rich Abraham. On the other hand, we must beware of the opposite evil; lest riches should cast a stumblingblock in our way, or should so burden us, that we should the less readily advance towards the kingdom of heaven.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
ABRAHAMTHE FRIEND OF GOD
Gen 11:10 to Gen 25:10.
ONE week ago we gave this hour to a study in Genesis, our subject being, The Beginnings. The birds-eye view of ten chapters and ten verses brought us to Babel, and impressed upon us the many profitable lessons that come between the record of creation and the report of confusion.
Beginning with the 10th verse of the 11th chapter of Genesis (Gen 11:10), and concluding with the 10th verse of the 25th chapter (Gen 25:10), we have the whole history of Abraham, the friend of God; and while other important persons, such as Sarai, Hagar, Lot, Pharaoh, Abimelech, Isaac, Rebecca and even Melchisedec appear in these chapters, Abraham plays altogether the prominent part, and aside from Melchisedec, the High Priest, is easily the most important person, and the most interesting subject presented in this inspired panorama. It may be of interest to say that Abraham lived midway between Adam and Jesus, and such was his greatness that the Chaldeans, East Indians, Sabeans and Mohammedans all join with the Jew in claiming to be the offspring of Abraham; while it is the Christians proud boast that he is Abrahams spiritual descendant.
It is little wonder that all these contend for a kinship with him whom God deigns to call His friend. The man who is a friend of God is entitled to a large place in history. Fourteen chapters are none too many for his record; and hours spent in analyzing his character and searching for the secrets of his success are hours so employed as to meet the Divine approval.
The problem is how to so set Abrahams history before you as to make it at once easy of comprehension, and yet thoroughly impress its lessons. In trying to solve that question it has seemed best to call attention to
THE CALL AND THE COVENANT.
Now the Lord had said unto Abraham, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy fathers house, unto a land that I will show thee, and I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great, and thou shalt be a blessing; and I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee, and in thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed (Gen 12:1-3).
Did you ever stop to think of the separations involved in this call?
It meant a separation from home. From thy fathers house. How painful that call is, those of us who have passed through it perfectly understand; and yet many of us have gone so short a distance from home, or else have made the greater journey with such extended stops, that we know but little how to sympathize with Abrahams more effective separation from that dear spot. To go from Chaldea to Canaan in that day, from a country with which he was familiar to one he had never seen; and from a people who were his own, to sojourn among strangers, was every whit equal to William Careys departure from England for India. But as plants and flowers have to be taken from the hot-bed into the broad garden that they may best bring forth, so God lifts the subject of His affection from the warm atmosphere of home-life and sets him down in the far field that he may bring forth fruit unto Him; hence, as is written in Hebrews, Abraham had to go out, not knowing whither he went.
This call also involves separation from kindred. And from thy kindred. In Chaldea, Abram had a multitude of relatives, as the 11th chapter fully shows. Upon all of these, save the members of his own house, and Lot, his brothers son, Abram must turn his back. In the process of time the irreligion of Lot will necessitate also a separation from him. In this respect, Abrahams call is in no whit different from that which God is giving the men and women today. You cannot respond to the call of God without separating yourself from all kin who worship at false shrines; and you cannot make the progress you ought and live in intimate relation with so worldly a professor of religion as was Lot.
We may have marvelled at times that Abraham so soon separated himself from Lot, but the real wonder is that the man of God so long retained his hold upon him. No more difficult task was ever undertaken than that of keeping in the line of service a man who, in the lust of his eyes and the purpose of his heart, has pitched his tent toward Sodom. It is worthy of note that so soon as Abraham was separated from Lot, the Lord said unto him,
Lift up now thine eyes and look from the place that thou art, northward and southward, and eastward and westward, for all the land which thou seest, to thee will I give it and to thy seed forever (Gen 13:14-15).
The men of the broadest view in spiritual things, the men upon whom God has put His choicest blessing, have been from time immemorial men who have separated themselves from idolaters and pretenders that they might be the more free to respond to the call of God, and upon such, God has rested His richest favors.
This call also involves separation from the Gentiles. The Gentiles of Chaldea and the Gentiles of Canaan; from the first he was separated by distance and from the second by circumcision. Gods appeal has been and is for a peculiar people, not that they might be queer, but that He might keep them separatedunspotted from the world. God knows, O so well, how few souls there are that can mingle with the unregenerate crowd without losing their testimony and learning to speak the shibboleth of sinners. Peter was a good man; in some respects greater than Abraham; but Peter in that porch-company was a poor witness for Jesus Christ, while his profanity proved the baneful effect of fellowship with Gods enemies. The call to separation, therefore, is none other than the call to salvation, for if any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him, for all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes and the pride of life, is not of the Father but is of the world.
But Gods calls are always attended by
GODS COVENANTS.
As this call required three separations with their sacrifices, so its attendant covenant contained three promised blessings. God never empties the heart without filling it again, and with better things. God never detaches the affections from lower objects without at once attaching them to subjects that are higher; consequently call and covenant must go together.
I will make of thee a great nation. That was the first article in His covenant. To the Jew, that was one of the most precious promises. This ancient people delighted in progeny. The Psalmist wrote, As arrows are in the hand of a mighty man, so are children of the youth. Happy is the man that hath his quiver full of them. They shall not be ashamed, but they shall speak with the enemies in the gate. If our Puritan fathers, few in number and feeble as they were, could have imagined the might and multitude of their offspring, they would have found in the prospect an unspeakable pride, and a source of mighty pleasure. It was because those fathers did, in some measure, imagine the America to come, that they were willing to endure the privations and dangers of their day; but the honor of being fathers of a nation, shared in by a half hundred of them, was an honor on which Abraham had a close corporation, for to him God said,
I will make thy seed as the dust of the earth; so that if a man can number the dust of the earth, then shall also thy seed be numbered.
If the heart, parting from parents and home, is empty, the arms into which children have been placed are full; and homesickness, the pain of separation, is overcome when, through the grace of God, one sits down in the midst of his own.
This covenant contained a further promise. I will . . . make thy name great. We may believe that the word great here refers not so much to empty honors as to merited praise. The Jewish conception of such a promise was expressed by Solomon when he said, A good name is rather to be chosen than great riches. And, notwithstanding the fact that our age is guilty of over-estimating the value of riches, men find it difficult to underrate the value of a good name.
Years ago, Jonas Chickering decided to make a better piano than had ever appeared on the market. He spared neither time nor labor in this attempt. His endeavor was rewarded in purity and truthfulness of tone as well as in simplicity of plan, and there came to him the ever-attendant result of success. His name on a piano was that instruments best salesman.
A Massachusetts man, seeing this, went to the Massachusetts legislature and succeeded in getting them to change his name to Chickering, that he might put it upon his own instruments.
As Marden said when referring to this incident, Character has a commercial value.
And, when God promised Abraham to make his name great, He bestowed the very honor which men most covet to this hour.
But the climax of His covenant is contained in this last sentence, In thee shall all the families of the earth be blest. That is the honor of honors! That is the success of all successes! That is the privilege of all privileges!
When Mr. Moody died some man said, Every one of us has lost a friend, and that speaker was right, for there is not a man in America who has not enjoyed at least an opportunity to be better because Moody lived. No matter whether the individual had ever seen him or no; had ever read one of his sermons or no; yet the tidal waves of Moodys work have rolled over the entire land, over many lands for that matter, and even the most ignorant and debased have breathed the better atmosphere on account of him. George Davis claims that Moody traveled a million miles, and addressed a hundred million people, and dealt personally with 750,000 individuals! I think Davis claim is an overstatement, and yet these whom he touched personally are only a tithe of the multitudes blessed indirectly by that evangelism for which Moody stood for forty years. If today I could be privileged to make my choice of the articles of this covenant, rather than be the father of a great nation, rather than enjoy the power of a great name, I would say, Give me the covenant that through me all the nations of the earth should be blessed. Such would indeed be the crowning glory of a life, and such ought to be the crowning joy of a true mans heart.
In the next place, I call your attention to
ABRAHAMS OBEDIENCE AND BLUNDERS.
His obedience was prompt No sooner are the call and covenant spoken than we read,
So Abraham departed as the Lord had spoken unto him (Gen 12:4).
In that his conduct favorably contrasted with the behavior of some other of the Old Testaments most prominent men. Moses was in many respects a model, but he gave himself to an eloquent endeavor to show God that He was making a mistake in appointing him Israels deliverer. Elijah at times indulged in the same unprofitable controversy, and the story of Jonahs criticism of the Divine appointment will be among our later studies. I am confident that Abraham brings before every generation a much needed example in this matter. In these days, men are tempted to live too much in mathematics and to regard too lightly Gods revelations of duty. That is one of the reasons why many pulpits are empty. That is one of the reasons why many a Sunday School class is without a teacher. That is the only reason why any man in this country can say with any show of truthfulness, No man careth for my soul. If the congregations assembled in Gods sanctuary should go out of them, as Abram departed from his home in Haran, to fulfil all that the Lord had spoken unto them, the world would be turned upside down in a fortnight, and Christ would quickly come.
In his obedience Abraham was steadfast also. There are many men who respond to the calls of God; there are only a few who remain faithful to those calls through a long and busy life. There were battles ahead for Abram. There were blunders in store for Abram. There were bereavements and disappointments to come. But, in spite of them all, he marched on until God gathered him to his people. I thank God that such stedfastness is not wholly strange at the present time. When we see professors of religion proving themselves shallow and playing truant before the smaller trials, and we are thereby tempted to join in Solomons dyspeptic lament, All is vanity and vexation of spirit, it heartens one to remember the history that some have made and others are making. Think of Carey and Judson, Jewett and Livingstone, Goddard and Morrison, Clough and Ashmoremen who, through long years, deprivations and persecutions, proved as faithful as was ever Abraham; and so, long as the world shall stand, stedfastness in obedience to the commands of God will be regarded highly in Heaven. Why is it that we so much admire the company of the apostles, and why is it that we sing the praises of martyrs? They withstood in the evil day, and having done all, stood.
Again, Abrams obedience was inspired by faith.
When he went out from Chaldea to come into Canaan, he was not yielding to reason but walking according to revelation. His action was explained in the sentence, He believed in the Lord. Joseph Parker commenting on the world believed as here employed says, This is the first time the word believed occurs in the Bible. * * * * What history opens in this one word. Abram nourished and nurtured himself in God. * * * * He took the promise as a fulfilment. The word was to him a fact. The stars had new meanings to him, as, long before, the rainbow had to Noah. Abram drew himself upward by the stars. Every night they spoke to him of his posterity and of his greatness. They were henceforward not stars only but promises and oaths and blessings.
One great need of the present-day church is a truer trust in God. Oh, for men who like Columbus can let the craft of life float out on the seas of thought and action, and look to the starry heavens for the guidance that shall land them upon newer and richer shores! Oh, for men that will turn their ears heavenward to hear what God will say, and even though His commissions contain sacrifice will go about exercising it! Such men are never forgotten by the Father. We are not surprised to hear Him break forth in praise of Abraham, saying,
Because thou hast done this thing, and hast not withheld thy son, thine only son, m blessing 1 will bless thee, and multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the seashore; and thy seed shall possess the gates of the enemy, and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed, because thou hast obeyed my voice.
No sacrifice made in faith is ever forgotten, and when Gods rewards for service are spoken, good men always regard them more than sufficient. If you could call up today the souls of Carey, Judson, Livingstone and Morrison, and assemble Clough, Ashmore, Taylor, Powell, Clark, Richards and a hundred others worthy to stand with them, and ask them the question Has God failed in any particular to keep with you any article of His covenant? they would answer in a chorus, No. And has God more than met the expectations of your faith? they would reply without dissent, Yes. As He was faithful to our father Abraham, so He is faithful to the present-day servant.
And yet Abraham, the obedient, was
GUILTY OF BLUNDERING.
Twice he lied, and the third time he approached the utmost limits of truth. He told Sarai to say she was his sister. She was his half-sister, and so he thought to excuse himself by dissembling and keeping back a part. But a lie is not a question of words and phrases! It may be acted as easily as spoken! When God comes to make a report upon your conduct and mine, dissembling will be labeled falsehood, for God does not cover up the sins of men. Somebody has asked, Do you suppose, if the Bible had been written by some learned Doctor, revised by a committee of some eminent scholars, and published by some great ecclesiastical society, we would ever have heard of Noahs drunkenness, of Abrams deception, of Lots disgrace, of Jacobs rascality, of the quarrel between Paul and Barnabas, or of Peters conduct on the porch? Not at all. But when the Almighty writes a mans life, He tells the truth about him.
I heard a colored preacher at Cincinnati say, The most of us would not care for a biography of ourselves, if God was to be the Author of it. Yet the work of the Recording Angel goes on, and as surely as we read today the report of Abrams blunders, we will be compelled to confront our own. Let us cease, therefore, from sin.
But Abrams few blunders cannot blacken his beautiful record. The luster of his life is too positive to be easily dimmed; and like the sun, will continue to shine despite the spots. Run through these chapters, and in every one of the fourteen you will find some touch of his true life. It was Abraham whose heart beat in sweetest sympathy with the sufferings of Hagar. It was Abraham who showed the most unselfish spirit in separating from Lot and dividing the estate. It was Abraham who opened his door to strangers in a hospitality of which this age knows all too little. It was Abram who overcame the forces of the combined kings and snatched Lot out of their hands. It was Abraham whose prayers prevailed with God in saving this same weakkneed professor out of Sodom. It was Abraham who trusted God for a child when Nature said the faith was foolish. It was Abraham who offered that same child in sacrifice at the word, not halting because of his own heart-sufferings. It was Abraham who mourned Sarahs death as deeply as ever any bereft bride felt her loss.
The more I search these chapters, the more I feel that she was right who wrote, A holy life has a voice. It speaks when the tongue is silent and is either a constant attraction or a continued reproof. Put your ear close to these pages of Genesis, and if Abraham does not whisper good to your heart, then be sure that your soul is dead and you are yet in your sins.
There remains time for but a brief review of these fourteen chapters in search of
THEIR TYPES AND SYMBOLS
Abrams call is a type of the Church of Christ. The Greek word for Church means the called-out. Separation from the Chaldeans was essential to Abrams access to the Father, and separation from the world is essential to the Churchs access to God and also essential to its exertion of an influence for righteousness. I believe Dr. Gordon was right when, in The Two-Fold Life he said, The truest remedy for the present-day naturalized Christianity and worldly consecration is to be found in a strenuous and stubborn non-conformity to the world on the part of Christians. With the most unshaken conviction, we believe that the Church can only make headway, in this world, by being loyal to her heavenly calling. Towards Ritualism her cry must be not a rag of popery; towards Rationalism, not a vestige of whatsoever is not of faith; and towards
Secularism, not a shred of the garment spotted by the flesh. The Bride of Christ can only give a true and powerful testimony in this world as she is found clothed with her own proper vesture even the fine linen clean and white, which is the righteousness of the saints.
Isaacs offering is a type of Gods gift of Jesus. He was an only son and Abraham laid him upon the altar of sacrifice. And, if one say that he fails as a type because he passed not through the experience of death, let us remember what is written into Heb 11:17 following,
By faith Abraham when he was tried, offered up Isaac; and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son, *** accounting that God was able to raise him up even from the dead, from whence also he received him, in a figure.
It might be written in Scripture, Abraham so believed God that he gave his only begotten son, for Gods sake. It is written in Scripture, God so loved the world that He gave His only Begotten Son that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Melchisedec is a type of our High Priest, Jesus Christ. His record in Gen 14:18-20 is brief, but the interpretation of his character in Hebrews 7 presents him as either identical with the Lord Himself, or else as one whose priesthood is the most perfect type of that which Jesus Christ has performed, and performs today for the sons of men.
In Sodom, we find the type of the days of the Son of Man. Of it the Lord said,
Because the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is great, and because their sin is very grievous, I will go down now, and see whether they have done altogether according to the cry of it, which is come unto Me.
Jesus Christ referred to that city and likened its condition to that which should obtain upon the earth at the coming of the Son of Man, saying, As it was in the days of Lot, they did eat; they drank; they bought; they sold; they planted; they builded; but the same day that Lot went out of Sodom, it rained fire and brimstone from heaven and destroyed them all, even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of Man is revealed.
The newspapers some time ago reported great religious excitement in a Southern city through the work of two evangelists. Doctors said, We will prescribe no more liquor for patients, druggists said, We will sell no more liquor as a beverage; gamblers gave up their gambling; those called the toughs of the town turned to the Lord; the people of means put off their jewels, changed their frivolous clothes to plainer style; and wherever one went he heard either the singing of hymns or the utterance of prayers, and a great newspaper said this had all come about because the people in that little college town expected the speedy return of Christ. You may call it fanaticism, if you will, and doubtless there would be some occasion, and yet call it what you may, this sentence will remain in the Scriptures, Therefore, be ye also ready, for in such an hour as ye think not, the Son of Man cometh.
Fuente: The Bible of the Expositor and the Evangelist by Riley
CRITICAL NOTES.
Gen. 13:1. Went up out of Egypt] In the language of the Jew the direction to Jerusalem from every quarter was upwards; besides, Egypt was a low-lying country and the traveller would have to ascend on his way to the hilly country of Canaan.Into the south] Heb. Towards the south. Not the south of Egypt, but the southern region of Palestine. A certain part of the country was called the south before the times of the Patriarchs. The LXX. has , into the desert; which conveys the same meaning, for Judea was bounded on the south by the desert region of Idumea.
Gen. 13:3. And he went on his journey] Heb. According to his removings. He proceeded after the manner of a nomad, striking his tent frequently and performing his journey by stations.Between Bethel and Hai] Stanley well describes this point as a conspicuous hill, its topmost summit resting on the rocky slopes below, and distinguished by its olive groves, offering a natural base for the altar, and a fitting shade for the tent of the patriarch (Jacobus)Called on the name of the Lord] This implies more than an ordinary prayer: he re-established public worship.
MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.Gen. 13:1-4
THE BELIEVER LEARNING FROM HIS GREAT ENEMY
It is an old saying that It is lawful to learn from an enemy. We may strive to overcome him, to protect ourselves with all care, and to maintain our cause. Still, he may teach us many lessons. We may refuse to unite with him, but we cannot help being instructed. The world is the great enemy of the believer, and Egypt was to Abram the representative of all worldliness. Abram was faith, Egypt was carnality. The patriarch had sojourned in the worlds kingdom, and had learned those solemn lessons which, as it too often happens, only a bitter experience can teach. He returned a sadder, but a wiser man. By the strength of Divine grace the believer may recover from the effects of the danger to which he had exposed himself by too close an alliance with the world. Even his faults and failings may result in spiritual gain. The lessons of wisdom may be dearly bought, still they are the secured possessions of the soul. The believer who has fallen into the worlds snares, or comes dangerously near to them, learns
I. That it is not safe to leave the paths marked out by Divine Providence. While Abram dwelt in Canaan, in the land which God had promised to give him, he was in the way of duty and of Providence, and was therefore safe. Calamity drove him to seek refuge in Egypt. He consulted his own safety, leaned to his own understanding, instead of seeking to know what was the Divine will. He ought to have trusted in Providence, and kept within the area of the promise. It is a dangerous experiment to leave the paths of Providence for any advantages the world may offer.
1. While we are in the path of Providence we may expect Divine direction. God honours the law of life which He has laid down for man by protecting and strengthening him while he observes it. There are special promises of grace to a sincere and exact obedience. When the sense of duty is so strong that we are regardless of any worldly consequences to ourselves, God will guide us and find a way to bring us out of the evil. To submit to be ruled absolutely by the will of God is meekness, which is the true conquering principle. They only have the true victory over all that is really evil, who acknowledge God in all their ways.
2. When we leave the paths of Providence we are thrown upon the resources of our own wisdom and strength, and can only expect failure. The world is too powerful and cunning an enemy for the believer to encounter by any might and skill of his own. He who would conquer must not engage in a private expedition on his own charges, but must have all the strength of the kingdom of God lawfully engaged on his side. He must enter the conflict as one of the loyal and obedient hosts of God. The believer, himself redeemed from the world, can never be kept above that world but by the strength of a Divine power. The grace of God is not a sudden impulse which suffices once for all, but a source of perpetual strength. When we cease to receive from that, the power of evil gains upon us and we are in spiritual danger.
3. Every step we take from the paths of Providence only increases the difficulty of returning. Though Abram followed his own will in going down to Egypt, he still retained his hold upon God. His heart was set upon obedience, and he only erred in not waiting for a clear sense of the Divine guidance. Though his fault was not grievous, it brought him into an entanglement with the world from which he could only extricate himself with difficulty. The danger continually increased, and the moral situation to which he had brought himself was perplexing. When once we leave the clear paths of duty which the will of God points out, our moral danger increases, and the difficulty of returning. Moral deviation generates a fearfully increasing distance from the good we have left. Another lesson which the believer may learn from his enemy is
II. That the friendship of the world involves deep spiritual loss. Abrams strong faith and firm principle of obedience could not save him from danger when exposed to the influences of the world, during his sojourn in Egypt. The world is an enemy that must be always regarded as such. There must be no pause in our spiritual warfare, no friendly overtures under the protection of a truce. The believer who courts friendship with the world, though he proceeds with much caution and firm purpose of integrity, is sure to suffer spiritual loss. Thus, in the case of Abram
1. The delicacy of the moral principle was injured. By his prevarication Abram had exposed his wife to danger, and himself to an irreparable loss. He saw that wealth, power, and rank were arrayed against him, and he sought his own safety by a false expediency. The step was then easy to deceit, and to the dangerous verge of absolute falsehood. He had learned this from the world, which had taught him to swerve from his better purpose, to be otherwise than his better self. It is a great calamity when the delicacy of conscience is injured. Fresh sin becomes easier, and even doubtful things deepen into the dark colours of evil. Above all, it is dangerous to depart from truthto rest our moral being in any degree upon an unreality. The contagion of that which is false rapidly corrupts our whole moral nature.
2. There was actual spiritual loss. When Abram turned aside from the truth and selfishily sought his own ends, the sense of the Divine presence must have been less clear. The faith in Providence to protect and guide him in the time of danger must have been less strong. The fervour of his first dedication to God must have greatly abated. The whole character was weakened. At first he had faith so strong that he could leave all at Gods command and venture upon an unknown and untried journey. He was satisfied with light for one step at a time, and trusted God for the future. Now he refuses to tell the whole truth, to take the consequences, and to trust in God to find the way of deliverance. Any loss of faith, of the clear insight of conscience, of the comforting and supporting sense of the Divine presence, is to be deplored. We cannot indulge in friendship with the world without some injury, and there is the danger of total loss. This is the dark side of the picture, but there is a way of escape. We may, through the grace of God, repair the losses we have sustained. The world teaches us some sad lessons, yet hereby we learn wisdom.
III. That the souls safety is best secured by revisiting, in loving memory, the scenes where God was first felt and known. And he went on his journey from the south, even to Bethel, unto the place where his tent had been at the beginning, between Bethel and Hai (Gen. 13:3). He returned to the Land of Promise, where he could be assured of Gods protection and His grace. There God had blessed him, there he experienced the first fervours of faith, the first sensations and stirrings of a new life. Thus, when the world has injured our faith or hope in God, or tempted us to evil, our way of return is marked out for us. We have to do our first works, and to remember the years of the right hand of the Most High. The believer, when his soul has been injured by the world, derives comfort and encouragement from the pastfrom revisiting the scenes where God was first felt and known.
1. He is aided by remembering the strength and fervour of his early faith and love. When God first appears to the soul, and faith and love are awakened, we feel strong for duty, and all difficulties seem to vanish. Through the impulse of our first devotion we continue for a season loving and serving with an ardent mind. But when we grow cold, or the world has gained an advantage over us in an unguarded hour, we may revive our languishing graces by the thought of what we once were, and still may be, if we return to our first love. The torch of an almost expiring faith and devotion may be rekindled at the altar where we were first consecrated to God. We can thus take our stand upon a fact in our spiritual history, and believe that God is able to repeat his former kindness.
2. Memory may become a means of grace. It is well for us to look backwards, as well as forwards by the anticipations of hope. What God has done for us in the past is a pledge of what He will do in the future, if we continue faithful to His grace. We may use memory to encourage hope. Because Thou hast been my help; therefore in the shadow of Thy wings will I rejoice. Let us imitate Abram, who returned to the sweet memorial places where he first met God. There we know that we shall have succour and deliverance.
IV. There must be a fresh consecration to God. Abram went at once to Bethel, where at the beginning he had pitched his tent, and built an altar to God. There he called on the name of the Lord. This implies a fresh consecration of himself, and points out the method by which we may recover our spiritual loss. Such a fresh consecration is necessary, for there are no other channels of spiritual blessing, but those by which it first flowed to us. There is no new way of restoration. We must come back to Him who first gave us our faith and made reconciliation. This renewed consecration of ourselves to God involves
1. The acknowledgment of our sin. It was sin that made, at first, our reconciliation with God necessary, and fresh sin renews the obligation to seek His face.
2. The conviction that propitiation is necessary to obtain the favour of God. Repentance for the sinful past is not sufficient; for it often fails to repair the evils that we have brought upon ourselves. There is still a dread behind that we are answerable for our sins to One whom we have offended. Such has been the universal feeling of mankind, who have added sacrifices to their repentance. They have felt that God must be propitiatedthat they must seek His favour by some appointed way of mercy. We need an altar and a sacrifice. Some expedient is necessary to restore the alienated heart of man back to God. We confess by offering sacrifice that in strict justice we deserve the penalty, yet that Divine mercy has a way of escape for us so that we may see salvation.
3. The open profession of our faith. Abram called on the name of the Lord. He who knows the salvation of God must confess Him before men. The believer cannot live to himself; he must stand forth as an example to others, a witness for God in the world. God can be seen but dimly in His works. He is most of all manifested in His saints. By their possession of truth and righteousness they reflect His intellectual and moral image. It is necessary that God should be represented to the world by good men. To call upon the name of the Lord is to acknowledge our relation to Him, and the duties thence arising; that His benefits demand recognition and praise. When we make an open profession of our faith before men we glorify God, we revive and keep in full vigour the sense of our adoption, and feel that in all our wanderings we are still Gods children and His witnesses in the world.
SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS ON THE VERSES
Gen. 13:1. When the course of Gods Providence opens up a way of escape from the scenes of temptation and trial, our duty is to follow in it.
We are safe only when we leave the land of carnality and dwell in the land of promise.
Unreality and deceit are some of the characteristic marks of the world, and the children of faith do not always escape their infection.
In Egypt the Churchthe chosen peoplewas introduced to the world. Egypt was to Abram, to the Jewish people also, to the whole course of the Old Testament, what the world, with all its interests and pursuits and enjoyments, is to us. But while Egypt, with its pride of wealth and art and power, its temples and pyramids, is almost forgotten, the name of the shepherd patriarch lives. Egypt is a type of the world-kingdom, abounding in wealth and power, offering temptations to a mere carnal sense. But Abram had encountered its worldliness and pride, and had been in danger of losing his personal and domestic peace, and was glad, doubtless, to escape from the land, and yet be once more within the boundaries of the Land of Promise.(Jacobus.)
Abrams deliverance from Egypt is a prophecy of the final deliverance of Gods people from this present evil world.
Lot accompanied Abram on his journeys as joined to him by the tie of natural relationship, and it may be also that the association contributed to his prosperity; but the event will tell how he has separate interests and is governed by a prevailing selfishness of nature.
Gen. 13:2. We have an account of the return of Abram from the land of Egypt rich. It has been observed that the blessedness of the Old Testament is prosperity, while that of the New Testament is affliction. Let not men say from this that the law of God is altered; it is we who have altered in conceptions of things. There was a time when men fancied that afflictions were proofs of Gods anger, but the revelation of God in Christ has since manifested to us the blessedness of affliction; for it is the cross that God bestows as His highest reward on all His chosen ones.(Robertson.)
Riches, if rightly used, do not hinder men from going after God.
Gen. 13:3. The believer cannot find his true rest where God is not enjoyed.
Abram moves to Bethel, where he had known God at the first. Thus the heart obeys the superior attraction. The magnetic needle may be disturbed by some force from its position, but when the constraint is removed it trembles towards the pole. In the midst of all his wanderings the heart of the patriarch pointed true.
Bethel:
1. The scene of the manifestation of God.
2. The birthplace of a new spiritual life.
3. The home of the most precious memories.
4. The earthly counterpart of heaven.
In things spiritual, to come back to our first love is true wisdom.
With his heart set, not upon his earthly possessions but upon his heavenly inheritance, he measured his steps to the place where he might compass Gods altar, and renew those delightful experiences which still dwelt upon his memory. It is well known with what exquisite emotions we re-visit, after a long absence, the scenes with which we were familiar in childhood and youth. The sight of the well-remembered places and objects calls up a thousand interesting associations, and our past existence seems for a time to be renewed to us. But to the pious heart how much more delightful and exhilarating is the view of scenes where we have experienced striking instances of providential kindness, where we have received token of the Divine favour, where we have held communion with God, and been refreshed with the manifestations of His love. Bethel was a place thus endeared by association to Abram, and it is only the heart that is a stranger to such feelings that will find any difficulty in accounting for his anxiety to tread again its pleasant precincts, and breathe the air which was shed around it.(Bush.)
Gen. 13:4. Abram returns to the place of his altar in Bethel. In like manner Christian settlements, towns, and villages, cluster around their churches.(Lange.)
Tent and altar were now in his mind as he had enjoyed them at first. We remember our sweet home and our sweet church after we have roamed in a land of exile. We yearn to get back to where we have enjoyed the dear circle of our family, and that of our Christian brethrenwhere we have lived, and where we have worshipped. Because it was Bethel, he loved it, even as the house of God (Psa. 84:1-2).(Jacobus.)
Coming to the altar, and calling upon the name of the Lord, regardI. Public religion.
1. The witness to, and confession of God before men.
2. The missionary element. By such an action Abram was spreading the knowledge of God amongst men. True religion must be aggressive and make war upon the enemys camp. The patriarchs office was to generate faith in others. II. Private religion.
1. Confessions of sin. God cannot be approached directly, but by some way of mediation. This implies that man has sinned, and has no longer access to God except by a way of mercy which God Himself appoints.
2. Supplication for forgiveness. The altar implies that God is offended by the sin of man, and, therefore, His mercy must be sought.
3. The necessity of sacrifice to propitiate the Divine favour. The stroke of justice must fall upon the sinners substitute. The life sacrificed upon the altar is accepted instead of that of the suppliant. Our altar is the cross.
4. The revival of the spirit of adoption. Abram had lost that clear sense of the Divine acceptance which he once enjoyed, and now he seeks to recover it by returning to the place where God at a former time met him in mercy.
Every time we come to God, even though we may have to do so in great penitence and humiliation, we renew our strength.
He who first gave us our spiritual life is necessary afterwards to sustain it.
The soul of the believer has its true home in the house of God, where His glory is manifested. By the strength and beauty of the Divine presence he enjoys there his own home, and the whole scene of his life becomes consecrated.
The manner in which the place of the altar is mentioned, seems to intimate that he chose to go thither, in preference to another place, on this account. It is very natural that he should do so; for the places where we have called on the name of the Lord, and enjoyed communion with Him, are, by association, endeared to us above all others. There Abram again called on the name of the Lord; and the present exercises of grace, we may suppose, were aided by a remembrance of the past. It is an important rule in choosing our habitations, to have an eye to the place of the altar. If Lot had acted on this principle, he would not have done as is here related of him.(Fuller.)
ABRAMS JOURNEY TO THE PLACE OF THE ALTAR
The steps of a good man, says the Psalmist, are ordered by the Lord, and He delighteth in his way. The truth of this has never been disputed in the Church, and proofs of the regard which God entertains to His devoted children may be derived from all parts of Scripture, which unite to prove that the eye and hand of an overruling Providence have been constantly engaged on their behalf. The history of Abram shows the individual attention which God bestows towards His faithful servants. Their names are held in imperishable memorial, their interests are perpetually consulted, nothing which concerns them is too minute to escape the Divine noticetheir birthplace, their journeyings, their crosses, their comforts, their enemies, their friends. The great empires of the world, and the names of their rulers and disturbers, are seldom mentioned but in connection with the Church. Cains generation is numbered in haste, but the generations of the godly are carefully recorded. Seths posterity are written in a large scroll and more legible hand, with the number of the years in which they lived, which in the case of Cains posterity is not noticed. God remembers Noahs cattle as well as his sons. Jacobs flocks and herds are distinctly noted; and here all that concerns Abram is deemed worthy of attentionhis journeyings, his companions, his possessions, the place where his tent was fixed, the circumstances which led to the erection of his altar, and the fact of his offering his customary devotions. We notice
I. His love to the Land of Promise, which all the attractions of Egypt could not extinguish or overpower. Egypt was at this time the most important country in the world, the resort of all nations. From the earliest times it was called the worlds great granary, a country so fair and fertile, that the Egyptians boasted that they could feed all men and feast all the gods. It is noticed, too, that Abram was very rich, and had probably great increase of his wealth in Egypt, which was a greater temptation to him to protract his stay. But Egypt, with all her plenty and pleasure, had not stolen away his heart from the Promised Land. Neither had he so laden himself with thick clay, as that he was disinclined to strike his tent and pursue his journey, but he went from strength to strength. All this was done by faith. Let us imitate his great example. In the midst of all we enjoy, remember how much more we have in hope. In the midst of peace, prosperity, honours, and enjoyments, let us still consider that we are pilgrims, and while we thankfully accept the favours showed us in a strange country, let us not forget our better home. A Land of Promise contents Abram; he leaves the possession to his posterity. Abram went up from Egypt, so there should be daily an ascension of our minds to the better country above. Abram took all he had; the Christian is not content to go to Heaven alone. Happy it is to journey to Heaven when accompanied by those we love.
II. His veneration for the place where God first appeared to him. He went on his journey to Bethel. Many a weary step he took till he came to his old altar. He went to sanctify that good he had got in Egypt, to give God thanks for it, and to consecrate it to Him. Enemies may part us and our tents, but not us and our God. The remembrance of the sweet communion and intercourse he had with God at that place was delightful and reviving to his mind. It was there God had appeared to him when he first set his foot in the land of Canaan, and the recollection appears to have been hallowed to him as it was to Jacob in after times. It was his first special time of dedication to God. It was there he built his first altarthere he received his first promisethere he offered his first prayerthere he recorded his first vow. The review of the same was eminently satisfactory and grateful to his mind. Twice it is mentioned, the place where his tent had been, the place of the altar. There may be in the Journey of life many inviting scenes, many fertile spots, but there is no place like the place of the altar. From this spot nothing that Egypt and the intermediate countries could offer was able to divert Abram. He came back prosperous, but his heart was unchanged. Time is apt to wear out the sense of mercies. Many in their travels leave religion behind them.
III. His concern wherever he was to erect his altar. Wherever we go we must take our religion with us.
1. As a public profession.
2. As keeping up family religion. Wherever he had a tent God had an altar.
ILLUSTRATIONS
BY THE
REV. WM. ADAMSON
Abram and Lot! Gen. 13:1-18. We have hereI. The Contention, which was
(1) unseemly,
(2) untimely, and
(3) unnecessary. II. The Consolation, which was
(1) unbounded,
(2) undoubted, and
(3) unearthly. Or, we have hereI. The Churlishness of the herdsmen. II. The Selfishness of Lot. III. The Unselfishness of Abram, and IV. The Graciousness of God. Or, we have hereI. The Return of Abram,
(1) forgiven and
(2) favoured. II. The Request of Abram,
(1) forbearing, and
(2) foregoing. III. The Reward of Abram (l) forgetting the earthly and
(2) foreshadowing the heavenly inheritance. The Lesson-Links or Truth-Thoughts are
1. Wealth means
(1) strife,
(2) sorrow, and
(3) separation.
2. Abram manifests
(1) faith,
(2) forbearance, and
(3) forgetfulness of self.
3. Worldly love means
(1) stupidity,
(2) suffering, and
(3) sinfulness.
4. God manifests
(1) favour,
(2) fulness, and
(3) faithfulness to Abram.
The pilgrims step in vain,
Seeks Edens sacred ground!
But in Hopes heavnly joys again,
An Eden may be found.Bowring.
Returns and Reviews! Gen. 13:1-3.
(1) The poet has immortalised the Swiss patriots sentiments on returning to the Alpine crags and peaks after strange and perilous experiences in exile. The historian has inscribed on the tablet of Church history the devout emotions of Arnaud on his return from danger and exile to the Vaudois Valleys. The litterateur has depicted on the page of his tale the joyful sensations of the emigrant, returning in safety and wealth to the home from which he had gone forth in peril and poverty.
(2) Abram had been driven by famine into the fruitful fields of Egypt, where he had narrowly escaped reaping death as the fruit of his fears and folly. God had in His wise and merciful Providence brought him back again to Hebron. He, therefore, calls on the name of the Lord. He, no doubt, received with thankfulness the Lords intimations of mercy as connected with his previous sojourn; and he, doubtless, acknowledged with gratitude Gods loving interposition with Pharaoh in his behalf.
(3) It is well to go back in review of old spots and past experiences in order to call up instrumentally thereby, says Doudney, the gracious acts, interposing goodness, and boundless benefits of our covenant-God in Christ. The light so shining upon the past prompts us to take down our harp from the willows, and to sing
His love in times past forbids me to think,
Hell leave me at last in trouble to sink.
Flocks and Herds! Gen. 13:2.
(1) In a very old Egyptian tomb near the Pyramids the flocks and herds of the principal occupant are pourtrayed. The numbers of them are told as 800 oxen, 200 cows, 2,000 goats, and 1,000 sheep. Job at first had 7,000 sheep, 500 yoke of oxen, 3,000 camels, etc. We can thus form some idea of the number and magnitude of the patriarchal flocks and herds.
(2) At the present day these are no exaggeration, however startling the figures sound. In an Australian sheep-run one grazier has nearly 20,000 sheep. Not long ago an American sheepowner had as many as 9,000 browsing on the heights of Omaha, so that when a traveller looked forth at daybreak the mountains seemed like waves of the sea. In Zululand the flocks and herds of Cetewayo were immense.
Abrams well was fannd by the breeze,
Whose murmur invited to sleep;
His altar was shaded with trees,
And his hills were white over with sheep.Shenstone.
Patriarchal Wealth! Gen. 13:2.
(1) Dr. Russell tells us that the people of Aleppo are supplied with the greater part of their butter, cheese, and flesh by the Arabs, Rushmans, or Turcomans, who travel about the country with their flocks and herds, as the patriarchs did of old. Before America became so thickly peopled, its primitive white patriarchs wandered with flocks over the richly-clothed savannahs and prairies. Having collected vast stores of cheese, honey, skins, etc., they would repair to the townships and dispose of them.
(2) The Hebrew patriarchs no doubt supplied the cities of Canaan in like manner. Hamor, in Gen. 34:21, expressly speaks of the patriarchs thus trading with his princes and people. La Rogue says that in the time of Pliny the riches both of the Parthians and Romans were melted down by the Arabs, who thus amassed large treasures of the precious metals. This probably explains how Abraham was rich, not only in cattle, but in silver and gold. Not that Abram trusted in his riches.
Oh! give me the riches that fade not, nor fly!
A treasure up yonder! a home in the sky!
Where beautiful things in their beauty still stay,
And where riches neer fly from the blessed away.Hunter.
Communion! Gen. 13:4.
(1) Watson says, that he knows of no pleasure so richno pleasure so hallowing in its influences, and no pleasure so constant in its supply of solace and strength, as that which springs from the true and spiritual worship of God. Pleasant as the cool water brooks are to a thirsty hart, so pleasant is it for the soul to live in communion with God.
(2) Rutherford wrote to his friend from the prison of Aberdeen, The king dineth with his prisoners, and his spikenard casteth a smell; he hath led me to such a pitch and degree of joyful communion with himself as I never before knew. This reminds us of Trapps quaint speech, that a good Christian is ever praying or praising: he drives a constant trade betwixt earth and heaven.
(3) Abram built his altar while the Canaanites looked on. He lifted up a testimony for God, and God honoured him; so that Abimelech was constrained to say, God is with thee in all that thou doest. Reader, in Greenland, the salutation of a visitor, when the door is opened, is this, Is God in this house? Remember that the home which has no family altar has no Divine delight.
Tis that which makes my treasure,
Tis that which brings my gain;
Converting woe to pleasure,
And reaping joy for pain.Guyon.
Returns and Reviews! Gen. 13:1-3.
(1) The poet has immortalised the Swiss patriots sentiments on returning to the Alpine crags and peaks after strange and perilous experiences in exile. The historian has inscribed on the tablet of Church history the devout emotions of Arnaud on his return from danger and exile to the Vaudois Valleys. The litterateur has depicted on the page of his tale the joyful sensations of the emigrant, returning in safety and wealth to the home from which he had gone forth in peril and poverty.
(2) Abram had been driven by famine into the fruitful fields of Egypt, where he had narrowly escaped reaping death as the fruit of his fears and folly. God had in His wise and merciful Providence brought him back again to Hebron. He, therefore, calls on the name of the Lord. He, no doubt, received with thankfulness the Lords intimations of mercy as connected with his previous sojourn; and he, doubtless, acknowledged with gratitude Gods loving interposition with Pharaoh in his behalf.
(3) It is well to go back in review of old spots and past experiences in order to call up instrumentally thereby, says Doudney, the gracious acts, interposing goodness, and boundless benefits of our covenant-God in Christ. The light so shining upon the past prompts us to take down our harp from the willows, and to sing
His love in times past forbids me to think,
Hell leave me at last in trouble to sink.
Flocks and Herds! Gen. 13:2.
(1) In a very old Egyptian tomb near the Pyramids the flocks and herds of the principal occupant are pourtrayed. The numbers of them are told as 800 oxen, 200 cows, 2,000 goats, and 1,000 sheep. Job at first had 7,000 sheep, 500 yoke of oxen, 3,000 camels, etc. We can thus form some idea of the number and magnitude of the patriarchal flocks and herds.
(2) At the present day these are no exaggeration, however startling the figures sound. In an Australian sheep-run one grazier has nearly 20,000 sheep. Not long ago an American sheepowner had as many as 9,000 browsing on the heights of Omaha, so that when a traveller looked forth at daybreak the mountains seemed like waves of the sea. In Zululand the flocks and herds of Cetewayo were immense.
Abrams well was fannd by the breeze,
Whose murmur invited to sleep;
His altar was shaded with trees,
And his hills were white over with sheep.Shenstone.
Patriarchal Wealth! Gen. 13:2.
(1) Dr. Russell tells us that the people of Aleppo are supplied with the greater part of their butter, cheese, and flesh by the Arabs, Rushmans, or Turcomans, who travel about the country with their flocks and herds, as the patriarchs did of old. Before America became so thickly peopled, its primitive white patriarchs wandered with flocks over the richly-clothed savannahs and prairies. Having collected vast stores of cheese, honey, skins, etc., they would repair to the townships and dispose of them.
(2) The Hebrew patriarchs no doubt supplied the cities of Canaan in like manner. Hamor, in Gen. 34:21, expressly speaks of the patriarchs thus trading with his princes and people. La Rogue says that in the time of Pliny the riches both of the Parthians and Romans were melted down by the Arabs, who thus amassed large treasures of the precious metals. This probably explains how Abraham was rich, not only in cattle, but in silver and gold. Not that Abram trusted in his riches.
Oh! give me the riches that fade not, nor fly!
A treasure up yonder! a home in the sky!
Where beautiful things in their beauty still stay,
And where riches neer fly from the blessed away.Hunter.
Communion! Gen. 13:4.
(1) Watson says, that he knows of no pleasure so richno pleasure so hallowing in its influences, and no pleasure so constant in its supply of solace and strength, as that which springs from the true and spiritual worship of God. Pleasant as the cool water brooks are to a thirsty hart, so pleasant is it for the soul to live in communion with God.
(2) Rutherford wrote to his friend from the prison of Aberdeen, The king dineth with his prisoners, and his spikenard casteth a smell; he hath led me to such a pitch and degree of joyful communion with himself as I never before knew. This reminds us of Trapps quaint speech, that a good Christian is ever praying or praising: he drives a constant trade betwixt earth and heaven.
(3) Abram built his altar while the Canaanites looked on. He lifted up a testimony for God, and God honoured him; so that Abimelech was constrained to say, God is with thee in all that thou doest. Reader, in Greenland, the salutation of a visitor, when the door is opened, is this, Is God in this house? Remember that the home which has no family altar has no Divine delight.
Tis that which makes my treasure,
Tis that which brings my gain;
Converting woe to pleasure,
And reaping joy for pain.Guyon.
Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell
PART TWENTY-SEVEN
THE STORY OF ABRAHAM: ABRAHAM AND LOT
(Gen., chs. 13, 14)
1. The Biblical Account (ch. 13)
And Abram went up out of Egypt, he, and his wife, and all that he had, and Lot with him, into the South. 2 And Abram was very rich in cattle, in silver, and in gold. 3 And he went on his journeys from the South even to Beth-el, unto the place where his tent had been at the beginning, between Beth-el and Ai, 4 unto the place of the altar, which he had, made there at the first: and there Abram called on the name of Jehovah. 5 And Lot also, who went with Abram, had flocks, and herds, and tents. 6. And the land was not able to bear them, that they might dwell together: for their substance was great, so that they could not dwell together. 7 And there was a strife between the herdsmen of Abrams cattle and the herdsmen of Lots cattle: and the Canaanite and Perizzite dwelt then in the land. 8 And Abram said unto Lot, Let there be no strife, 1 pray thee, between me and thee, and between my herdsmen and thy herdsmen; for we are brethren. 9 Is not the whole land before thee? separate thyself, I pray thee, from me: if thou wilt take the left hand, then I will go to the right; or if thou take the right hand, then I will go to the left. 10 And Lot lifted up his eyes, and beheld all the Plain of the Jordan, that it was well watered everywhere, before Jehovah destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, like the garden of Jehovah, like the land of Egypt, as thou goest unto Zoar. 11 So Lot chose him all the Plain of the Jordan; and Lot journeyed east: and they separated themselves the one from the other. 12 Abram dwelt in the land of Canaan, and Lot dwelt in the cities of the Plain, and moved his tent as far as Sodom. 13 Now the men of Sodom were wicked and sinners against Jehovah exceedingly.
14 And Jehovah said unto Abram, after that Lot was separated from him, Lift up now thine eyes, and look from the place where thou art, northward and southward and eastward and westward: 15 for all the land which thou seest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed for ever. 16 And I will make thy seed as the dust of the earth: so that if a man can number the dust of the earth, then may thy seed also be numbered. 17 Arise, walk through the land in the length of it and in the breadth of it; for unto thee will I give it. 18 And Abram moved his tent, and came and dwelt by the oaks of Mamre, which are in Hebron, and built there an altar unto Jehovah.
2. The Separation from Lot
We now find Abram back at Bethel, the place where his tent had been at the beginning, between Bethel and Ai, unto the place of the altar; and we are told that there Abram called on the name of Jehovah. We have learned that this last statement means that he renewed the public worship of Yahweh on behalf of his household (retinue). It should be emphasized at this point that wherever Abram sojourned, there we find the altar, the sacrifice, and the priest (the patriarch himself), the elements of Biblical religion. It is impossible to harmonize this very important fact with the notion that Abram came out of Ur of the Chaldees contaminated by pagan idolatry. Abram and his household are now back at their second stopping-place after their entrance into the Promised Land.
At this point a matter of some significance takes place. The land was not able to bear the tents, flocks, and herds of both Abram and Lot. Hence, a separation became the feasible solution of the problem. Murphy (MG, 274, 275): Lot has been hitherto kept in association with Abram by the ties of kinship. But it becomes gradually manifest that he has an independent interest, and is no longer disposed to follow the fortunes of the chosen of God. In the natural course of things this under-feeling comes to the surface. Their serfs come into collision; and as Abram makes no claim of authority over Lot, he offers him the choice of a dwelling-place in the land. This issues in a peaceable separation in which Abram appears to great advantage. The chosen of the Lord is now in the course of providence isolated from all associations of kindred. He stands alone, in a strange land. . . . Lot now also abounds in the wealth of the East. Two opulent sheiks (elders, heads of houses) cannot dwell together any more. Their serfs come to strife. The carnal temper comes out among their dependents. Such disputes were unavoidable under the circumstances. Neither party had any title to the land. Landed property was not yet clearly defined or secured by law. The land therefore was a common, where everybody availed himself of the best spot for grazing he could find unoccupied. We can easily understand what facilities and temptations this would offer for the strong to overbear the weak. We meet with many incidental notices of such oppression (Gen. 21:25; Gen. 26:15-22; Exo. 2:16-19). The folly and impropriety of quarreling among kinsmen about pasture grounds on the present occasion is enhanced by the circumstances that Abram and Lot are mere strangers among the Kenaanites and the Perrizites, the settled occupants of the country. Custom had no doubt already given the possessor a prior claim. Abram and Lot were there merely on sufferance, because the country was thinly peopled, and many fertile spots were still unoccupied.
Lots Choice. Note that Lot lifted up his eyes, and beheld the Plain of the Jordan, that it was well watered everywhere. . . . So Lot chose him all the Plain of the Jordan, etc. Speiser (ABG, 98): Having been orphaned early in his life (Gen. 11:28), Lot was brought up first by his grandfather Terah (Gen. 11:31). The task was then taken over by Abraham (Gen. 12:5), who went on to treat his nephew with unfailing solicitude and tenderness. Now the two must part, since each requires a large grazing and watering radius for his flocks and herds. Although the choice of territory rests with the older man, Abraham generously cedes this right to his ward. Nor does Lot fail to take advantage of this unforeseen opportunity. He picks the greener and richer portion. How was he to know what fate lay in store for Sodom and Gomorrah, or how glorious was to be the future of the rugged hill country to the west? The narrative ends thus on a note of gentle irony, the ever-present irony of history.
Lot lifted up his eyes. The spot where Abram and he were standing was the conspicuous hill between Bethel and Ai, from the top of which, according to travelers, they could see the Jordan, the broad grasslands on either bank, and the waving verdure which marks the course of the stream. The plain chosen was situated in, or at least included, the tract to the south of the Dead Sea, where at that time there were copious springs and an abundance of sweet water. It is surely obvious that Lot was looking out for number one, as we say in American slang. Jamieson (CECG, 134): In re Lots choice: A choice excellent from a worldly point of view, but most inexpedient for his best interests. He seems, though a good man, to have been too much under the influence of a selfish and covetous spirit; and how many, alas! imperil the good of their souls for the prospect of worldly advantage. Lange (CDHCG, 398): It is the vale of Siddim (Gen. 14:3), the present region of the Dead Sea, which is here intended. That the lower valley of the Jordan was peculiarly well-watered, and a rich pasture region, is expressed by a twofold comparison: it was as Paradise, and as the land of Egypt. The lower plain of the Jordan was glorious as the vanished glory of Paradise, or as the rich plains of the Nile in Egypt, which were still fresh in the memory of Lot. The land was watered not by trenches and canals (irrigation) but by copious streams along its course, descending chiefly from the mountains of Moab. Leupold (EG, 430): The separation from Lot is a necessity growing out of deeper reasons than those usually cited. Lot is an element that is not suited to be an integral part of the chosen people, as his later deterioration shows. Circumstances soon arise which make it eminently desirable to remove this unsuitable material as early as possible. Behind the outward separation lies a deeper motivation. At the same time, the incident has always served in the church as a typical case of how to deal in a practical way with the problem of incompatibility. If persons simply cannot get along together, nothing is gained by attempting to force the issue or by discussing the point until a solution is reached. Incompatibility is best dealt with by separation: let those that cannot agree get out of one anothers way. To Ambrose is attributed the saying, divide ut meneat amicitia, a procedure which does not merit the criticism, a wretched but practicable rule (Delitzsch).
The Plain of the Jordan, literally, the circle or circuit of the Jordan, that is, at the southern end of the Dead Sea. Leupold (EG, 437): It is not the whole basin of the Jordan from the Lake of Gennesareth to the Dead Sea, but only that portion which extends from about Jericho down to and including the northern end of the Dead Sea to Zoar. . . . Now when Moses reminds us that this region was so attractive before Yahweh destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, he clearly implies that in his time the region was sadly altered. One question will perhaps never be determined at this point and that is how far the devastating effects of the overthrow of Sodom and Gomorrah affected the rest of the Dead Sea region. Some hold that the Bible indicates that the entire Dead Sea is the result of that cataclysmic overthrow. We personally believe that indeed only the southern shallow end of the Dead Sea became covered with water as a result of the overthrow of these cities, as also Kyles investigations seem to substantiate. But at the same time it appears that more or less of a blight settled upon the whole kikkar. For the author goes on to describe that it once was as the garden of Yahweh, by which he must mean the garden of Eden which was in a special sense Yahwehs handiwork. The comparison must have been suitable, else Moses would not have used it. It is true that, nevertheless, the simile is a bit strong. Consequently, it is toned down by a second simile that has a fine propriety about it from another point of view: as the land of Egypt. . . . The special propriety of this latter simile lies in this, that the region is like Egypt in that a deeper lying river winds through a fertile plain enclosed by mountains of either side. See Gen. 14:3; Gen. 14:8; Gen. 14:10, also (JB 29, n.): The author imagines the Dead Sea as not yet in existence; or else the Valley of Siddim (the name is not met with elsewhere) occupied only what is now the southern part of the Dead Sea, a depression of relatively recent formation.
Gen. 13:12, K.J.V. The old version is so much more forceful here: Lot dwelled in the cities of the plain, and pitched his tent toward Sodom. What tragedy lay in this last statement, as strongly intimated in Gen. 13:13! Cf. JB (29): Lot chooses a life of ease and a region where immorality flourishes; for this he will be heavily punished, ch. 19. But the generosity of Abraham in leaving his nephew the choice is to be rewarded by a renewal of the promise of Gen. 12:7. The choice of this present world above God inevitably leads to Divine judgment, just as it did when Lot chose to pitch his tent toward Sodom (Gen. 18:20-21, Gen. 19:4-11).
Abrams Reward (Gen. 13:14-18). Smith-Fields (OTH, 69, 70): Abram now began to feel the evils of prosperity. The land could not support his own cattle and Lots. Their herdsmen quarreled, and Lot probably put forward his rights as head of the family. Abrams faith did not fail this time. Remembering that he was the heir of better promises, he gave the choice of present good to Lot. Their encampment looked westward on the rugged hills of Judea and eastward on the fertile plain of the Jordan about Sodom, well watered everywhere, as the garden of the Lord, like the land of Egypt he had only lately left. Even from that distance, through the clear air of Palestine, can be distinctly seen the long and thick masses of vegetation which fringe the numerous streams that descend from the hills on either side to meet the central stream in its tropical depths. It was exactly the prospect to tempt a man who had no fixed purpose of his own, who had not like Abram obeyed the stern call of duty. So Lot left his uncle on the barren hills of Bethel, and chose all the precinct of the Jordan, and journeyed east. Abram received his reward in a third blessing and promise from Jehovah, who bade him lift up his eyes and scan the whole land on every side, for it should be the possession of his seed, and they should be unnumbered as the dust of the earth. Yahweh also enjoins him to walk over his inheritance, and to contemplate it in all its extent, with the repeated assurance that it will be his. To be understood not as a literal direction, but as an intimation that he might leisurely survey his inheritance with the calm assurance that it was his (PCG, 200). Gen. 13:15Leupold (EG, 441): True, Abram becomes possessor only in his seed. But such possession is none the less real. It is none the less real simply because it is guaranteed by God, who is the Owner of all things (Psa. 24:1; Psa. 50:12; 1Co. 10:26): and only He could give a completely clear title to any human being.
3. Abrams Third Altar: from Bethel to Mamre.
(Bethel became especially conspicuous in the time of Jacob (Gen. 28:11-22; Gen. 31:13; Gen. 35:1-15). It was allotted to the tribe of Ephraim later (1Ch. 7:28) and bordered the territory of Benjamin (Jos. 18:13). The Israelites resettled the town calling it by the name Jacob had given to the scene in his vision, instead of the name Luz which it apparently bore at the time of the Conquest (Jdg. 1:23). It became a sanctuary in the time of Samuel who visited it annually (1Sa. 7:16; 1Sa. 10:3): this means undoubtedly that it was a center of the school of the prophets (1Sa. 7:16-17; 1Sa. 10:5-11; 1Sa. 19:18-20; 2Ki. 2:1-3), the famous line which originated with Samuel and culminated in John the Immerser. The name Bethel means house of God.). HSB (23): The strife between the herdsmen of Abraham and Lot represents the first threat to the promise of God that Abraham would possess the land. Abraham lived above this threat in faith, and his gracious attitude toward Lot was rewarded by another confirmation of the promise of God. (Cf. Gen. 13:14-17, also ch. 15). Thus encouraged, the Friend of God (Jas. 2:23) pulled up stakes again and traveling southward took up his abode (tent) under the spreading oaks of Mamre, named after an Amorite prince, with whom and his brothers Eschol and Aner, the patriarch later formed an alliance for the purpose of rescuing Lot, Gen. 14:13; Gen. 14:24. The place was near Hebron, a town of great antiquity, having been built seven years before Tanis in Egypt (Num. 13:22; cf. Exo. 6:18), which seems to have been known also at this time as Kiriath-Arba, city of Arba, from Arba, the father of Anak and the ancestor of the giant Anakim (Gen. 23:2; Gen. 35:27; Jos. 14:13-15; Jos. 15:13-14; Jos. 21:10-12). Evidently on being taken by Caleb it recovered its ancient name (Jos. 14:13-15). The town is some twenty miles south of Jerusalem and a like distance north of Beersheba. It became the burial place of Abraham and his family in the cave of Machpelah (Gen. 23:19; Gen. 25:9; Gen. 49:29-33); from this circumstance the place is revered by the Mohammedans who call it El-Khalil, The Friend, i.e., the Friend of God, the name which they give to Abraham. David first reigned as king in Hebron, and here, too Absalom began his tragic revolt (2Sa. 5:1-5; 2Sa. 15:7-12). It will thus be seen that Hebron had a long and varied history, under several masters: first, in all likelihood, a Shemite, then the Amorites (Gen. 14:13), then the Hittites (Gen. 23:10-20; Gen. 25:9), then the Anakim (Num. 13:22; Num. 13:28; Jos. 14:13-15; Jos. 15:13-14), then Judah, and lastly the Mohammedans. Hebron became Abrahams more or less settled abode throughout the rest of his life. There Abram built his third altar. A third altar is here built by Abram. His wandering course requires a varying place of worship. It is the Omnipresent whom he adores. The previous visits of the Lord had completed the restoration of his inward peace, security, and liberty of access to God, which had been disturbed by his descent into Egypt, and the temptation that had overcome him there. He feels himself again at peace with God, and his fortitude is renewed. He grows in spiritual knowledge and practice under the great Teacher (MG, 278). Lot in the meantime has not only pitched his tent toward Sodom, but evidently has moved on into the city itself.
FOR MEDITATION AND SERMONIZING
Pitching Ones Tent Toward Sodom
Gen. 13:12
Lot pitched his tent toward Sodom. His choice was determined solely by contemplated personal advantage, by the prospect of a more abundant earthly life: his highest values were those of this present evil world. Greed, with the prospect of ease and luxury, proved to be too alluring for him to resist it. Having pitched his tent toward Sodom, he finally went all the way and became a resident of that den of iniquity. No matter to what extent his righteous soul was sore distressed (2Pe. 2:7-8) by the lust and violence which all but engulfed him, he lacked the moral stamina to get himself and his family out of it. Flabbiness of character showed itself in everything he did. The root of his tragedy was that his values were all distorted: he did not know how to put first things first. His life story reminds us of a similar tragedy portrayed in Arthur Millers Death of a Salesman. This tragic tale leaves one emotionally depressed by its sordidness; nevertheless, it does inculcate a tremendous moral lesson. The protagonist, Willy Lomana salesman whose escapist tendencies blinded him to his real mediocrityworshiped only one god, the great god Success. In pursuing this false god, he sacrificed his home and family, and he himself could find no exit except by suicide. Such is always the tragic end of one who pitches his tent toward Sodom, that is, unless he comes to himself and resolutely comes back to the Fathers house.
What happened to Lot happens to every man who pitches his tent toward Sodom unless and until he heeds the cry, Come out of her, my people (Rev. 18:4). In what ways, then, do men and women in our time pitch their tents toward Sodom: They do it in various ways, as follows: 1. By getting into the wrong crowd (Psa. 1:1; Pro. 1:10; Pro. 4:14; Pro. 9:6; 2Co. 6:14-17; Eph. 5:11; 2Th. 3:16). 2. By assuming the posture of piety (piosity, religiosity), while conforming more and more to the ways of the world (the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the vainglory of life, 1Jn. 2:15-17; cf. Rom. 12:2). 3. By neglecting the appointments of the Spiritual Life (Act. 2:42; 1Co. 16:1-2; Romans 6, Rom. 11:23-30; Heb. 10:25). Where there is life, there is growth; where there is no growth, the living thing stagnates and dies (Rom. 14:17, 2Pe. 1:5-11; 2Pe. 3:18). 4. By turning from the Word of God, the Foundation that stands sure and strong (2Ti. 2:19) to the vain babblings of human speculation, philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men (Col. 2:8; 1Ti. 6:20, 2Ti. 2:16).
What of parents who move from one community to another without ever giving any thought as to what effects the new environment will have on the moral character of their children? How many put the demands of their business or profession above the spiritual welfare of their families? Are not these instances of pitching ones tent toward Sodom?
But the greatest tragedy of all is the fact that every human being, on reaching the age of discretion, pitches his tent toward Sodom. Rom. 3:23all have sinned, and fall short of the glory of God.
Lot himself would have perished in Sodom had not God come to his rescue. Likewise, all sinners will eventually perish in hell, unless they heed Gods call to repentance. (Luk. 13:3, Mat. 25:46, Rev. 6:16-17).
The Priesthood of Christ
Heb. 6:20Jesus . . . having become a high priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek.
The terms Messiah (Hebrew), Christos (Greek), and Christ (English), all mean The Anointed One. Jesus the Christ (or Jesus Christ) is, then, The Anointed of God, the King of kings and Lord of lords (1Ti. 6:14-15). It was the custom by Divine warrant in Old Testament times to formally anoint into office those who were called to be prophets, priests, and kings. See Exo. 28:41; Lev. 16:32; 1Sa. 9:16; 1Sa. 15:1; 1Sa. 16:12-13; 1Ki. 19:15-16, etc. This anointing was emblematic of investiture with sacred office, and of particular sanctification or designation to the service of God. To anoint meant, says Cruden, to consecrate and set one apart to an office (s.v., Concordance). The element used in the ceremony of anointing was olive oil (Exo. 30:22-25). This holy anointing oil was typical of the comforting and strengthening gifts and powers of the Holy Spirit.
To accept Jesus as Christ, therefore, is to accept Him as prophet to whom we go for the Word of Life, to accept Him as our great high priest who intercedes for us at the right hand of the Father, and to accept Him as King from whose will there is no appeal (because, of course, He wills only our good). (Cf. 1Ti. 2:5; Joh. 8:31-32; Joh. 16:14-15; Mat. 28:17; Eph. 1:19-23; Eph. 4:5; Col. 1:13-18, etc.).
According to the teaching of the Bible, there are three Dispensations of true religion. (Religion is that system of faith and practice by which man is bound anew to God, from the root, lig, and the prefix, re, meaning to bind back or bind anew.) Dispensations changedfrom the family to the national to the universalas the type of priesthood changed. The Patriarchal Dispensation was the age of family rule and family worship, with the patriarch (paternal head) acting as prophet (revealer of Gods will), priest (intercessor) and king, for his entire living progeny. The Jewish Dispensation was ushered in with the establishment of a national institution of worship (the Tabernacle, and later the Temple) and a national priesthood (the Levitical or Aaronic priesthood). The Christian Dispensation had its beginning with the abrogation of the Old Covenant and ratification of the New, by one and the same eventthe death of Christ on the Cross (although the Jewish institution was permitted to remain as a social and civil institution some forty years longer, that is, down to the Destruction of Jerusalem and the dispersion of its people by the Roman armies, A.D. 70). (Cf. Joh. 1:17, Gal. 3:23-29, 2Co. 3:1-11, Col. 2:13-15, and especially the Epistle to the Hebrews, chs. 7, 8, 9, 10). Under the Christian System all Christians are priests unto God, and Christ is their High Priest (1Pe. 2:5; 1Pe. 2:9; Rev. 5:10, Rom. 12:1-2; Rom. 8:34; Heb. 2:17, also chs. 3, 5, 7; 1Ti. 2:5, 1Jn. 2:1, etc.). It will be recalled that Alexander Campbell referred to the Patriarchal Dispensation as the starlight age, to the Jewish Dispensation as the moonlight age, to the special ministry of John the Immerser (to the Jewish nation) as the twilight age, and to the present or Christian Dispensation (which may rightly be designated also the Dispensation of the Holy Spirit) as the sunlight age, of the unfolding of the divine Plan of Redemption. These successive ages, therefore, embrace the successive stages of the revelation of true religion, as set forth in the Scriptures. Refusal to recognize this fundamental unity of the Bible as a whole can result only in confusion, presumption, and, ultimately, eternal separation from God and all good (2Th. 1:7-10).
The subject matter of the Epistle to the Hebrews deals with the superiority of Christianity to Judaism, of the New Covenant to the Old Covenant (cf. Jer. 31:31-34, Heb., ch. 8). This is proved by the superiority of Christ, the Son of God, to angels, to Moses, to the Levitical priesthood, etc. Judaizers, in and out of the church, were contending, it seems, that if Jesus was truly Messiah, as High Priest He must have sprung from the tribe of Levi, because that tribe alone had been set apart as Israels priesthood. But, said they, Jesus actually hailed from the tribe of Judah, and this fact disqualified Him for the priestly office. The writer of the Epistle, replying to this argument, frankly admitted that the Lord Jesus did hail from the tribe of Judah, the tribe from which no high priest was ever supposed to come, according to the Old Testament writings. But, said he, referring to Psa. 110:4, God Himself declared in days of old (affirmed by an immutable oath) that the Messiahs High Priesthood should be after the order of Melchizedek, not after the order of the Levitical or Aaronic priesthood; that, whereas the Levitical priesthood was authenticated only by the power of a carnal commandment, the priesthood of the Messiah, like that of Melchizedek, was authenticated by the power of an endless life; hence, that whereas the former was temporal and imperfect, the latter was eternal and in every respect perfect or complete. Moreover, the Messianic High Priest, like Melchizedek of old who was King of Salem and Priest of God Most High, was destined to combine in His own Person both the Eternal Kingship and the Eternal Priesthood. (See Hebrews, chs. 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9.) This is true simply because of the fact that our Lord Jesus, Gods Only Begotten, is the First and the Last, the Alpha and Omega, the Living One (Rev. 1:4; Rev. 1:8; Rev. 1:17-18; cf. Joh. 1:1-14; Eph. 1:3-14; Eph. 2:11-22; Eph. 3:1-12; Col. 2:12-20; 1Co. 15:20-28, Php. 2:5-11, etc.).
The priestly office is necessitated (1) by the difference in rank between the divine and the human, (2) by the very structure of human nature and its needs. Man has always felt the need of confession and intercession. This is a recognized psychological fact: catharsis, the draining off of ones burdens by sharing them with a trusted friend is the first step in the psychoanalytic cure; every minister of the Gospel and every physician knows this to be true. If a famished man is not supplied with food, he will seize anything within his reach; and if the wants of the soul are not lawfully satisfied, the soul will seek unlawful and unholy gratification. If Christ does not fill the heart, some monstrous idol or some human priest (or even some supreme object of devotion such as Party or Cause, to the monolithic Leninist) will fill it. People need a confessor and intercessor. And if they do not learn to make God their Confessor, prayer their confessional, and Christ Jesus their Intercessor, they will heap to themselves a human confessional and a human priesthood, and so degrade true religion into superstition.
A true priest must possess three qualities or excellences:
1. He must have authority. Authority is moral power, and moral power is right, that is, the right to possess something, to do something, or to require something to be done. Who, then, truly has this power? Not the Jewish priests of old, because they were compassed about with infirmities. They had no authority to forgive sin in any sense of the term: all the High Priest of Israel could do was to go into the Holy of Holies on each Day of Atonement and offer sacrifices for the people; but even this did not procure the forgiveness of their sins. God merely laid them over, put them out of His Mind, so to speak, until the next Day of Atonement; and so the weight of human sin, laid over from year to year, grew into what was veritably a crushing burden until the one Sin-offering was made once for all, on the Cross of Calvary (Hebrews, ch. 9). Joh. 1:29note the singular here, the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world.
Who has this moral power? Not the priests of either pagan or papal Rome. They are men, and their assumption of it is a monstrous imposition upon the credulity of the masses. Jesus expressly forbids our calling anyone Father in a spiritual sense, except our Father in Heaven (Mat. 23:9): He alone is entitled to be addressed as Holy Father (Joh. 17:11; Joh. 17:25).
Who, then, does have this authority (moral power) to forgive sin, to be intercessor for the saints? Only one Person has itJesus of Nazareth: He hath this priesthood unchangeable; He alone is able to save to the uttermost them that draw near unto God through him (Heb. 7:24-25); He alone ever liveth to make intercession for His saints. This authority is His by virtue of WHO HE IS, The Living One: He who is alive for evermore; He is without beginning or end (Rev. 1:1; Rev. 1:4; Rev. 1:8; Rev. 1:17-18; Joh. 8:58), and therefore His power is that of an endless life (Heb. 7:16). While in the flesh He exercised this moral power as He saw fit (cf. Luk. 5:17-26; Luk. 23:39-43); now that He is Acting Sovereign of the universe and Absolute Monarch of the Kingdom of God, He alone has the right to intercede for His people at the Right Hand of God the Father (Mar. 16:19; Mar. 14:62; Luk. 22:69; Act. 2:33; Act. 5:31; Act. 7:55; Rom. 8:34; Eph. 1:20-23; Heb. 1:3; Heb. 8:1; Heb. 10:12; Heb. 12:2; 1Pe. 3:22). All authority (moral power) has been given unto Him in heaven and on earth (Mat. 28:18); and He must reign until He has put all His enemies, including death itself, under His feet for ever (1Co. 15:20-23, Php. 2:9-11; 2Co. 5:4).
2. The true priest must be characterized by purity. This fact manifests itself in our desire for the prayers of a good man in times of trouble; even a dying man would summon all his energies to spurn the prayer of a hypocrite offered in his behalf; such a prayer is an abomination to God and to man (Jas. 5:16; Mat. 7:21; Luk. 6:46-49; Joh. 15:16; Col. 3:17). A preacher is not a priest, except as every Christian man is a priest; but he is called upon to discharge certain priestly functions, to comfort the sorrowful, support the weak, pray with the dying; and the demand for his personal purity is as righteous as it is instinctive and universal. The Jewish high priest wore on his forehead a plate of pure gold, on which was engraved, Holiness to the Lord, God thus affirming the holiness of his ministry.
Now our High Priest alone meets this demand for personal purity. Heb. 7:26Such a high priest became us, holy, guileless, undefiled, separated from sinners, and made higher than the heavens. Note the saying, Such a High Priest is becoming to us, that is, appropriate, be-fitting. Not that it is fortuitous that we have such a High Priest, but that it is necessary: no other could fill the office of the eternal Priesthood. Consider, then, the High Priest of our Christian profession. Living on earth, yet undefiled with sin; keeping company with the outcast, but only to bless and save them. Our purity is soon lost; we leave it in our cradles. We lay off our innocence with our child garments. But the Son of Man lived a holy and undefiled life. How beautiful! How wonderful! that human life of pain, hunger, sorrow, thorns, temptation, and death, without sin! (Heb. 2:18; Heb. 4:14-15; Heb. 10:19-25).
3. The true priest must be characterized by sympathy. Perhaps compassion would be the better word: pity for the undeserving and the guilty (cf. Luk. 23:34, Act. 7:60). We need a priest who can be touched with the feeling of our infirmities. He must be pure, to appear before God. He must be filled with all human sympathies, to win our love and bear our burdens. It is the human heart of Jesus that qualifies Him for the eternal priesthood. It behooved him in all things to be made like unto his brethren, that is, to take upon Himself their human nature, that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people (Heb. 2:14-18). These words declare, not simply that he was made in all things like unto his brethren, but that it was necessary that he should be made in all things like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest. It was absolutely necessary for Him to assume our human nature and experience its frailities, in order to qualify for this eternal Priesthood. Heb. 13:8Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, and today, and for ever. Men sympathize with those of their own class or kind, but the rich can hardly sympathize with the poor, the learned with the ignorant, adults with children and youth. Let every tempted and struggling child be taught to go boldly to Christ, and find mercy and grace in the time of need. We need not be afraid to trust the faith of the child because he cannot appreciate the evidences of the divine origin of the Gospel. Salvation is in the Gospel, not in its evidences. Life is in the air we breathe, and not in any knowledge of its causes and chemistry. Our High Priest sympathized with all who needed mercy and salvation: with frail and impulsive Simon Peter; with the sisters of Bethany, Martha and Mary, at the grave of Lazarus; with the woman taken in the act of adultery (no doubt a victim of the social evils of her day) ; with the publican Zaccheus; with all who needed the true Burden Bearer of all time. Our High Priest, while in the flesh, was often tired and hungry; suffered loneliness such as only His sensitive soul could suffer; felt despair, as when He cried out on the Cross, My God, why hast thou forsaken me? He was tempted in all points as we are, and yet without sin. His sympathy is for all humankind, not for their sins, but for their frailities and struggles. (Cf. Psa. 103:13-18).
He knows all our sorrows. He knows all our struggles. He knows all our frustrations. He knows all our problems. He is our great High Priest who knoweth all our infirmities. The trouble with us is that we will not come unto Him that we may have all these blessings. What hope can we have of heaven without such a High Priest? What hope does the man have who ignores Him, who rejects the only salvation ever offered, the only Atonement provided, the only Intercession available? If we who are in Christ so often feel our unworthiness so much that we question whether we shall ever be able to attain, what must be the sad condition of the one who does not even make the effort, the one who proudly asserts his own goodness instead of reclining on the grace and advocacy of Christ? If the righteous is scarcely saved, where shall the ungodly and sinner appear? (1Pe. 4:18).
(The quotes appearing above are from a sermon by John Shackelford, in Biographies and Sermons of Pioneer Preachers, edited by Goodpasture and Moore, Nashville, Tenn. 1954.)
REVIEW QUESTIONS
See the end of Genesis 14 (Gen. 14:1-24).
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
XIII.
ABRAMS RETURN FROM EGYPT AND HIS SEPARATION FROM LOT.
(1-4) He went on his journeys.Or, according to his stations, which the Vulgate very reasonably translates, by the same route by which he had come. This route was first into the south, the Negeb, which is virtually a proper name, and thence to the spot between Beth-el and Ai mentioned in Gen. 12:8.
At the first does not mean that this was the first altar erected by Abram, but that he built it on his first arrival there. His first altar was at Shechem. As regards his wealth, while his cattle had been greatly increased in Egypt, he had probably brought the silver and gold with him from Mesopotamia. Gold, however, was plentiful at that time in Egypt, but silver rare.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
RETURN FROM EGYPT, Gen 13:1-4.
1. Abram went up out of Egypt An exodus typical of that later one of Israel, when another Pharaoh was plagued, and Abram’s sons and daughters went forth with much Egyptian spoil . Exo 12:36.
Lot with him Hitherto Lot had accompanied his uncle in all his wanderings to the west and to the south; but the time of separation draws near .
Into the south The Negeb, or south country, (Gen 20:1,) a name constantly used to designate the district immediately south of Palestine .
So, whether Abram journeys southward, as in Gen 12:9, or northward, as here, he goes into the Negeb; that is, enters the South Country bordering on Canaan. See note on Jos 10:40.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘And Abram went up out of Egypt, he and his wife, and all that he had, and Lot with him, into the Negev.’
The sentence confirms immediately that Abram had been accompanied by his family tribe and by his nephew. They return to the Negev, to the land that God had promised Abram.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
The Separation of Abraham and Lot Gen 13:1-18 gives the account of Abraham and Lot separating themselves from one another in the land of Canaan because of the size of their flocks and herds. Although the faith of Abraham was not yet mature, his heart with right with God. This story reveals Abraham’s faith in God in the area of divine provision. He entrusts himself into God’s divine care and providence, which is an important step to take in believing the promises that God would soon give him.
Gen 13:1 And Abram went up out of Egypt, he, and his wife, and all that he had, and Lot with him, into the south.
Gen 13:2 Gen 13:3 Gen 13:4 Gen 13:4
Gen 13:3-4 Comments – Abraham Returns to Bethel In Gen 13:3-4 Abraham comes out of Egypt and returns to Bethel. Why would he journey back to this city? Most likely it was because this was the last place where God spoke to him. In other words, it was the last place where he knew he was in God’s will for his life, since he very likely doubted it was God’s will for him to enter Egypt. So, in Bethel Abraham believed he would be heard by the Lord and granted spiritual guidance and direction. There he “called upon the name of the Lord.”
In our lives we too must evaluate our spiritual journeys, and return to the places where we knew we were last in God’s will. For example, when I graduated from college in June 1979 I rededicated my life back to the Lord after being out of church and running with the worldly crowds by moving back to my hometown and joining the church where I grew up. This was the place where I was able to get back on the spiritual journey for my life. For each one of us, the physical location may be different, but the principle is the same.
Gen 13:5 And Lot also, which went with Abram, had flocks, and herds, and tents.
Gen 13:6 Gen 13:7 Gen 13:7
We find the Perizzite coupled with the Canaanite again in Gen 34:30 and Jdg 1:4.
Gen 34:30, “And Jacob said to Simeon and Levi, Ye have troubled me to make me to stink among the inhabitants of the land, among the Canaanites and the Perizzites : and I being few in number, they shall gather themselves together against me, and slay me; and I shall be destroyed, I and my house.”
Jdg 1:4, “And Judah went up; and the LORD delivered the Canaanites and the Perizzites into their hand: and they slew of them in Bezek ten thousand men.”
Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures
Ten Genealogies (Calling) – The Genealogies of Righteous Men and their Divine Callings (To Be Fruitful and Multiply) – The ten genealogies found within the book of Genesis are structured in a way that traces the seed of righteousness from Adam to Noah to Shem to Abraham to Isaac and to Jacob and the seventy souls that followed him down into Egypt. The book of Genesis closes with the story of the preservation of these seventy souls, leading us into the book of Exodus where we see the creation of the nation of Israel while in Egyptian bondage, which nation of righteousness God will use to be a witness to all nations on earth in His plan of redemption. Thus, we see how the book of Genesis concludes with the origin of the nation of Israel while its first eleven chapters reveal that the God of Israel is in fact that God of all nations and all creation.
The genealogies of the six righteous men in Genesis (Adam, Noah, Shem, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob) are the emphasis in this first book of the Old Testament, with each of their narrative stories opening with a divine commission from God to these men, and closing with the fulfillment of prophetic words concerning the divine commissions. This structure suggests that the author of the book of Genesis wrote under the office of the prophet in that a prophecy is given and fulfilled within each of the genealogies of these six primary patriarchs. Furthermore, all the books of the Old Testament were written by men of God who moved in the office of the prophet, which includes the book of Genesis. We find a reference to the fulfillment of these divine commissions by the patriarchs in Heb 11:1-40. The underlying theme of the Holy Scriptures is God’s plan of redemption for mankind. Thus, the book of Genesis places emphasis upon these men of righteousness because of the role that they play in this divine plan as they fulfilled their divine commissions. This explains why the genealogies of Ishmael (Gen 25:12-18) and of Esau (Gen 36:1-43) are relatively brief, because God does not discuss the destinies of these two men in the book of Genesis. These two men were not men of righteousness, for they missed their destinies because of sin. Ishmael persecuted Isaac and Esau sold his birthright. However, it helps us to understand that God has blessed Ishmael and Esau because of Abraham although the seed of the Messiah and our redemption does not pass through their lineage. Prophecies were given to Ishmael and Esau by their fathers, and their genealogies testify to the fulfillment of these prophecies. There were six righteous men did fulfill their destinies in order to preserve a righteous seed so that God could create a righteous nation from the fruit of their loins. Illustration As a young schoolchild learning to read, I would check out biographies of famous men from the library, take them home and read them as a part of class assignments. The lives of these men stirred me up and placed a desire within me to accomplish something great for mankind as did these men. In like manner, the patriarchs of the genealogies in Genesis are designed to stir up our faith in God and encourage us to walk in their footsteps in obedience to God.
The first five genealogies in the book of Genesis bring redemptive history to the place of identifying seventy nations listed in the Table of Nations. The next five genealogies focus upon the origin of the nation of Israel and its patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
There is much more history and events that took place surrounding these individuals emphasized in the book of Genesis, which can be found in other ancient Jewish writings, such as The Book of Jubilees. However, the Holy Scriptures and the book of Genesis focus upon the particular events that shaped God’s plan of redemption through the procreation of men of righteousness. Thus, it was unnecessary to include many of these historical events that were irrelevant to God’s plan of redemption.
In addition, if we see that the ten genealogies contained within the book of Genesis show to us the seed of righteousness that God has preserved in order to fulfill His promise that the “seed of woman” would bruise the serpent’s head in Gen 3:15, then we must understand that each of these men of righteousness had a particular calling, destiny, and purpose for their lives. We can find within each of these genealogies the destiny of each of these men of God, for each one of them fulfilled their destiny. These individual destinies are mentioned at the beginning of each of their genealogies.
It is important for us to search these passages of Scripture and learn how each of these men fulfilled their destiny in order that we can better understand that God has a destiny and a purpose for each of His children as He continues to work out His divine plan of redemption among the children of men. This means that He has a destiny for you and me. Thus, these stories will show us how other men fulfilled their destinies and help us learn how to fulfill our destiny. The fact that there are ten callings in the book of Genesis, and since the number “10” represents the concept of countless, many, or numerous, we should understand that God calls out men in each subsequent generation until God’s plan of redemption is complete.
We can even examine the meanings of each of their names in order to determine their destiny, which was determined for them from a child. Adam’s name means “ruddy, i.e. a human being” ( Strong), for it was his destiny to begin the human race. Noah’s name means, “rest” ( Strong). His destiny was to build the ark and save a remnant of mankind so that God could restore peace and rest to the fallen human race. God changed Abram’s name to Abraham, meaning, “father of a multitude” ( Strong), because his destiny was to live in the land of Canaan and believe God for a son of promise so that his seed would become fruitful and multiply and take dominion over the earth. Isaac’s name means, “laughter” ( Strong) because he was the child of promise. His destiny was to father two nations, believing that the elder would serve the younger. Isaac overcame the obstacles that hindered the possession of the land, such as barrenness and the threat of his enemies in order to father two nations, Israel and Esau. Jacob’s name was changed to Israel, which means “he will rule as God” ( Strong), because of his ability to prevail over his brother Esau and receive his father’s blessings, and because he prevailed over the angel in order to preserve his posterity, which was the procreation of twelve sons who later multiplied into the twelve tribes of Israel. Thus, his ability to prevail against all odds and father twelve righteous seeds earned him his name as one who prevailed with God’s plan of being fruitful and multiplying seeds of righteousness.
In order for God’s plan to be fulfilled in each of the lives of these patriarchs, they were commanded to be fruitful and multiply. It was God’s plan that the fruit of each man was to be a godly seed, a seed of righteousness. It was because of the Fall that unrighteous seed was produced. This ungodly offspring was not then nor is it today God’s plan for mankind.
Outline Here is a proposed outline:
1. The Generation of the Heavens and the Earth Gen 2:4 to Gen 4:26
a) The Creation of Man Gen 2:4-25
b) The Fall Gen 3:1-24
c) Cain and Abel Gen 4:1-26
2. The Generation of Adam Gen 5:1 to Gen 6:8
3. The Generation of Noah Gen 6:9 to Gen 9:29
4. The Generation of the Sons of Noah Gen 10:1 to Gen 11:9
5. The Generation of Shem Gen 11:10-26
6. The Generation of Terah (& Abraham) Gen 11:27 to Gen 25:11
7. The Generation Ishmael Gen 25:12-18
8. The Generation of Isaac Gen 25:19 to Gen 35:29
9. The Generation of Esau Gen 36:1-43
10. The Generation of Jacob Gen 37:1 to Gen 50:26
Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures
The Genealogy of Terah (and of Abraham) The genealogies of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob have a common structure in that they open with God speaking to a patriarch and giving him a commission and a promise in which to believe. In each of these genealogies, the patriarch’s calling is to believe God’s promise, while this passage of Scripture serves as a witness to God’s faithfulness in fulfilling each promise. Only then does the genealogy come to a close.
Gen 11:27 to Gen 25:11 gives the account of the genealogy of Terah and his son Abraham. (Perhaps the reason this genealogy is not exclusively of Abraham, but rather of his father Terah, is because of the importance of Lot and the two tribes descended from him, the Moabites and the Ammonites, who will play a significant role in Israel’s redemptive history.) Heb 11:8-19 reveals the central message in this genealogy that stirs our faith in God when it describes Abraham’s acts of faith and obedience to God, culminating in the offering of his son Isaac on Mount Moriah. The genealogy of Abraham opens with God’s promise to him that if he would separate himself from his father and dwell in the land of Canaan, then God would make from him a great nation through his son (Gen 12:1-3), and it closes with God fulfilling His promise to Abraham by giving Him a son Isaac. However, this genealogy records Abraham’s spiritual journey to maturity in his faith in God, as is typical of each child of God. We find a summary of this genealogy in Heb 11:8-19. During the course of Abraham’s calling, God appeared to Abraham a number of times. God reappeared to him and told him that He would make his seed as numerous as the stars in the sky (Gen 15:5). God later appeared to Abraham and made the covenant of circumcision with him and said, “I will make My covenant between Me and you, and will multiply you exceedingly.”(Gen 17:2) After Abraham offered Isaac his son upon the altar, God reconfirmed His promise that “That in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies.” (Gen 22:17). The event on Mount Moriah serves as a testimony that Abraham fulfilled his part in believing that God would raise up a nation from Isaac, his son of promise. Thus, Abraham fulfilled his calling and destiny for his generation by dwelling in the land of Canaan and believing in God’s promise of the birth of his son Isaac. All of God’s promises to Abraham emphasized the birth of his one seed called Isaac. This genealogy testifies to God’s faithfulness to fulfill His promise of giving Abraham a son and of Abraham’s faith to believe in God’s promises. Rom 9:6-9 reflects the theme of Abraham’s genealogy in that it discusses the son of promise called Isaac.
Abraham’s Faith Perfected ( Jas 2:21-22 ) – Abraham had a promise from God that he would have a son by Sarai his wife. However, when we read the Scriptures in the book of Genesis where God gave Abraham this promise, we see that he did not immediately believe the promise from God (Gen 17:17-18).
Gen 17:17-18, “Then Abraham fell upon his face, and laughed, and said in his heart, Shall a child be born unto him that is an hundred years old? and shall Sarah, that is ninety years old, bear? And Abraham said unto God, O that Ishmael might live before thee!”
Instead of agreeing with God’s promise, Abraham laughed and suggested that God use Ishmael to fulfill His promise. However, many years later, by the time God commanded Abraham to sacrifice his son, he was fully persuaded that God was able to use Isaac to make him a father of nations. We see Abraham’s faith when he told his son Isaac that God Himself was able to provide a sacrifice, because he knew that God would raise Isaac from the dead, if need be, in order to fulfill His promise (Gen 22:8).
Gen 22:8, “And Abraham said, My son, God will provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering: so they went both of them together.”
Heb 11:17-19, “By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son, Of whom it was said, That in Isaac shall thy seed be called: Accounting that God was able to raise him up, even from the dead; from whence also he received him in a figure.”
The best illustration of being fully persuaded is when Abraham believed that God would raise up Isaac from the dead in order to fulfill His promise. This is truly being fully persuaded and this is what Rom 4:21 is referring to.
What distinguished Abraham as a man of faith was not his somewhat initial weak reaction to the promises of God in Gen 17:17-18, but it was his daily obedience to God. Note a reference to Abraham’s daily obedience in Heb 11:8.
Heb 11:8, “By faith Abraham, when he was called to go out into a place which he should after receive for an inheritance, obeyed ; and he went out, not knowing whither he went.”
Abraham was righteous before God because he believed and obeyed God’s Words on a daily basis. A good illustration how God considers obedience as an act of righteousness is found in Genesis 19. Abraham had prayed for ten righteous people to deliver Sodom from destruction. The angels found only four people who hearkened to their words. These people were considered righteous in God’s eyes because they were obedient and left the city as they had been told to do by the angels.
Abraham’s ability to stagger not (Rom 4:20) and to be fully persuaded (Rom 4:21) came through time. As he was obedient to God, his faith in God’s promise began to take hold of his heart and grow, until he came to a place of conviction that circumstances no longer moved him. Abraham had to learn to be obedient to God when he did not understand the big picture. Rom 5:3-5 teaches us that tribulation produces patience, and patience produces experience, and experience hope. Abraham had to pass through these four phases of faith in order to develop strong faith that is no longer moved by circumstances.
Let us look at Abraham’s history of obedience to God. He had first been obedient to follow his father from Ur to Haran.
Gen 11:31, “And Terah took Abram his son, and Lot the son of Haran his son’s son, and Sarai his daughter in law, his son Abram’s wife; and they went forth with them from Ur of the Chaldees, to go into the land of Canaan; and they came unto Haran, and dwelt there.”
He was further obedient when he left Haran and went to a land that he did not know.
Gen 12:1, “Now the LORD had said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father’s house, unto a land that I will shew thee:”
He was further obedient for the next twenty-five years in this Promised Land, learning that God was his Shield and his Reward. Note:
Gen 15:1, “After these things the word of the LORD came unto Abram in a vision, saying, Fear not, Abram: I am thy shield, and thy exceeding great reward.”
God called Himself Abraham’s shield and reward because Abraham had come to know Him as a God who protects him and as a God who prospers him. Note that Abraham was living in a land where people believed in many gods, where people believed that there was a god for every area of their lives. God was teaching Abraham that He was an All-sufficient God. This was why God said to Abraham in Gen 17:1, “I am the Almighty God; walk before me, and be thou perfect.” In other words, God was telling Abraham to be obedient. Abraham’s role in fulfilling this third promise was to be obedient, and to live a holy life. As Abraham did this, he began to know God as an Almighty God, a God who would be with him in every situation in life. As Abraham fulfilled his role, God fulfilled His divine role in Abraham’s life.
God would later test Abraham’s faith in Gen 22:1 to see if Abraham believed that God was Almighty.
Gen 22:1, “And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham, and said unto him, Abraham: and he said, Behold, here I am.”
God knew Abraham’s heart. However, Abraham was about to learn what was in his heart. For on Mount Moriah, Abraham’s heart was fully persuaded that God was able to raise Isaac from the dead in order to fulfill His promise:
Heb 11:19, “Accounting that God was able to raise him up, even from the dead; from whence also he received him in a figure.”
Abraham had to die to his own ways of reasoning out God’s plan. He had taken Eliezer of Damascus as his heir as a result of God’s first promise. Then, he had conceived Ishmael in an attempt to fulfill God’s second promise. Now, Abraham was going to have to learn to totally depend upon God’s plan and learn to follow it.
The first promise to Abraham was made to him at the age of 75, when he first entered the Promised Land.
Gen 12:7, “And the LORD appeared unto Abram, and said, Unto thy seed will I give this land: and there builded he an altar unto the LORD, who appeared unto him.”
This first promise was simple, that God would give this land to Abraham’s seed. So, Abraham took Eliezer of Damascus as his heir. But the second promise was greater in magnitude and more specific.
Gen 15:4-5, “And, behold, the word of the LORD came unto him, saying, This shall not be thine heir; but he that shall come forth out of thine own bowels shall be thine heir. And he brought him forth abroad, and said, Look now toward heaven, and tell the stars, if thou be able to number them: and he said unto him, So shall thy seed be.
This next promise said that God would give Abraham this land to Abraham’s biological child and that his seed would proliferate and multiply as the stars of heaven. So, Abraham has a son, Ishmael, by Hagar, his handmaid in order to fulfill this promise.
The third promise, which came twenty-five years after the first promise, was greater than the first and second promises. God said that Abraham would become a father of many nations through Sarah, his wife. Abraham had seen God be his Shield and protect him from the Canaanites. He had seen God as his Reward, by increasing his wealth (Gen 15:1). But now, Abraham was to learn that God was Almighty (Gen 17:1), that with God, all things are possible.
It was on Mount Moriah that Abraham truly died to himself, and learned to live unto God. In the same way, it was at Peniel that Jacob died to his own self and learned to totally depend upon God. After Mount Moriah, Abraham stopped making foolish decisions. There is not a fault to find in Abraham after his experience of sacrificing his son. When Abraham was making wrong decisions, he had the wisdom to build an altar at every place he pitched his tent. It was at these altars that he dealt with his sins and wrong decisions.
At Peniel God called Jacob by the name Israel. Why would God give Jacob this name? Because Jacob must now learn to totally trust in God. His thigh was limp and his physical strength was gone. The only might that he will ever know the rest of his life will be the strength that he finds in trusting God. Jacob was about to meet his brother and for the first time in his life, he was facing a situation that he could not handle in his own strength and cunning. He has been able to get himself out of every other situation in his life, but this time, it was different. He was going to have to trust God or die, and Jacob knew this. His name was now Israel, a mighty one in God. Jacob would have to now find his strength in God, because he had no strength to fight in the flesh. Thus, his name showed him that he could look to God and prevail as a mighty one both with God and with man. After this night, the Scriptures never record a foolish decision that Jacob made. He began to learn how to totally rely upon the Lord as his father Abraham had learned.
After Mount Moriah and Peniel, we read no more of foolish decisions by Abraham and Jacob. We just see men broken to God’s will and humble before God’s mercy.
Obedience is the key, and total obedience is not learned quickly. I believe that it takes decades, as we see in the life of Abraham, to learn to be obedient to a God whom we know as Almighty. This is not learned over night.
Abraham had a word from God before he left Ur. When he reached Canaan, he received a promise from God. Don’t mess with a man and his promise. Pharaoh tried to mess with this man’s promise and God judged him. King Abimelech tried to take Abraham’s promise, but God judged him.
Like Abraham, we may start the journey making some poor judgments, but God is greater than our errors.
We will first know God as our shield and our reward. He will protect us throughout our ministry. He will reward us. He will prosper our ministry. As we learn to be obedient, we will come to know our God as the Almighty in a way that we have never known Him before.
Do not mess with a man who has laid Isaac on the altar. I have heard Gen 17:17 taught as the laugh of faith.
Gen 17:17-18, “Then Abraham fell upon his face, and laughed, and said in his heart, Shall a child be born unto him that is an hundred years old? and shall Sarah, that is ninety years old, bear? And Abraham said unto God, O that Ishmael might live before thee!”
I see very little faith in Abraham’s words in these verses. On the other hand, I have heard other preachers criticize Abraham for his lack of faith at these times in his life; yet, I do not see God criticizing his faith. Abraham was not fully persuaded at this point, but he did not fail God. Abraham simply continued being obedient and living holy until the faith grew in his heart. Every wrong decision that Abraham made brought him that much closer to the right decision. We call this the school of hard knocks. As a result, faith continued to grow in his heart. By Genesis 22, Abraham was fully persuaded and strong in faith that God was Almighty.
Watch out, lest you criticize a man learning to walk in his promise. He may look foolish at times, but do not look on the outward appearance. You either run with him, or get out of the way, but don’t get in the way.
When I left Seminary and a Master’s degree, I was given a job driving a garbage truck while learning to pastor a Charismatic church. I was learning to walk in a promise from God. I will never forget riding on the back of these garbage trucks in my hometown, while the church members who had given money to send me to Seminary watched me in disbelief.
God does not measure a man by the size of his ministry, but by the size of his heart. When Jimmy Swaggart fell into sin, Alethia Fellowship Church was one of his partners, so this church was receiving his monthly ministry tapes during this period in his ministry. In a cassette tape immediately after his fall, he gave a testimony of how he told the Lord that he had failed. The Lord replied to him that he had not failed; rather the Lord had to get some things out of his life. [170] That word from God gave him the courage to go on in the midst of failure. You see, God was more pleased with Jimmy Swaggart living a godly life in fellowship with Him than preaching in great crusades while living in sin.
[170] Jimmy Swaggart, “Monthly Partner Cassette Tape,” (Baton Rouge, Louisiana: Jimmy Swaggart Ministries, February 1988), audiocassette.
Joyce Meyer said that if God measured our success by the way the world measured us, He would have called us “achievers” and not “believers.” [171] Abraham was justified by faith and not by his works. Our work is to believe, not to achieve.
[171] Joyce Meyer, Life in the Word (Fenton, Missouri: Joyce Meyer Ministries), on Trinity Broadcasting Network (Santa Ana, California), television program.
Many of my church friends and relatives criticized me as a failure. However, I knew somehow that the walk of faith was obedience to the Word of God, and not a walk of pleasing man. I obviously did not spend much time with people who thought that I was nuts. Instead, I spent so much time in my bedroom studying my Bible that I looked dysfunctional. Yet, the Lord strengthened me. I will never forget, after riding the garbage truck during the day, and hiding in God’s Word in the night. One night, I laid down about 1:00 a.m. and the glory of God filled my room until 5:00 a.m. in the morning. It was during these most difficult times that the Lord strengthened me the most.
The Lord strengthened Abraham in the midst of his questions and errors. If you will just stay obedient, God will see His Word come to pass through you, as did Abraham learn to see God as Almighty.
Gen 11:27 Now these are the generations of Terah: Terah begat Abram, Nahor, and Haran; and Haran begat Lot.
Gen 11:28 Gen 11:28
“And in the thirty-fifth jubilee, in the third week, in the first year [1681 A.M.] thereof, Reu took to himself a wife, and her name was ‘Ora, the daughter of ‘Ur, the son of Kesed, and she bare him a son, and he called his name Seroh, in the seventh year of this week in this jubilee. And ‘Ur, the son of Kesed, built the city of ‘Ara of the Chaldees, and called its name after his own name and the name of his father. And they made for themselves molten images, and they worshipped each the idol, the molten image which they had made for themselves, and they began to make graven images and unclean simulacra, and malignant spirits assisted and seduced (them) into committing transgression and uncleanness.” ( The Book of Jubilees 11.1-5)
Gen 11:29 And Abram and Nahor took them wives: the name of Abram’s wife was Sarai; and the name of Nahor’s wife, Milcah, the daughter of Haran, the father of Milcah, and the father of Iscah.
Gen 11:29
Gen 20:12, “And yet indeed she is my sister; she is the daughter of my father, but not the daughter of my mother; and she became my wife.”
Compare the comments in Gen 11:29 where Nahor, Abraham’s brother, took his niece, the daughter of Haran, as his wife.
Gen 11:29 “and the name of Nahor’s wife, Milcah, the daughter of Haran, the father of Milcah, and the father of Iscah” – Word Study on “Milcah” Gesenius tells us that by Chaldean usage the Hebrew name “Milcah” “Milkah” ( ) (H4435) means “counsel.” Strong tells us that the name means, “queen.” PTW tells us it means, “counsel.” She is daughter of Haran and sister to Lot and Iscah. She married her uncle named Nahor and bare him eight children. She is first mentioned in Gen 11:29 in the genealogy of Terah. She is mentioned a second time in Scripture Gen 22:20-24, where Nahor’s genealogy is given. Her name is mentioned on a third occasion in the chapter where Isaac takes Rebekah as his bride (Gen 24:15; Gen 24:24; Gen 24:47). She is mentioned no more in the Scriptures.
Word Study on “Iscah” Gesenius says the Hebrew name “Iscah” “Yickah” ( ) (H3252) means, “one who beholds, looks out” from ( ). Strong tells us that it comes from an unused word meaning “to watch.” PTW tells us it means, “Jehovah is looking” or “who looks.” Iscah was the sister to Milcah and Lot. Nothing more is mentioned of this person in the Scriptures, her significance being her relationship to her siblings, of whom Lot is the best known.
Gen 11:30 But Sarai was barren; she had no child.
Gen 11:30
Gen 11:31 And Terah took Abram his son, and Lot the son of Haran his son’s son, and Sarai his daughter in law, his son Abram’s wife; and they went forth with them from Ur of the Chaldees, to go into the land of Canaan; and they came unto Haran, and dwelt there.
Gen 11:31
“And Terah went forth from Ur of the Chaldees, he and his sons, to go into the land of Lebanon and into the land of Canaan, and he dwelt in the land of Haran, and Abram dwelt with Terah his father in Haran two weeks of years.” ( The Book of Jubilees 12.15-16)
However, Act 7:1-4 says that it was Abraham who moved out from Ur due to a Word from the Lord.
Act 7:1-4, “Then said the high priest, Are these things so? And he said, Men, brethren, and fathers, hearken; The God of glory appeared unto our father Abraham, when he was in Mesopotamia, before he dwelt in Charran, And said unto him, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and come into the land which I shall shew thee. Then came he out of the land of the Chaldaeans, and dwelt in Charran: and from thence, when his father was dead, he removed him into this land, wherein ye now dwell.”
Gen 11:31 Scripture References – Note:
Jos 24:2, “And Joshua said unto all the people, Thus saith the LORD God of Israel, Your fathers dwelt on the other side of the flood in old time, even Terah , the father of Abraham, and the father of Nachor: and they served other gods.”
Gen 11:32 And the days of Terah were two hundred and five years: and Terah died in Haran.
Gen 12:1-3
Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures
The Calling of the Patriarchs of Israel We can find two major divisions within the book of Genesis that reveal God’s foreknowledge in designing a plan of redemption to establish a righteous people upon earth. Paul reveals this four-fold plan in Rom 8:29-30: predestination, calling, justification, and glorification.
Rom 8:29-30, “For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.”
The book of Genesis will reflect the first two phase of redemption, which are predestination and calling. We find in the first division in Gen 1:1 to Gen 2:3 emphasizing predestination. The Creation Story gives us God’s predestined plan for mankind, which is to be fruitful, multiply, and fill the earth with righteous offspring. The second major division is found in Gen 2:4 to Gen 50:25, which gives us ten genealogies, in which God calls men of righteousness to play a role in His divine plan of redemption.
The foundational theme of Gen 2:4 to Gen 11:26 is the divine calling for mankind to be fruitful and multiply, which commission was given to Adam prior to the Flood (Gen 1:28-29), and to Noah after the Flood (Gen 9:1). The establishment of the seventy nations prepares us for the calling out of Abraham and his sons, which story fills the rest of the book of Genesis. Thus, God’s calling through His divine foreknowledge (Gen 11:27 to Gen 50:26) will focus the calling of Abraham and his descendants to establish the nation of Israel. God will call the patriarchs to fulfill the original purpose and intent of creation, which is to multiply into a righteous nation, for which mankind was originally predestined to fulfill.
The generations of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob take up a large portion of the book of Genesis. These genealogies have a common structure in that they all begin with God revealing Himself to a patriarch and giving him a divine commission, and they close with God fulfilling His promise to each of them because of their faith in His promise. God promised Abraham a son through Sarah his wife that would multiply into a nation, and Abraham demonstrated his faith in this promise on Mount Moriah. God promised Isaac two sons, with the younger receiving the first-born blessing, and this was fulfilled when Jacob deceived his father and received the blessing above his brother Esau. Jacob’s son Joseph received two dreams of ruling over his brothers, and Jacob testified to his faith in this promise by following Joseph into the land of Egypt. Thus, these three genealogies emphasize God’s call and commission to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and their response of faith in seeing God fulfill His word to each of them.
1. The Generations of Terah (& Abraham) Gen 11:27 to Gen 25:11
2. The Generations Ishmael Gen 25:12-18
3. The Generations of Isaac Gen 25:19 to Gen 35:29
4. The Generations of Esau Gen 36:1-43
5. The Generations of Jacob Gen 37:1 to Gen 50:26
The Origin of the Nation of Israel After Gen 1:1 to Gen 9:29 takes us through the origin of the heavens and the earth as we know them today, and Gen 10:1 to Gen 11:26 explains the origin of the seventy nations (Gen 10:1 to Gen 11:26), we see that the rest of the book of Genesis focuses upon the origin of the nation of Israel (Gen 11:27 to Gen 50:26). Thus, each of these major divisions serves as a foundation upon which the next division is built.
Paul the apostle reveals the four phases of God the Father’s plan of redemption for mankind through His divine foreknowledge of all things in Rom 8:29-30, “For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.” Predestination – Gen 1:1 to Gen 11:26 emphasizes the theme of God the Father’s predestined purpose of the earth, which was to serve mankind, and of mankind, which was to be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth with righteousness. Calling – Gen 11:27 to Gen 50:26 will place emphasis upon the second phase of God’s plan of redemption for mankind, which is His divine calling to fulfill His purpose of multiplying and filling the earth with righteousness. (The additional two phases of Justification and Glorification will unfold within the rest of the books of the Pentateuch.) This second section of Genesis can be divided into five genealogies. The three genealogies of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob begin with a divine calling to a patriarch. The two shorter genealogies of Ishmael and Esau are given simply because they inherit a measure of divine blessings as descendants of Abraham, but they will not play a central role in God’s redemptive plan for mankind. God will implement phase two of His divine plan of redemption by calling one man named Abraham to depart unto the Promised Land (Gen 12:1-3), and this calling was fulfilled by the patriarch. Isaac’s calling can also be found at the beginning of his genealogy, where God commands him to dwell in the Promised Land (Gen 26:1-6), and this calling was fulfilled by the patriarch Isaac. Jacob’s calling was fulfilled as he bore twelve sons and took them into Egypt where they multiplied into a nation. The opening passage of Jacob’s genealogy reveals that his destiny would be fulfilled through the dream of his son Joseph (Gen 37:1-11), which took place in the land of Egypt. Perhaps Jacob did not receive such a clear calling as Abraham and Isaac because his early life was one of deceit, rather than of righteousness obedience to God; so the Lord had to reveal His plan for Jacob through his righteous son Joseph. In a similar way, God spoke to righteous kings of Israel, and was silent to those who did not serve Him. Thus, the three patriarchs of Israel received a divine calling, which they fulfilled in order for the nation of Israel to become established in the land of Egypt. Perhaps the reason the Lord sent the Jacob and the seventy souls into Egypt to multiply rather than leaving them in the Promised Land is that the Israelites would have intermarried the cultic nations around them and failed to produce a nation of righteousness. God’s ways are always perfect.
1. The Generations of Terah (& Abraham) Gen 11:27 to Gen 25:11
2. The Generations Ishmael Gen 25:12-18
3. The Generations of Isaac Gen 25:19 to Gen 35:29
4. The Generations of Esau Gen 36:1-43
5. The Generations of Jacob Gen 37:1 to Gen 50:26
Divine Miracles It is important to note that up until now the Scriptures record no miracles in the lives of men. Thus, we will observe that divine miracles begin with Abraham and the children of Israel. Testimonies reveal today that the Jews are still recipients of God’s miracles as He divinely intervenes in this nation to fulfill His purpose and plan for His people. Yes, God is working miracles through His New Testament Church, but miracles had their beginning with the nation of Israel.
Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures
Abraham Returns to Canaan
v. 1. And Abram went up out of Egypt, he and his wife, and all that he had, and Lot with him, into the south. v. 2. And Abram was very rich in cattle, in silver, and in gold. v. 3. And he went on his journeys from the south even to Bethel, unto the place where his tent had been at the beginning, between Bethel and Hai; v. 4. unto the place of the altar, which he had made there at the first; and there Abram called on the name of the Lord.
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
EXPOSITION
Gen 13:1
And Abram went up out of Egypt, he and his wife. A special mercy that either of them returned, considering the sin they had committed and the peril in which they had been placed. And all that he had. Referring principally to the souls, “domestiei” (Poole), acquired in Haran (Gen 12:5, Gen 12:16), his material wealth being mentioned afterwards. And Lot (who does not appear in the preceding paragraph, no part of which relates to him, but is now reintroduced into the narrative, the present portion of the story being connected with his fortunes) with him into the south (sc. of Canaan, vide Gen 12:9).
Gen 13:2
And Abram was very rich. Literally, weighty; used in the sense of abundance (Exo 12:38; 1Ki 10:2; 2Ki 6:14). In cattle. Mikneh, from kana, to acquire by purchase, may apply to slaves as well as cattle (cf. Gen 17:12, Gen 17:13, Gen 17:23). In silver and gold. Mentioned for the first time in Scripture; implying an acquaintance among the Egyptians with the operations of mining and the processes of refining the precious metals. Cf. the instructions of Amenemhat I; which speak of that monarch, belonging to the twelfth dynasty, as having built for himself a palace adorned with gold.
Gen 13:3, Gen 13:4
And he went on his journeys. Literally, in his journeyings or stations!cf. Gen 11:2; Exo 17:1; Num 10:6, Num 10:12). The renderings }lqen (LXX.) and reversus est per iter quo venerat (Vulgate) imply without warrant that he used the same camping grounds in his ascent which he had previously occupied in his descent. From the south even to Bethel (vide Gen 12:8), unto the place where his tent had been at the beginning. Before his emigration into Egypt, i.e. not to Shechem, the site of his first altar, where probably he had not encamped for any length of time, if at all, but to a spot between Bethel and Ai (the exact situation being more minutely described as) unto the place of the altar, which he had made there at the first. After entering the promised land. In reality it was the second altar he had erected (vide Gen 12:7, Gen 12:8). And there Abram called on the name of the Lord. Professed the true and pure worship of God (Calvin); preached and taught his family and Canaanitish neighbors the true religion (Luther). Vide Gen 12:8; Gen 4:26.
Gen 13:5, Gen 13:6
And Lot also (literally, and also to Lot), who went with Abram (literally, going with Abram), had (were) flocks and herds and tents. The uncle’s prosperity overflowed upon the nephew. Rosenmller includes in the tents the domestics and servants, qui in tentoriis degebant (cf. 1Ch 4:41). And the land was not able to bear them. Literally, did not bear, i.e. support their households and flocks. That they should dwell together. In consequence partly of the scarce pasturage, the land probably having not yet sufficiently recovered from the drought, but chiefly because of their increasing wealth. For their substance (vide Gen 12:5) was great, so that they could not (literally, and they were not able to) dwell together.
Gen 13:7
And there was a strife (originating doubtless in the scarcity of pasture, and having for its object the possession of the best wells and most fertile grounds) between the herdmen of Abram’s cattle and the herdmen of Lot’s cattle: and the Canaanitethe lowlander (vide Gen 9:22; Gen 12:6)and the Perizzitethe highlander, or dweller in the hills and woods of Palestine (Josephus, Bochart); in the open country and in villages, as opposed to the Canaanites, who occupied walled towns (Kalisch, Wordsworth; a tribe of wandering nomads (Murphy), the origin of whose name is lost in obscurity (Keil), who, though not mentioned in Gen 10:1-32; are commonly introduced with the Canaanites (Gen 15:20; Gen 34:30; Exo 3:8, Exo 3:17), as dividing the land between them, and are probably to be regarded as the remnant of an early Shemite race displaced by the Hamite invaders of Palestine. Their introduction here is neither a sign of post-Mosaic authorship nor an interpolation, but an explanation of the difficulty of finding pasturethe land was occupied (vide Gen 12:6)dwelt then in the land.
Gen 13:8
And Abram said unto Lot. Perceiving probably that Lot’s face was not towards him as usual, and being desirous to avert the danger of collision between his nephew and himself. Let there be no strife, I pray thee, between me and thee, and (i.e. either identifying himself and his nephew with their subordinates, or fearing that the strife of their subordinates might spread to themselves, hence, as) between my herd-men and thy herdmen; for we be brethren. Literally, men brethren (cf. Gen 11:27, Gen 11:31; Exo 2:13; Psa 133:1). Abram and Lot were kinsmen by nature, by relationship, and by faith (vide Gen 11:31; 2Pe 2:7).
Gen 13:9
Is not the whole land before thee? The Bethel plateau commands an extensive view of Palestine (vide on Gen 13:10). Separate thyself, I pray thee, from me. Thus giving Lot the choice of the country. If thou wilt take the left hand (literally, if to the left hand (sc. thou wilt go), the Hebrew term being in the accusative after a verb of motionthen I will go to the right; or if thou depart to the right hand, then I will go to the left.
HOMILETICS
Gen 13:9
The magnanimity of Abram.
I. WHEN IT WAS EVOKED.
1. On returning to the land of Canaan. Departing into Egypt, the better nature of the patriarch became obscured and enfeebled, and he himself became the subject of timorous emotions, the deviser of guileful machinations, and the perpetrator of unworthy actions; retracing his erring footsteps to the holy soil, he seems as it were immediately to have recovered the nobility and grandeur of soul which he had lost in the land of Ham. When saints wander into sinful ways they inflict a hurt upon their spirits from which they cannot recover till they seek the good old paths. Sublime deeds of spiritual heroism are not to be expected at the hands of believers who con form to the world. The true champions of the faith, who by their personal behavior can illustrate its godlike character, are only to be found among those who walk as strangers and pilgrims on the earth, and do not stray from God’s commandments.
2. After having committed a great sin. The recoil which Abram’s spirit must have experienced when, in the light of God’s merciful interposition, he came to perceive the heinous nature of the transgression into which his fears had betrayed him in Egypt, had doubtless something to do with the lofty elevation of soul to which he soon afterwards climbed upon the heights of Bethel. So oftentimes a saint, through grace, is profited by his backslidings. The memory of the matter of Uriah had its influence in ripening the piety of David, and the recollection of the judgment-hall of Pilate assisted Peter to a height of spiritual fortitude he might not otherwise have attained.
3. After an experience of rich mercy. After all, God’s kindnesses to Abram and Sarai were the principal instrumentalities that quickened the better nature of the patriarch; and so it is generally in proportion as we meditate upon and partake of Divine mercy that our hearts are ennobled and enabled. It is the love of God in Christ that constrains a saint to holy and unselfish deeds.
II. HOW IT WAS OCCASIONED.
1. By the danger of collision between himself and Lot. The strife which had arisen between his nephew’s herdsmen and his own was liable, unless promptly extinguished, to communicate its bad contagion to himself and Lot. But the patriarch, with that insight which belongs to simple minds, discerned a method of avoiding so unseemly a calamity, and, with that self-forgetful heroism which ever characterizes noble souls, had the fortitude and magnanimity to put it into execution. It indicates an advanced stage of Christian maturity when what might prove temptations to sin are, by spiritual discernment and unshrinking self-sacrifice, transformed into occasions for holy acting and suffering.
2. By the necessity of separation which had come on him and Lot, which necessity was owing
(1) To their increasing wealth. If the present history shows that good men may become rich, and sometimes in dubious ways, it also reveals that wealth has its dangers. The character of Lot was demonstrably injured by prosperity;’ while if Abram escaped corruption through wealth, that wealth was indirectly the power which deprived him of his kinsman. It is a poor bargain when one grows rich at the expense Of his better nature, as did Lot; or even, like Abram, at the expense of affection. Better remain poor and keep friends than become rich and lose friends!
(2) To the quarrels of their servants. Though possibly occasioned by devotion to their masters’ interests, the contention of the herdsmen was wrong. Not even for the sake of employers should workmen and dependents become involved in strife. And still less should masters and mistresses become entangled in the wranglings of employees and domestics. Better part than fight!
III. BY WHAT IT WAS PRECEDED.
1. By a solemn act of devotion. Suitable at all seasons, prayer is specially needful and becoming in times of danger and trial like those in which the patriarch was situated. Nothing is better calculated to soothe the troubled heart, to allay irritation, to prevent strife, to enable the assaulted spirit to resist temptation, to grace the soul for arduous duty and magnanimous self-renunciation, than communion with God. Had Abram’s discernment of the growing danger to which he and Lot were exposed, and Abram’s contemplation of the necessity of yielding Lot the choice of the land their influence in taking him back to Bethel with its altar?
2. By an earnest deprecation of the rising strife. If the Spirit’s fruits will not flourish in the stagnant marsh of a dead soul, neither will they in the breast of an angry Christian. A peaceful mind and a quiet heart are indispensable pre-requisites to grace’s motions. Heavenly virtue cannot prosper in an atmosphere of wrath and contention. But where saints cultivate a gentle and forgiving spirit it is not uncommon to find them strengthened to perform deeds of holy valor. The conciliatory disposition of the elder of the two travelers was an admirable preparation for, almost a foreshadowing of, the magnanimous act that followed; as the perpetuation of the strife or the indulgence of anger on the part of Abram would have rendered it impossible.
IV. IN WHAT IT WAS DISPLAYED.
1. A sublime act of self-renunciation.
(1) In preferring Lot’s interests to his own, though Lot was the younger, and a dependent on himself, and in a manner only in the land by sufferance; in this exemplifying the very spirit which Christ and his apostles afterwards enjoined upon New Testament believers (Mat 20:26; Rom 12:10; Php 2:3); and
(2) in renouncing Canaan for the sake of peace, which was practically what he did when he gave Lot the choice of the land, the greatness of which act of self-abnegation appears when it is remembered that already God had given him the land, so that he, and not Lot, was entitled to elect to what quarter he should turn, and that this concession of his rights was intended to disarm Lot’s hostility; and preserve the unity of the Spirit in the bonds of peace.
2. A signal illustration of self-resignation, in which, when he beheld the meanness of Lot, and saw the best portion of the soil abstracted from him, there was neither a display of feeling towards his nephew nor the uprising of a pang of discontentment and regret at the result, but the most humble and self-satisfied acquiescence in what he knew to be the allotment of Heaven.
Learn
1. That soul-wealth is greater than material prosperity.
2. That a man becomes spiritually rich in proportion as he practices self-renunciation.
3. That the higher one rises in true spiritual greatness, the less is he affected by the loss of earth’s goods.
HOMILIES BY J.F. MONTGOMERY
Gen 13:1-13
The separation between Abram and Lot.
Return to Bethelto the altar. The circumstances of the patriarch were very different. He was very rich. Lot is with him, and the sojourn in Egypt had far more depraving effect upon his weaker character than upon that of his uncle. We should remember when we take the young into temptation that what may be comparatively harmless to us may be ruinous to them. The subsequent misery of Lot’s career may be all traced to the sojourn in Egypt.
I. The root of it lay in WORLDLY WEALTH LEADING TO CONTENTION. “They could not dwell together.”
II. THE DIVERGENCE OF CHARACTER IS BROUGHT OUT IN THE COMPLICATION OF EXTERNAL CIRCUMSTANCES. Lot is simply selfish, willful, regardless of consequences, utterly worldly. Abram is a lover of peace, a hater of strife, still cherishes the family feeling and reverences the bond of brotherhood, is ready to subordinate his own interests to the preservation of the Divine order, has faith to see that Canaan with the blessing of God is much to be preferred to the plain of Jordan with Divine judgments hanging over those who were wicked and sinners before the Lord exceedingly.
III. LESSONS OF PROVIDENCE ARE NOT LOST ON THOSE WHO WAIT UPON GOD, and can be learnt in spite of infirmities and errors. Abram could not forget what Egypt had taught him; rich as he was, he did not put riches first. He had seen that that which seems like a garden of the Lord in external beauty may be a cursed land after all. There are people of God who pitch their tents towards Sodom still, and they will reap evil fruits, as Lot did. It is a most terrible danger to separate ourselves from old religious associations. In doing so we cannot be too careful where we pitch our tent.R.
HOMILIES BY F. HASTINGS
Gen 13:8
Abraham, the peaceable man.
“Let there be no strife, I pray thee, between me and thee.” Abraham had a nephew who attached himself to his fortunes and shared his fate. Food, fodder, and water became scarce. The flocks of Lot and of Abraham are more than the land can sustain; the herdsmen of each strive together. Servants will often be more bitter towards the servants of a rival of their master, than those immediately concerned. Pathetic is the appeal of the patriarch for the maintenance of peace.
I. IT IS A MOST DESIRABLE THING TO LIVE IN PEACE WITH OTHERS. We are commanded to do so: “As much as lieth in you live peaceably with all men.” We may not sacrifice any good principle for the sake of ease, but we are to strive to maintain peace. In matters of faith a man may have to take up at times such a position that others will speak ill of him, but in regard to the neighborly life he must by all means cultivate amity and concord. Little is ever gained by standing on “our rights.” Scandal is always the fruit of quarrelling. The worldly-minded are sure to plume themselves on their superior goodness when the spiritually-minded contend. In many homes there is jangling, sneering, and strife; scathing remarks like hot cinders from Vesuvius fall carelessly around. Tyrannous tempers become like tornados, and moodiness kills like the choke-damp of an ill-ventilated mine. Among nations there should be maintenance of peace. The common sense of most should “hold the fretful realm in awe.” In the Church strife should cease. It will when each sect seeks to make men Christ-like and not uniform bigots.
II. THERE ARE ALWAYS MEANS OF MAINTAINING PEACE WHEN IT IS DESIRED. Abraham acted most unselfishly with this view; he yielded his claim to a choice. Lot owed much to Abraham, yet he seized an advantage. Lot looks towards Sodom; the strip of green beside the lake and reaching to Jordan reminds him of the land of Nile. The spirit of Egypt, whence he had lately come, is in him; he chooses Sodom, but with its green pastures he has to take its awful corruption. Abraham turns away in the direction alone left to him. He has his tent, his altar, the promises, and his God; he will live in peace. His Father will not forsake him; indeed God very speedily renews his promises to Abraham, and thus the unselfishness of a peaceful man met with an appropriate reward.H.
Fuente: The Complete Pulpit Commentary
Gen 13:1. Into the south Into the south of Canaan.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
SECOND SECTION
Abram as a witness for God in Canaan, and his self-denying separation from Lot. The New Promise of God. His altar in Hain (oaks) Mamre
Gen 13:1-18
1And Abram went up out of Egypt, he and his wife, and all that he had, and Lot with him, into the south [of Canaan]. 2And Abram was very rich, in cattle [possessions], in silver, and in gold. 3And he went on his journeys [nomadic departures, stations] from the south, even to Bethel, unto the place where his tent had been at the beginning, between Bethel and Hai; 4Unto the place of the altar which he had made there at the first: and there Abram called upon the name of the Lord. 5And Lot also, which went with Abram, had flocks [small cattle], and herds [large cattle], and tents. 6And the land was not able to bear [support] them, that they might dwell together: for their substance was great, so that they could not dwell together. 7And there was a strife between the herdmen of Abrams cattle, and the herdmen of Lots cattle: and the Canaanite and the Perizzite dwelled then [as owners, settlers, ] in the land. 8And Abram said unto Lot, Let there be no strife, I pray thee, between me and thee, and between my herdmen and thy herdmen; for we be brethren [men, brethren]. 9Is not the whole land before thee [open to thy choice]? Separate thyself, I pray thee, from me. If thou wilt take the left hand [land], then I will go to the right; or if thou depart to the right hand, then I will go to the left.
10And Lot lifted up his eyes, and beheld all the plain [literally, circle] of Jordan [the down-flowing, descending = Rhein], that it was well watered everywhere, before the Lord destroyed Sodom [burning] and Gomorrah [submersion], even as the garden of the Lord [paradise, in Eden with its stream], like the land of Egypt, as [until] thou comest to Zoar [smallness, the little one]. 11Then Lot chose him all the plain of Jordan; and Lot journeyed east [, from the east, Septuagint and Vulgate incorrect]: and they separated themselves the one from the other. 12Abram dwelled in the land [province] of Canaan, and Lot dwelled in the cities of the plain [the circle], and pitched his tent toward Sodom [until it stood at Sodom]. 13But the men [people] of Sodom were wicked, and sinners before the Lord exceedingly.
14And the Lord said unto Abram, after that Lot was separated from him, Lift up now thine eyes and look [out] from the place where thou art northward [to Lebanon], and southward [the desert], and eastward [to Perea], and westwards [the sea]. 15For all the land which thou [thus] seest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed for ever [to eternity]. 16And I will make [have determined] thy seed as the dust of the earth; so that if a man can number the dust of the earth, then shall thy seed also be numbered. 17Arise, walk through the land in the length of it and in the breadth of it; for I will give it unto thee. 18Then Abram removed his tent, and came and dwelt in the plain of Mamre [fatness, strength: name of the owner], which is in Hebron [connection, confederacy], and built there an altar unto the Lord.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
1. The Return of Abram from Egypt, and the introduction of the Separation from Lot (Gen 13:1-9). Into the south.Abram returned with Lot, whose migration with him to Egypt is thus presupposed, to Canaan, not as in Luthers version, to the south, but northwards to the southern part of Palestine, to the region of Hebron and Bethlehem, from which he had gone to Egypt. The is a term which had obviously attained geographically a fixed usage among the Israelites, and points out the southern region of Palestine. But the pasture-ground in this region seems to have been insufficient for Lot and himself at the same time. Besides his treasures in gold and silver he had grown rich in the possession of herds, especially through the large presents of Pharaoh.1 Hence he removes further, by slow and easy stages, to the earlier pasture-grounds between Bethel and Hai. Here, where he had earlier built an altar, he again sets up the worship of Jehovah with his family. This worship is itself also a preaching of Jehovah for the heathen. But even here the pasture-land was not broad enough, since Lot also was rich in herds, and the Canaanite and Perizzite then held the greater part of that region in their possession. These Perizzites are referred to, because they were those with whom Abram and Lot came most frequently into contact, and were their rivals. The Perizzites, who do not appear in the genealogical lists of the Canaanitish tribes, but only in the geographical enumeration of the inhabitants of the land (Gen 15:20; Exo 3:8; Deu 7:1; Jos 11:3), and whom we find in different parts of Canaan, are inhabitants of the lowlands, who devote themselves to agriculture and grazing (Eze 38:11; ZeGen Gen 2:4; Deu 3:5; 1Sa 6:18). The Perizzites, as the author intimates, were in possession of the best pastures; those only remained to Lot and Abram, which they had despised. Hengstenberg. Schrder conjectures that the Canaanites here designate the inhabitants of the cities in contrast with the Perizzites who dwelt in the open country. But the name designates, beyond question, not only a mode of life, but a peculiar people, and they are brought into notice here, because they were thickly crowded in the region of Bethel, with Abram. Gerlach: Perizzites, probably dwellers in perazoth, open courts, or villages, inhabitants of the country, in distinction from those who dwelt in cities. But then the greater portion of the Canaanites would have been Perizzites, from whom still Gerlach distinguishes the Canaanites. They appear to have been nomads. In Gen 34:30, they appear in Sichem; in Jos 11:3, between the Jebusites and Hittites, upon the mountains. Against the interpretation, inhabitants of the open country, see Keil, p. 137, who distinguishes the form and (Deu 3:5), inhabitants of the low or flatlands.2Let there be no strife between me and thee.The strife between the herdsmen, would soon issue in a strife between their masters, if these should quietly or willingly permit the disorder. It is possible that Lots restless, uneasy temper, had already betrayed itself in the open strife of his servants. The position of the words of Abram, between me and thee, standing before the allusion to the herdsmen, would seem to intimate something of this kind.We are brethren (brother men). The law controversies, which, although sometimes allowable between strangers, are yet in all ways to be avoided, ought not to have place between brethren. Here kindred, piety, and affection, should make the utmost concessions easy. In his humility Abram places himself on an equality with Lot, calls him brother, although he was his nephew, and owed to him the duty of a son. Indeed, he so far takes the subordinate place, that he yields to him the choice of the best portions of the land.If thou wilt take the left hand.The word of Abram has passed into a proverbial watchword of the peace-loving and yielding temper, in all such cases when a distinction and separation in the circumstances becomes necessary.
2. Lots Choice, and the Separation(Gen 13:10-13). The bold, unblushing, self-seeking features in Lots character come clearly into view here. He raises his eyes, and with unrestrained greediness chooses what seems to him the best. The circuit of the Jordan, i. e. the region of the Jordan (named simply ), includes the deep valley of the Jordan (the Ghor), from the Sea of Tiberias to the Dead Sea. The whole valley, until we reach the Red Sea, is the Arabah, which takes its name from the region here mentioned. It is the vale of Siddim (Gen 14:3), the present region of the Dead Sea, which is here intended. That the lower valley of the Jordan was peculiarly well-watered, and a rich pasture-region, is expressed by a twofold comparison; it was as Paradise, and as the land of Egypt. The lower plain of the Jordan was glorious as the vanished glory of Paradise, or as the rich plains of the Nile in Egypt, which were still fresh in the memory of Lot. For the Jordan and its valley, compare the Bible Dictionories, geographical works, and books of travels.3As thou comest to Zoar.At the southeast of the Dead Sea (Ghor el Szaphia).And they separated themselves, the one (a brother) from the other.The separation was brotherly in a good and evil sense; good in the mind and thought of Abram, and as to its peaceful form, but evil in so far as the nephew acts as a privileged brother, and chooses the best of the land.And Abram dwelled in the land of Canaan.The opposition here is not, as Knobel thinks, between Canaan and the lower valley of the Jordan, but between the land of Canaan in which Abram remained, and the plain rich in cities( must be emphasized in opposition to ). This also forms a distinct feature in Lots character. Abram remained in the retirement of his oaks, from which Lot removed further and further toward the cities of the valley, and indeed to those most renowned; he soon has his pastures in the neighborhood of Sodom, and his dwelling in Sodom itself. In Sodom, even, we find him in the most frequented placeat the gate. While there is no doubt that he left Mesopotamia in the characteristic faith of Abram, yet the prominence of the worldly thought and inclination is revealed in him, through these facts, although he on the whole preserves in the very heart of his disposition and thought, the essential features of faith and reverence for God. Sodom must have lain at the southwesterly end of the Dead Sea. The allusion to the pillar of salt points to this location (Gen 19:26), and its name is still preserved there in the present Usdum. The near vicinity of Zoar (Gen 19:20), which must be sought in the Ghor el Szaphia (see Gen 19:22) and the general nature of the southern part of the Dead Sea, are in favor of this location. Knobel. It is true, that the kindred of the Israelitish tribes left Palestine (Gen 21:14; Gen 25:6; Gen 25:18; Gen 36:6), but it by no means follows, as Knobel holds, that the writer brings this into prominence from special and interested motives, for the same writer records also the journeyings of the Israelites into Egypt.But the men of Sodom.We shall learn more fully the wickedness of the Sodomites in the 19th ch. It is referred to here, in order to show that Lot had chosen foolishly when he thought that he was choosing the best portion, and in order to make way for the history of the punishment which came upon Sodom, in which Lot also must suffer for his folly.4
3. The Renewal and Enlargement of the Promise of the Land of Canaan, with which Abrams new act of self-denial was rewarded, and his settlement in the groves (oaks) of Mamre, in Hebron(Gen 13:14-18).Lift up now thine eyes and look.After the departure of Lot, Jehovah commanded Abram now also to lift up his eyes, in pious faith, as Lot had raised his eyes in impious and shameless self-seeking. Since Bethel was about central in the land, and lay high upon a mountain (Gen 12:8; Gen 35:1, etc.), this direction is evidently historical;5 probably Abram could look far and wide over the land in all directions from this place.Northwards (towards the midnight), etc.The designation of the four-quarters of the heavens (com. Gen 28:14).And I will make thy seed.6 As the land should be great for the people, thy posterity, so thy people shall be numerous, or innumerable for the land. The seed of Abram are compared with the dust of the earth, with reference to its being innumerable. At a later point, the one hyperbole falls into two: as the stars of heaven, and as the sand upon the sea-shore (Gen 15:5; Gen 22:17).Arise, etc. The free passage through the land, should serve to animate his faith, and be a sign for his descendants of the symbolic seizure and possession of the land. The command is not to be understood as a literal direction; Abram could view the land promised to him, at his pleasure.Then Abram removed his tent.7 The oak-grove of Mamre lay in Hebron, and is often mentioned as the residence of the patriarchs (Gen 14:13; Gen 14:18; Gen 35:27). It had its name from the Amorite Mamre, a confederate with Abram (Gen 14:13; Gen 14:24), as the valley northerly from Hebron holds its name, Eschol, from a brother of Mamre (Num 13:23). Knobel. According to Knobel, the later custom of sacrificing to Jehovah at Hebron (2Sa 15:7), is dated back to the times in Genesis. Still, he can neither deny the migrations, nor the piety of Abram. As to the circumstance that, according to Jos 15:13, Hebron at an earlier date was called Kirjath-arba,8 see the Introduction. For the founding of Hebron, see Num 13:23. Bunsen: This remarkable narrative bears upon its face every evidence of historical truth, and is most fitly assigned to a time soon after 2900 years before Christ.
DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL
1. In the history of Abram we must distinguish throughout the providence of God, and the conduct of the patriarch. In the previous chapter the providence of God preserves in safety the promise to Abram, since it preserves Sarah inviolate. In this a new confirmation of the promise appears in the separation from Lot. The conduct of Abram is in both cases marked by a renunciation of self, grounded in faith. As the previous chapter portrays the self-renunciation of Abram in reference to his country, and his fathers house, in regard to a fixed settlement in Canaan, and to his connubial blessedness, so here we meet a like renunciation as to the relative position of Lot, and as to the best parts of Palestine itself. For this new act of self-denial is twofold. With the separation of Lot, leaving out of view now the society and assistance which Abram might have had in him, and which was renounced, his former patriarchal dependence upon Abram ceases, and with the residence of Lot and his family in the best of the land, there might arise a serious prejudice to the claims of the descendants of Abram to the land. But in regard to this also he trusts God, and in this case, without any exaggerated or over-hasty confidence, such as appeared in the exposure of Sarah.9
2. Abram returns to the place of his altar in Bethel. In like manner Christian settlements, towns, and villages, cluster around their churches.
3. The wealth of Abram is referred to by the early writers as an example that even rich people may be pious, and also that the pious may be rich. And indeed, without any contradiction to the word of Christ (Mat 19:24), for Christ himself explains that word more fully in the 26th verse, by the thought, that through the grace of God, one could be freed from the influence of his wealth, and enabled in humility to use it as a moral good for the glory of God. The writing of Clemens Alex., , is in place here. Moreover, the danger of riches appears prominently here, in the very first case in which riches, as such, are mentioned. His riches were, in some measure, a tax to Abram, since he could not find room for his herds, and his possessions threatened to involve him in hostility with his nephew. It is here also, as always, tainted with a want; the want in this case of sufficient pasturage, and the necessity for the separation of Abram and Lot. But for Lot, indeed, his wealth becomes a temptation, which he does not resist in any creditable way.
4. The germinal divisions of masters ofttimes reveal themselves clearly in the strifes of their servants and dependents. Even the wives are often in open hostility while their husbands are still at peace. Abram teaches us how to observe these symptoms in the right way. His proposal to separate arises from his love of peace, not from any selfish regard to his own interests.10
5. A law-suit is always doubtful or hazardous, although often necessary. Law-suits between brethren are to be avoided with double care and earnestness. How beautiful it is for brethren to dwell together in unity (Psa 133:1); but a peaceful separation is also beautiful, if it prevents a dwelling together in strife and hatred. This holds true also in spiritual things. Abram must avoid with special watchfulness giving an offence to the Canaanites.11
6. Wilt thou to the left hand, etc. An eternal shining example, and a watchword of the peace-loving, magnanimous, self-denying character which is the fruit of faith.12
7. The character of Lot. Its light side must not be overlooked. He had left Mesopotamia and his fathers house, cleaving to Abram and his faith, and up to this time had remained true to him in all his march through the land, to Egypt and back. Still, the return from the rich land of Egypt may have awakened in him thoughts similar to those which wrought with many of the Israelites, who murmured against Moses. At all events, the lower valley of the Jordan appears to him specially desirable, because it bears such a resemblance to Egypt. And in the way and manner, violating both modesty and piety, in which he chose this province, and regardless of religious prudence, yielded himself to the attractions of Sodom; the shaded and darker features of his character, the want of sincerity, delicacy, and that freedom from the world which became a pilgrim, are clearly seen. He is still, however, a man who can perceive the angels, and protect them as his guests. In comparison with the Sodomites he is righteous.
8. Lot makes the worst choice, while he thinks that he has chosen well. For his worldly-mindedness, the sin in his choice,13 he was first punished through the plundering of his house, and his captivity in the war of the kings, which followed soon after his choice, and then through his fearful flight from Sodom, and the losses, misfortunes and crimes which were connected with it. Thus, the want of regard to true piety, the selfishness, the carelessness as to the snares of the world, must ever be punished. And indeed, it is just when one thinks, that in his own wilful and sinful ways, he has attained his highest wishes, he finds himself ensnared in the retributions of divine righteousness, which rules over him and works with solemn irony.
9. We must distinguish clearly the times of the revelation and manifestation of Jehovah in the life of Abram, from the times in which he conceals himself from view, which may be regarded as the times of the elevation and sinking of the faith of Abram. He enjoys the first manifestation of God after the first proof of his faith, his migration to Canaan. On the contrary, there is no intimation of any revelation of God on his return from Egypt. But after Abrams noble act of faith towards Lot, he again receives a new promise in a new word of the Lord. Then again, after his march for the rescue of Lot (Gen 15:1). From his connection with Hagar, thirteen years elapse without any mention of a divine revelation, and the revelation which then follows (Gen 17:1 ff.) wears the form of a renewal of the covenant (Genesis 15). But now, after Abram had obeyed the command as to circumcision, he enjoys the fullest manifestation of God, with the most express and definite promise (Gen 18:1 ff.). Thus after his intercessory prayer for Sodom, he is rewarded by the appearance of the angels for Lot, and Lots salvation (Gen 19:29). After the events at Gerar, and his deportment there (Genesis 20), the quiet and ordinary course of life is only broken by the birth of Isaac, and then follows the great trial of his faith, which he heroically endured, and receives the seal of his faith. From this introductory completion of his life, it unfolds itself in the calm coming and going of the evening of his days. But the promises of God always correspond to the acts and conduct of faith which Abram had shown.
10. Lift up thine eyes and look (Gen 13:14). A glorious antithesis to the word: And Lot lifted up his eyes. The selfish choice brings disgrace and destruction, the choice according to the counsel and wisdom of God secures blessing and salvation.14
11. This is the third theocratic promise, including both the first (Gen 12:1-3) and the second (Gen 12:7). Knobel. But it has also, like the preceding, its own specific character. The first promise relates to the person of Abram; in him and in his name are embraced all promised blessings. In the second a seed was more definitely promised to Abram, and also the land of Canaan for the seed. But here, in opposition to the narrow limits in which he is with his herds, and to the pre-occupation of the best parts of the land by Lot, there is promised to him the whole land in its extension towards the four quarters of heaven, and to the boundless territory, an innumerable seed. It should be observed that the whole fulness of the divine promise, is first unreservedly declared to Abram, after the separation from Lot.15 Lot has taken beforehand his part of the good things. His choice appears as a mild or partial example of the choice of Esau (the choice of the lentile-pottage).
12. The Holy land: an allegory of Paradise, a symbol of heaven, a type (germ) of the sanctified and glorified earth.
13. For the primitive, consecrated Hebron, and the oak-grove Mamre, see the dictionaries, geographical hand-books, and books of travels, and also the Bible-work, Book of Joshua.
14. Starke (the Freiberg Bible): This is the first time that silver and gold are mentioned since the flood, and we may infer, therefore, that mining for these metals must have been practised. (Reflections upon Tubal-Cain).
15. The declaration that the Canaanites and Perizzites were then in the land, like the allusion to the Canaanites, Gen 12:6, furnishes no ground for the inference, according to Spinoza, that the passages were first written when there were no longer any Canaanites and Perizzites in the land. For the first passage says plainly, that it was on account of the Canaanites that Abram felt it necessary to go through the land to Sichem; and here again, that owing to their presence, he and Lot found themselves straitened for pasture-ground, and were compelled to separate.
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL
See Doctrinal and Ethical paragraphs. The happy exodus of Abram from Egypt, a prophecy or type of the glorious Exodus of the children of Israel.Abrams return to the altar in Bethel.The house of God the consecration of the home.Abram and Lot.The love of peace characteristic of the believer.The scandal of kindred and family strifes.The eager watchfulness of servants.The true separation for the sake of peace.The watchword of Abram in its typical significance.The blessing of a spirit of concession.The character of Lot in its lighter and darker aspects.Lots choice: 1. In its fair promise; 2. in its evil results.The third promise of God to Abram.The peril of the worldly life, and the blessing of retirement: Lot in the gate of Sodom, Abram in the oak-grove of Mamre.How quickly the paradise of Lots choice lay in the terrible depths of the Dead Sea.How firm the promise of the eternal possession of the Holy land to Abrams seed: 1. The conditional character of the promise with reference to his natural descendants (the Arabians in Palestine are still his natural sons); 2. its unconditional character for his believing children (Mat 5:5).
Starke: Abram and Lot feared God; they were related, and fellow-travellers. Poverty, hunger, and toilsome journeys to and fro, could not bring about any strifes, but the abundance of temporal possessions had nearly accomplished it, when Abram saw and marked the cunning of the devil. If this could happen to holy men like these, we may easily, see how far Satan may carry those whose hearts cling to this worlds goods.Lange, Gen 13:2 : It is one thing to be rich, and quite another to desire riches, and bend all ones energies and efforts to that end. It is not the former, but the latter, which is in opposition to true faith, and the divine blessing (Sir 31:1).
Gen 13:7. The devil is wont to sow tares, misunderstandings, and divisions, even between pious men and believers (Psa 133:1).
Gen 13:8-9. What a beautiful example of humility and the love of peace! The elder yields to the younger.Whoever will be a son of Abram, must strive to win his neighbor by love, but never seek to prevail by violence.
Gen 13:13. It is commonly (often) true, that the people are more depraved in those parts of the land which are more rich and fruitful (Psa 106:24-29).A good land seldom bears pious people, and we cannot endure prosperous days with safety (Eze 16:49).Osiander, upon Gen 13:18 : Religious worship at the first and last.Lisco: In this history, the principal thing is the grace of God towards the chosen race, the divine providence, through which circumstances are so arranged as to separate from this race one who was not a constituent portion of it. Under this providence Lot freely concedes all his claims to the land of promise, to which the plain of Jordan no longer belonged (certainly not the plain of Sodom, after its submersion). This interpretation is manifestly correct from the account Gen 13:14-15, that the new promise of the land of Canaan was given to Abram after the departure of Lot.
Gen 13:16. Includes not barely the natural but also the spiritual descendantsthe children of Abram by faith (Jer 33:22).16
Gen 13:17. This journey should be a type of the possession which took place much later under Joshua.Gerlach upon Gen 13:2. The outward earthly blessing was, to this man of faith, a pledge of the spiritual and invisible.Passavant: 1Jn 2:15; Mat 5:5; Mat 5:9; Mat 6:33.Indeed, if we only assert our just right and possessions, harshly and firmly, there is no praise nor reward from God, no promiseno pleasant bow of peace; we have our reward, blessing and peace therein.Schrder: From all these notices in reference to Canaan, it is clear that everything in this chapter bears upon the land of promise.Calvin: If no Canaanites surround us, we still live in the midst of enemies, while we live in this world.Luther: To the service of God, and the preaching of religion, and faith towards God (Gen 13:4), there is added now a most beautiful and glorious example of love to our neighbor, and of patience.Abrams generous and magnanimous spirit comes out all the more clearly, through the directly opposite conduct of Lot (Gen 13:10).Because Lot had in eye only the beauty of the land, he had no eye for the far higher, inward beauty of Abrams character.Schwenke: In his faith, Abram had placed a low estimate upon the world and its good things, and found a much richer blessing.Heuser: Abram in his disturbed relation with Lot: 1. The disturbance; 2. the way in which Abram removed it; 3. the thought which gave him strength for his work.17
Footnotes:
[1][Gen 13:5. To Lot also there were flocks. The blessing upon Abram overran and flowed over upon Lot. Jacobus, p. 237.A. G.]
[2][Keil adds, as of still greater force, the use of the name, now with the Canaanites, and now with the other tribes of Canaan, who obviously derive their names from their ancestors, or the head of their tribe.A. G.]
[3][Stanley: Sinai and Palestine; Jacobus: Notes.A. G.]
[4][This is one of the numerous passages which prove the unity of Genesis.A. G.]
[5][Stanley describes the hill as the highest of a succession of eminences, from which Abram and Lot could take the wide survey of the land on the right hand and on the left, such as can be enjoyed from no other point in the neighborhood.A. G.]
[6][The promise of the land for a possession is . The divine promise is unchangeable. As the seed of Abram should have an eternal existence before God, so also Canaan is the eternal possession of this seed. But this does not avail for the natural descendants of Abram as such, or his seed according to the flesh, but for the true spiritual seed, who receive the promise by faith, and hold it in believing hearts. This promise, therefore, neither prevents the exclusion of the unbelieving seed from the land of Canaan, nor secures to the Jews a return to the earthly Palestine, after their conversion. Through Christ the promise is raised from its temporal form to its real nature; through him the whole earth becomes a Canaan. Keil.Quum terrain sculum, promittitur, non simpliciter notatur perpetuitas; sed qu finem accepit Christi adventu. Calvin.A G.]
[7][Dwelt, settled down, made it the central point of his subsequent abode in Canaan. Wordsworth.A. G.]
[8][Its earliest name was Hebron, but it was later called Kirjath-arba by the sons of Anak. When the Israelites came into the possession of the land, they restored the original patriarchal name. Baumgarten, p. 178. Also, Hengstenbergs Beitrge, ii. p. 187 ff.; and Kurtz: History of the Old Covenant, p. 169.A. G.]
[9][Abram went up out of Egypt. In the history of Abram, the father of Isaac, the type and pattern of the true Israelites, we see prophetic glimpses of the history of his posterity. Abram went out of Egypt very rich in cattle, silver, and gold. Abram had his Exodus from Egypt into Canaan, and it was a prefiguration of theirs, Exo 12:35; Exo 12:38, which in time prefigures the pilgrimage of the church through the world to the heavenly Canaan. Is not the life of Abram, as presented in the Pentateuch, so wonderfully preadjusted to the circumstances and necessities of all the Israel of God, a silent proof of its genuineness and inspiration? Wordsworth.A. G.]
[10] [The heavenly principle of forbearance evidently holds the supremacy in Abrams breast. He walks in the moral atmosphere of the Sermon on the Mount (Mat 6:28-34). Murphy.A. G.]
[The practical nature of Abrams religion was most strikingly developed here. His conduct was marked by humility, condescension, and generosity. Bush: the natural fruits of his faith.A. G.]
[11][The presence of those powerful tribes is mentioned to show why Abram and Lot were so straitened as to pasturage, to signalize the impropriety and danger of their quarrelling among themselves, and to show that Abram felt that the eyes of these idolaters were upon him, and that any misstep on his part, as the representative of Jehovah, would be an occasion of stumbling to them.A. G.]
[12][Abram could have claimed the exclusive possession on the higher ground of the Divine promise and plan. But this exclusiveness is not the spirit of our holy religion. Jacobus, p. 239.A. G.]
[13][Murphy suggests that he was a single man when he parted from Abram, and therefore that he married a woman of Sodom, and thus involved himself in the sin of the Antediluvians, Gen 6:1-7.A. G.]
[14][Thus he who sought this world lost it; and he who was willing to give up anything for the honor of God and religion, found it. Fuller; see Bush, p. 219.A. G.]
[15][Abram has now obtained a permanent resting-place in the land, but not a foot-breadth belongs to him. His household is smaller in number than at first. He is old and childless, and yet his seed shall be as the dust of the earth. All around him is his, and he is only one among the thousandsbut . Delitzsch.A. G.]
[16][See also in confirmation the Epistle to the Hebrews, Gen 11:10; Gen 11:16, where the apostle points to the true and highest sense of the land promised. The spiritual seed require a heavenly inheritance, and the heavenly inheritance implies a spiritual seed.A. G.]
[17][The whole chapter remarkable, as it presents to us the workings of faith in the domestic and ordinary life, in the common transactions between man and man, and affords us an opportunity of observing how far his daily life was in unison with that higher character with which the inspired writers have invested him. Bush, 210.A G.]
Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange
CONTENTS
The history of the Patriarch Abram, is continued through the whole of this Chapter. He is still in his pilgrimage state, wandering and removing under the guidance of Heaven, from one place to another. His wealth is here particularly noticed; as also his remarkable piety. But troubles beset him. A strife between his servants and the servants of his kinsman Lot, soon causeth them to separate from each other. Lot removes eastward towards the fruitful plains of Sodom, and Abram remains still in Canaan.
Gen 13:1 And Abram went up out of Egypt, he, and his wife, and all that he had, and Lot with him, into the south.
It will be profitable to remark in this place (considering it spiritually) how the Lord, in the several ages of the church, hath led his people down into Egypt, and brought them up again. Gen 46:34 ; Hos 11:1 ; Mat 2:15 ; Rev 11:3
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Gen 13:10-11
The lesson to be gained from the history of Abraham and Lot is obviously this that nothing but a clear apprehension of things unseen, a simple trust in God’s promises, and the greatness of mind thence arising, can make us act above the world indifferent, or almost so, to its comforts, enjoyments, and friendships, or in other words, that its goods corrupt the common run even of religious men who possess them…. Could we not easily persuade ourselves to support Antichrist, I will not say at home, but at least abroad, rather than we should lose one portion of the freights which ‘the ships of Tarshish bring us’…. Surely, if we are to be saved, it is not by keeping ourselves just above the line of reprobation, and living without any anxiety and struggle to serve God with a perfect heart. No one, surely, can be a Christian who makes his worldly interests his chief end of action.
J. H. Newman.
Lot’s Choice
Gen 13:11
In the story of patriarchal times we see how the possession of property brought with it new social problems for the primitive family. In this case the difficulty began not with the principals, but with their retainers. Before the difficulty struck the masters, the servants were at war. Jealousy about respective rights, and emulation to secure the better bargain crept in. Abram with his calm wisdom saw that it would be better to avoid all such unseemly quarrels by voluntarily separating. Abram with generous disinterestedness offers Lot his choice. ‘If thou wilt take the left hand then I will go to the right; or if thou wilt take the right hand then I will go to the left.’ It was quite like Abram to do this, in keeping with his noble nature.
I. The presence of moral greatness either raises us or dwarfs us, either prompts us to rise to the occasion or tempts us to take advantage of it. Lot lost his choice of meeting Abram’s generosity. Worldly advantage was the first element in his choice. He judged according to the world’s judgment; he judged by the eye. His heart was allured by the beauty and fertility of the plain. On the other side the gain was limited and hardly won.
II. Now the power of the temptation to Lot, as it is the power of it to us, was that the good of the one alternative was present, while the good of the other seemed distant. The one could be had at sight; the other only through faith. The seduction of the world is that it is here, palpable, to be had now. To exercise self-control for the sake of a future blessing, to put off a present good for a prospective good needs strength of character and will, and, above all, faith.
III. Faith is the refusal of the small for the sake of the large. Worldly wisdom is not wisdom; it is folly, the blind grasping at what is within reach. Lot thought he was doing a wise thing in making the choice he did, but a share in the wealth of Sodom was a pitiful substitute for a place in Abram’s company and a share in Abram’s thoughts and faith. And the end was a ruined home, a desolate life, and a broken heart.
H. Black, Edinburgh Sermons, p. 33.
References. XIII. 11. G. A. Towler, From Heart to Heart, p. 1. XIII. 11-14. C. Perren, Revival Sermons, p. 242.
Abraham and Lot A Contrast
Gen 13:12
Abraham’s life is characterized throughout by great simplicity of motive. He is a man called of God, and true to the heavenly vision a ‘pilgrim of the invisible,’ as Robertson of Brighton called him, laying by. his faith and high surrender of himself the foundation of a kingdom from which the prophet and the psalmist and the apostle and our Lord Himself were to come. You get a glimpse into the inner soul of Abraham in this chapter. When it comes to a quarrel between his servants and Lot’s, and the younger man is scheming how he can promote his own interests by striking a good bargain, Abraham betrays on the whole subject a lofty indifference. He is so sure about God that he feels it matters very little whether he goes to the right hand or to the left. He does not need to stoop to any mean or grasping course to get what God has promised him. And although in this difference with Lot, as the older man and the leader of the enterprise, he might have claimed the first choice, he instead surrenders it.
I. In God’s Company. I find then that acting as he did Abraham got the best of both worlds. For one thing when he left Lot he went in God’s company. As always when a man does right, even at a sacrifice, he saw the heavens opened and heard God speaking. And then in making this lofty unselfish choice, Abraham discovered that he had not lost his inheritance, but rather come to the gate of it. Abraham sought heavenly riches and lo! the wealth of the world lay at his feet.
II. The Divided Heart. Lot is the type of a man, who tried in a very mistaken use of the phrase, to make the best of both worlds, and in the end got the good out of neither. You see him at every point trying to serve two masters, fearing God and yet pitching his tent towards Sodom. If you were to sum Lot up you might say he was an unsuccessful religious man, and an unsuccessful worldling, neither satisfied on the one side of his being nor the other. Lot’s was a dissatisfied life; let me try to make the statement good. For on the one side his religion was spoiled by his worldliness. When you see him in Sodom he is sitting in the gate to dispense hospitality, perhaps to administer justice. He vexes his righteous soul at the depravity that goes on about him. He is looked upon by the lawless Sodomites as in some ways a moral censor; for you remember they say, ‘This one fellow came in to sojourn, and he will needs be a judge’. But you feel at once that Lot differs from Abraham in that he did not make religious principle the guiding star of his life. Right feeling, for instance, should have prompted him to refuse Abraham’s generous offer of the first choice. But he did not refuse to take an unfair advantage of his kinsman. Then he pitched his tent towards Sodom, risking for worldly gear the defilement of his family.
III. A Life of Double Failure. Then on the other side Lot’s worldliness was spoiled by his religion. Another man might have let go the reins, and surrendered himself with wholehearted zest to the sordid and vicious life of Sodom. But Lot could not do that. And why? Because following him like a spectre was the memory of the days that were gone, the uplifting communion with Abraham and with God. And so he remained in Sodom, not entering into its life, uneasy and disturbed, vexing his righteous soul from day to day but without the moral courage to leave the city, till he was thrust out by the mercy of heaven ‘saved yet so as by fire’.
J. McColl, Christian World Pulpit, vol. lxxiv. p. 170.
References. XIII. 12. W. J. Dawson, The Comrade of Christ, p. 243. XIII. 12-13. R. C. Trench, Sermons New and Old, p. 258. XIII. 18-20. J. Vaughan, Fifty Sermons (2nd Series), p. 22. C. Stanford, Symbols of Christ, p. 3. XIII. P. W. Robertson, Notes on Genesis, p. 39. XIV. 13. A. Maclaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture Genesis, p. 93. XIV. 15, 16. J. Budgen, Parochial Sermons, vol. ii. p. 285. XIV. 17-24. Spurgeon, Sermon, vol. xliii. No. 2523; ibid., vol. xlix. No. 2814.
Fuente: Expositor’s Dictionary of Text by Robertson
Abram and Lot
Gen 13:1
This is the first time, is it not, that a rich man is mentioned in the Bible. I do not remember that we have yet seen that great division of human society which is known by the names of “rich” and “poor.” Now there is a rich man before us, and we shall see what rich men do when they are put to it. A wonderful thing it is, by the way, that some men should be rich and others poor they live on the same earth, they need the same comforts, yet one man seems to have everything and another to have nothing. Behind all this there must be a secret. It certainly looks like an unnatural state of things; yet we know that if all men had exactly the same today, in less than six months we should find ourselves very much where we are now.
In the text we learn that Abram was “very rich,” and that Lot “had flocks, and herds, and tents.” You will say, then, that this must have been a very happy company of travellers; they must be so, for they have come out at God’s call, they are walking in God’s way, and they have flocks and herds, and silver and gold, and every comfort that can be named. But even here a strife arose! “Their substance was great, so that they could not dwell together.” Things got mixed. The cattle ran together so that sometimes the herdmen could not tell which was which; the count was always wrong at night; and the noise got louder and louder as the herdmen became fretful and suspicious. It was a quarrel in the kitchen, as we should say nowadays. The masters seemed to get along fairly well with each other, but the servants were at open war. Small credit to the masters, perhaps! They had everything nice; the lentil soup and the smoking kid were punctually set before them, and mayhap the wine-flagon was not wanting. But noise travels upward. It gets somehow from the kitchen into the parlour. It was so in this case. Abram heard of the vulgar quarrel and was the first to speak. He spake as became an elder and a millionaire: “Lot,” said he “you, must see to it that my peace be not broken; you must lay the lash on the backs of these rough men of yours and keep them in check; I will not stand any noise; the lips that speak above a whisper shall be shut by a strong hand; you and your men must all mind what you are at, or I will scourge you all to within an inch of your lives.” And when the lordly voice ceased there was great fear amongst those who had heard its solemn thunder!
Now it so happens that the exact contrary of this is true. Abram was older than Lot, and richer than Lot, and yet he took no high airs upon him, but spoke with the meekness of great strength and ripe wisdom. His words would make a beautiful motto today for the kitchen, for the parlour, for the factory, for the Church: “Let there be no strife, I pray thee, between me and thee, and between my herdmen and thy herdmen; for we be brethren. Is not the whole land before thee? separate thyself, I pray thee, from me: if thou wilt take the left hand, then I will go to the right; or if thou depart to the right hand, then, I will go to the left.” And instantly Lot arose, and said: “No, mine uncle, this shall never be; I am the younger; I am but a follower; without thee I cannot stand; if we must part, the choice shall be thine, and what thou dost leave I will take.” A beautiful speech for a young man to make: quiet and also great, and full of tender pathos; but, unhappily, never made by Lot! This is what Lot really did; listen: “And Lot lifted up his eyes, and beheld all the plain of Jordan.” And as Lot stole out alone to take another look, he said to himself, “‘It is an ill wind that blows nobody any good’; if these rattle-pated herdmen had not come to high words this good luck never would have been mine.” And he looked round with the air of a rich lord, and hoped that all quarrels would end as well.
Brave Abram! we say as we read his words. He walked by faith and not by sight. Certainly his foot slipped in Egypt, but he is strong now, and he looks every inch a king as he stoops before Lot. “Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus; who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: but made himself of no reputation.” It is beautiful to see strength stoop to weakness, but a very hard thing for strength to do.
There is a clause in the story that has much meaning in it which would be useful to us: “And the Canaanite and the Perizzite dwelled then in the land.” No doubt their flocks helped to lessen the pasture which had already suffered from want of water, but I wonder whether we are not entitled to say that Abram did not want these strangers to hear any quarrelling amongst the Lord’s people. As if he had said: “They are pagans; they are to be sent away from this land; they know not our God; but if we fight and bicker, and if we assail and devour one another, they must think evil of our religion, and they may secretly despise our God. Let us not shame our call and our destiny before the worshippers of idols.” This is, at all events, a lesson which, we may learn and put in force today. The world overhears the Church, and if we scold and fret, and throw hard words at one another, the world may mock us and say how mighty must their God be who cannot still the noise of their vanity and pride. My brethren, the Canaanite and the Perizzite are still in the land! The mocker has come across the threshold of the Church that he may find food for bitter mirth; his ear is set, if haply he can hear one note of discord which he will maliciously magnify into a great uproar. Let us give none occasion to the enemy to blaspheme. Let us forgive one another, if any man have a quarrel against any, and let mercy triumph over the letter of the law.
Now let us look for a moment at Lot’s choice. The well-watered plain of Jordan is a great prize for any man, and Lot has made sure of it His estate is large, and is favoured by the sun and the clouds. Is there, then, any drawback? Read: “But the men of Sodom were wicked and sinners before the Lord exceedingly.” A great estate, but bad neighbours! Material glory, but moral shame! Noble landscapes, but mean men! But Lot did just what men are doing today. He made choice of a home, without making any inquiry as to the religious state of the neighbourhood. Men do not care how poor the Church is, if the farm be good. They will give up the most inspiring ministry in the world for ten feet more garden, or a paddock to feed an ass in. They will tell you that the house is roomy, the garden is large, the air is balmy, the district is genteel, and if you ask them what religious teaching they will have there, they tell you they really do not know, but must inquire! They will take away six children into a moral desert for the sake of a garden to play in: they will leave Paul or Apollos for six feet of greenhouse! Others again fix their tent where they can get the best food for the heart’s life; and they sacrifice a summer-house that they may now and again get a peep of heaven.
Abram will need some comfort now that Lot has gone. He will want some one to speak to. He will be lonely and dull. Many a strange talk they had at eventide as the great eastern stars came trooping forth from their hiding, and shone like lamps of silver on the crags and the green plains. Oh, the sight! Every star a veiled sun, and the broad moon like the shield of a king waiting peacefully for the fight, yet loathing war. And the two men spoke softly. They lived in a holy church; every wind a sweet hymn, every hill an altar set apart, every star a flaming minister of God. But now Abram is left alone, and he will need more than nature can give him; for nature becomes monotonous, and at last a mockery and a pain. So the Lord came to him and spoke to Abram in his mother-tongue: “Lift up now thine eyes, and look from the place where thou art northward, and southward, and eastward, and westward: for all the land which thou seest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed for ever: and I will make thy seed as the dust of the earth: so that if a man can number the dust of the earth, then shall thy seed also be numbered. Arise, walk through the land in the length of it and in the breadth of it; for I will give it unto thee.” A sweet word to speak to a dull heart, and a wonderful way of making up loss to a man who has done a brave deed and said good-bye to a friend he loved. God gives land. God gives children. God sends our bread day by day. We think that he looks at us only in church; we forget that he filleth our mouths with good things, and makes our basket rich with all kinds of store. Lot chose for himself. He took things into his own hands, and put himself at the head of his own affairs. What became of his management we shall see presently. He asked no blessing; will the feast choke him? he sought no advice; will his wisdom mock him and torment him bitterly? He snatched at good luck; will he fall into a pit which he did not see? O, my soul, make no model of this fool for thine own guidance. Perhaps his honour is but for a moment. Commit thy way unto the Lord, and choose nothing for thyself. In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he will direct thy paths. O rest in the Lord, and wait patiently for him. Seek not high things for thyself, nor take thy life into thine own keeping. O, my soul, I charge thee, live in the secret of Christ’s love. Walk in the way of the Lord seek him always with eager heart, and whether the road be long or short, rugged or plain, it will lead thee into the city where the angels are, and the firstborn and the loved ones who left thee long ago.
Fuente: The People’s Bible by Joseph Parker
XIX
THE CALL AND MIGRATION OF ABRAHAM
Genesis 12-13
Stephen says, “the God of glory appeared unto our father Abraham.” Jehovah is thus called in Psa 29:3 . In the Gospel of John the term is applied to the incarnate Word: “And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us (and we beheld his glory, glory as of the only begotten of the father), full of grace and truth” (Joh 1:14 ). The manifestation must have been in some visible form and deeply impressive.
The terms of the call. It was from “thy country, thy kindred, and thy father’s house and to an unknown land.”
The incentives. These were in the six fold promise: “And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and be thou a blessing; and I will bless them that bless thee, and him that curseth thee will I curse: and in thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed” (Gen 12:2-3 ).
The object of the call: (a) his own salvation (Rom 4:1-3 ) ; (b) to make him the father of a nation to become a depository of the oracles of God (Rom 3:1-2 ; Rom 9:4 ); (c) to make him the father of a spiritual seed until the end of time; (d) the progenitor of the Redeemer in whom all the families of the earth should be blessed (Rom 9:5 ; Gal 3:16 ).
The requirements of the call were faith and obedience.
These requirements were fully met. “By faith Abraham, when he was called, obeyed to go out unto a place which he was to receive for an inheritance; and he went out, not knowing whither he went” (Heb 11:8 ). Two important matters will be considered later: (a) The steps of Abraham’s faith; (b) the covenants established with him.
THE MIGRATION Ur of the Chaldees, while Semitic territory, was dominated by the Cushites, who were idolaters. There was no suitable environment among them for the upbuilding of a chosen nation. The objective point of the migration was the land of Canaan (Gen 1:31 ) But the line of the movement was up the Euphrates, not because it was direct, but because it was the thoroughfare of travel, having an abundant supply of water and pasturage. There were many of these migrations from the same country toward Canaan, and the Euphrates route was the usual way of approach, thereby avoiding the intervening desert. At Haran the movement was checked on account of the aged father who died there. Nahor, the other brother, seems later to have followed to the same point and there permanently established himself. In Haran both Isaac and Jacob subsequently found wives among his descendants. The caravan from Haran was large. The principal parties were Abraham, Lot and their wives. But they had many servants and cattle and much substance.
FROM HARAN TO SHECHEM The movement was steadily south and adjusted to the needs of their herds, lingering at pleasant stopping places while pasturage lasted. The tradition that he stopped a while in Damascus seems well founded, for there in his house was born his bond servant and steward, Eliezer of Damascus. (Compare Gen 15:2-3 .) Entering Canaan on the north, the movement progressed to Shechem, one of the most beautiful valleys in all the land, where was an already famous oak grove. Dr. Hackett thus describes the valley:
A few hours north of Bethel, a valley suddenly opens upon the traveller among the hills, which, though not so extensive as Esdraelon or Sharon, is yet unsurpassed in point of beauty and fertility, by any other region in the Holy Land. . . . It runs very nearly north and south, and may be ten or twelve miles in length and a mile and a half in breadth. . . . Toward the upper part of the plain the mountains which skirt its westward side fall apart, leaving a somewhat narrow defile between them, where stands Nablus, the ancient Shechem or Sychar. A more lovely spot than that which greets the eye it would be difficult to find in any land. Streams, which gush from perennial fountains, impart a bright and constant freshness to the vegetation.” Concerning the same valley Mohammed says: “The land of Syria is beloved by Allah beyond all lands, and the part of Syria that he loveth most is the district of Jerusalem, and the place which he loveth most in the district of Jerusalem is the mountain of Nablus.”
It was an ideal pastoral land, becoming yet more famous in after ages. Here the Lord appeared again to Abraham, and told him that this was the Promised Land. Abraham erected an altar in response to this intimation and the place became a permanent sanctuary. It was his way of setting up a standard to assert his title to the land yet in possession of the Canaanite. Under this famous oak in after times the grandson, Jacob, had serious trouble (Gen 35:4 ). Moses, in Deuteronomy, refers to these oaks. And here Joshua assembled all Israel in the impressive scenes of the nation’s history: (a) when blessings and cursings were announced from the opposite summits of Ebal and Gerizim, and (b) when he delivers his farewell address long afterward (Jos 24:2 ), and made a final covenant with the people and erected a memorial tablet (Gen 24:25-28 ). Nearly two centuries later the pillar was standing and the place was sacred (Jdg 5:6 ). Near the same place our Lord talked at the well with the woman of Samaria (Joh 4 ). We here note the fact that wherever Abram dwelt he erected an altar to God. Thus his whole life was a witness to that faith in the one God which is the groundwork in the civilization of our age, and is diffusing its blessings around the world.
BETHEL AND OTHER PLACES From Shechem Abraham makes a short move to Bethel and erects another altar. This place also becomes famous in the subsequent history. The historian calls the place by its later name. The early name of the place was Luz. The name “Bethel” was conferred by the grandson, Jacob, when fleeing from Esau, in commemoration of his conversion there when be dreamed of the ladder which reached to heaven. Leaving Bethel, Abraham moved steadily south until he had thus traversed Palestine from north to south. God is showing him the country that shall one day be possessed by his descendants. There seems little probability in his day of the fulfillment of the promise. He and his children lived on faith concerning the country, and for themselves lifted up their eyes to its heavenly antitype. Thus testified Stephen: “And he gave him none inheritance in it, no, not so much as to set his foot on: and he promised that he would give it to him in possession, and to his seed after him, when as yet he had no child” (Act 7:5 ). But Paul is bolder: “By faith he became a sojourner in the land of promise, as in a land not his own, dwelling in tents, with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him of the same promise: for he looked for the city which hath the foundations whose builder and maker is God. . . . These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them and greeted them from afar, and having confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth. For they that say such things make it manifest that they are seeking after a country of their own. And if indeed they had been mindful of that country from which they went out, they would have had opportunity to return. But now they desire a better country, that is, a heavenly: wherefore, God is not ashamed of them, to be called their God; for he hath prepared for them a city” (Heb 11:9-10 ; Heb 11:13-16 ).
THE FAMINE And now comes a calamity that sends Abraham out of the Promised Land. A long drought, followed by a famine, ensues. Pasturage, crops and water fail, a fearful trial to any cattleman, as we in Texas know by many experiences. There later, as here, oftentimes when surface water fails, the people resorted to well digging. Some wells then, as now, become not only famous, but the occasion of strife. But Abraham had not yet learned to find supplies of water under ground as later (Gen 21:30 ; Gen 26:15 ), and so taking counsel of fear rather than that of faith, he left the Promised Land for Egypt, even then the granary of the world. The whole expedition to Egypt seems to have been a mistake of human calculation, for in a similar experience in his son’s time Isaac was forbidden to go to Egypt (Gen 26:1-2 ).
We now come to the one blot on the fair name of this great patriarch. It seems that when he first left Haran to go on the long wandering among strange people, his mind was disturbed by the fear that the stranger in the land, having the power, would rob him of his beautiful wife, and so he led Sarah into a compact of duplicity, even on his own statement of the case, which he makes to Abimelech: “And it came to pass when God caused me to wander from my father’s house, that I said unto her: This is thy kindness which thou shalt show unto me: at every place whither we shall come, say of him, He is my brother.”
The example of the father was followed by Isaac, the son. The same principles apply to all three cases. We might as well dispose of all of them here. In reply to the question: What defense can be made of the duplicity of Abraham and Isaac, our answer is: It is difficult to make any defense of dissimulation. The most plausible explanation is thus made by Conant:
Censure would be just, if the object had been to deceive others to their injury. But the object was personal safety; and the injury to others arose from their own violation of the duties of hospitality and the rights of strangers. Persons traveling, or sojourning, where the full knowledge of their relations exposes them to dangers, are not bound to disclose all that concerns themselves, and in no way concerns others. This principle is often acted on, and without any violation of moral duty; but whether wisely and prudently, the circumstances of the case must decide. Abraham consulted his wife’s honour, no less than his own safety, in adopting this expedient. For if she had been deprived of him, her only protector, her fate would have been worse than his. But while he passed for her brother, none but honorable proposals would be made to her as his sister; and these could be evaded or postponed until they should remove to a place of safety. That she should be taken without consent, by royal authority, was a contingency not likely to be foreseen. But my own opinion is that this defense is specious, and hardly Justified by the facts, since the expedient was repeated by Abraham with Abimelech after its known failure in Egypt, and by Isaac later, with the double experience of Abraham before him. It would seem more consistent with dignity and morality, if both had implicitly trusted God and told the truth, thus saving themselves from being put to disadvantage by the just censure of unbelievers. The whole transaction is discreditable to Abraham, particularly his acceptance of gifts on account of his wife. Why, after this solemn lesson, it should have been repeated by both father and son is inexplicable.
The Scriptures themselves pass no express judgment on the duplicity of Abraham. They record the facts, whatever they may be. They anticipate Cromwell’s direction to the painter: “Paint me as I am. Leave out no scar or blemish.” But the Lord did intervene for the protection of Abraham by sending plagues on Pharaoh as later for oppressing Abraham’s descendants. In that case, as this, the Egyptians were urgent to get them out of the land. It is customary for commentators to eulogize Pharaoh and Abimelech for their integrity in condemning Abraham’s duplicity, but observe that they showed no integrity until after the rebuke of God. Then all at once, they who had seized a woman by violence from the household of an inoffensive stranger, became very pious. To these incidents the psalmist refers:
When they were but a few men in number, Yea, very few, and sojourners in it, And they went about from nation to nation, From one kingdom to another people, He suffered no man to do them wrong; Yea, he reproved kings for their sakes, Saying, Touch not mine anointed ones, And do my prophets no harm. Psa 105:12-25
Indeed, it was the protecting care of God that made them friends in every place, and camped around them as a protecting army.
EGYPT Observe the position already attained by Egypt, and that her rulers are styled Pharaohs. This was a title, not a name, sometimes used in connection with the name of the king, as Pharaoh Necho (2Ki 23:29 ), and Pharaoh Hopra (Jer 44:30 ). The discussion as to what dynasty in Egypt held rule in Abram’s time may be reserved for later investigation. Dr. Conant says:
There is reason to believe that the Pharaoh of this passage was not a native prince, but was one of the shepherd kings (Hyksos), who ruled over lower Egypt, bordering on Canaan, from about 2080 B.C., when the country was overrun by the incursion of the Arabian race, known in history as the Shepherds. The territory was nearly contiguous, known as the “south country” (Gen 12:9 ), and the language of the dominant races was the same in both. On the eastern frontier, toward Canaan, was a royal residence for a portion of the year, the Zoan mentioned in Num 13:22 , and referred to in Psa 78:12 ; Psa 78:43 , as the scene of the plagues of Egypt.
It is evident that Abraham learned some things in Egypt. When he came out of the land the record says he had silver and gold, which is the first notice in the Bible of these precious metals as currency. He also brought out of Egypt a handmaiden for his wife, who will cause some trouble later. The thirteenth chapter gives an account of the transaction between Abraham and Lot, to which you are referred for the answers to the questions of this incident.
QUESTIONS 1. What was the nature of Abraham’s call?
2. What were the terms?
3. What were the incentives?
4. What were the objects?
5. What were the requirements, did Abraham meet them and what was the proof?
6. Why was Abraham called to leave his country?
7. What was the objective point, the route, and why?
8. Why the sojourn at Haran?
9. What direction did he take from Haran? Did he atop at Damascus and the proof?
10. What was the first stopping place in Canaan and Dr. Hackett’s description of it?
11. What events of later history make this place famous?
12. What did Abraham do here which was his custom ever afterward?
13. What was the next objective point, its two names, who gave it the second and why?
14. What course did he take from Bethel and what was the object?
15. What was Abraham’s relation to this country, and what the proof?
16. What calamity drives him from the country, was this a wise course and the proof?
17. What one blot on his fame?
18. What is the best that can be said of the duplicity of Abraham and Isaac in passing off the wife as a sister? (Conant.)
19. Show wherein this does not exculpate.
20. What is the explanation of their success under such circumstances?
21. Who was the ruler in Egypt at this time and what did Abraham bring out of Egypt with him?
22. Who accompanied Abraham from Haran through Canaan to Egypt and came out with him?
23. On leaving Egypt, what their objective point?
24. What trouble arose between Abraham and Lot and what was cause?
25. How was this difficulty settled and what the definite location of each after their separation?
26. After Lot was separated from Abraham what revelation did God make to him and where does he next pitch his tent?
Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible
Gen 13:1 And Abram went up out of Egypt, he, and his wife, and all that he had, and Lot with him, into the south.
Ver. 1. And Abram went up out of Egypt. ] There must be likewise daily ascensions in our hearts, out of the Egypt of this world, to the heavenly Canaan, where Christ our altar is. The Church is compared to “pillars of smoke” ascending. Son 3:6 Black she is as smoke in regard of infirmities, yet hath a principle to carry her upwards. Who is this that ascends out of this Egypt below with pillars of smoke, elationibus fumi , that is, with her affections, thoughts, desires, upward, heavenward? Our Edward I had a mighty desire to go to the Holy Land; and because he was hindered, he gave his son a charge upon his deathbed, to carry his heart thither, and prepared 32,000 English pounds to that purpose. a The children of faithful Abram, though their bodies be on earth, yet they take much pains, and are at great charge, to get up their hearts to heaven. Hence they are called “eagles,” Mat 24:28 for their high soaring, and are said to have “noses like the tower of Lebanon,” Son 7:4 for their singular sagacity in resenting and smelling after Christ, the true all quickening body.
a Act. and Mon.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Genesis
THE IMPORTANCE OF A CHOICE
Gen 13:1 – Gen 13:13
The main lesson of this section is the wisdom of seeking spiritual rather than temporal good. That is illustrated on both sides. Prosperity attends Abram and Lot while they think more of obeying God than of flocks and herds. Lot makes a mistake, as far as this world is concerned, when he chooses his place of abode for the sake of its material advantages. But the introductory verses Gen 13:1 – Gen 13:4 suggest a question, and seem to teach an important lesson. Was Abram right in so soon leaving the land to which God had led him, and going down to Egypt? Was that not taking the bit between his teeth? He had been commanded to go to Canaan; should he not have stopped there-famine or no famine-till the same authority commanded him to leave the land? If God had put him there, should he not have trusted God to keep him alive in famine? The narrative seems to imply that his going to Egypt was a failure of faith. It gives no hint of a divine voice leading him thither. We do not hear that he builded any altar beside his tent there, as he had done in the happier days of life by trust. His stay resulted in peril and in something very like lying, for which he had to bear the disgrace of being rebuked by an idolater, and having no word of excuse to offer. The great lesson of the whole section, and indeed of Abram’s whole life, receives fresh illustration from the story thus understood, which preaches loudly that trust is safety and wellbeing, and that it is always sin and always folly to leave Canaan, where God has put us, even if there be a famine, and to go down into Egypt, even if its harvests be abundant.
But another lesson is also taught. After the interruption of the Egyptian journey, Abram had to begin all his Canaan life over again. Very emphatically the narrative puts it, that he went to ‘the place where his tent had been at the beginning,’ to the altar which he had made at the first. Yes! that is the only place for a man who has faltered and gone aside from the course of obedience. He must begin over again. The backsliding Christian has to resort anew to the place of the penitent, and to come to Christ, as he did at first for pardon. It is a solemn thought that years of obedience and heroisms of self-surrender, may be so annihilated by some act of self-seeking distrust that the whole career has, as it were, to be begun anew from the very starting-point. It is a blessed thought that, however far and long we may have wandered, we can always return to the place where we were at the beginning, and there call on the name of the Lord.
Note how we are taught here the great truth for the Old Testament, that outward prosperity follows most surely those who do not seek for it. Abram’s wealth has increased, and his companion, Lot, has shared in the prosperity. It is because he ‘went with Abram’ that he ‘had flocks, and herds, and tents.’ Of course, the connection between despising the world and possessing it is not thus close in New Testament times. But even now, one often sees that the men who will be rich fall into a pit of poverty, and that a heart set on higher things, which counts earthly advantages second and not first, wins a sufficiency of these most surely. Foxlike cunning, and wolf-like rapacity, and Devil-like selfishness, which make up a large portion of what the world calls ‘great business capacity,’ do not always secure the prize. But the real possession of earth and all its wealth depends to-day, as much as ever it did in Abram’s times, on seeking ‘first the kingdom of God, and His righteousness.’ Only when we are Christ’s are all things ours. They are ours, not by the vulgar way of what the world calls ownership, but in proportion as we use them to the highest ends of helping us to grow in wisdom and Christ-likeness, in the measure in which we subordinate them to heavenly good, in the degree in which we employ them as means of serving Christ. We can see the Pleiades best by not looking directly at, but somewhat away from, them; and just as pleasure, if made the direct object of life, ceases to be pleasure, so the world’s goods, if taken for our chief aim, cease to yield even the imperfect good which they can bestow.
But now we have to look at the two dim figures which the remainder of this story presents to us, and which shine there, in that far-off past, types and instances of the two great classes into which men are divided,-Abram, the man of faith; Lot, the man of sense.
Mark the conduct of the man of faith. Why should he, who has God’s promise that all the land is his, squabble with his kinsman about pasture and wells? The herdsmen naturally would come to high words and blows, especially as the available land was diminished by the claims of the ‘Canaanite and Perizzite.’ But the direct effect of Abram’s faith was to make him feel that the matter in dispute was too small to warrant a quarrel. A soul truly living in the contemplation of the future, and filled with God’s promises, will never be eager to insist on its rights, or to stand on its dignity, and will take too accurate a measure of the worth of things temporal to get into a heat about them. The clash of conflicting interests, and the bad blood bred by them, seem infinitely small, when we are up on the height of communion with God. An acre or two more or less of grass land does not look all-important, when our vision of the city which hath foundations is clear. So an elevated calm and ‘sweet reasonableness’ will mark the man who truly lives by faith, and he will seek after the things that make for peace. Abram could fight, as Old Testament morality permitted, when occasion arose, as Lot found out to his advantage before long. But he would not strive about such trifles.
May we not venture to apply his words to churches and sects? They too, if they have faith strong and dominant, will not easily fall out with one another about intrusions on each other’s territory, especially in the presence, as at this day, of the common foe. When the Canaanite and the Perizzite are in the land, and Unbelief in militant forms is arrayed against us, it is more than folly, it is sin, for brethren to be turning their weapons against each other. The common foe should make them stand shoulder to shoulder. Abram’s faith led, too, to the noble generosity of his proposal. The elder and superior gives the younger and inferior the right of option, and is quite willing to take Lot’s leavings. Right or left-it mattered not to him; God would be with him, whichever way he went; and the glorious Beyond, for which he lived, blazed too bright before his inward sight to let him be very solicitous where he was. ‘I have learned, in whatsoever state I am, therewith to be content.’ It does not matter much what accommodation we have on ship-board, when the voyage is so short. If our thoughts are stretching across the sea to the landing at home, and the welcome there, we shall not fight with our fellow-passengers about our cabins or places at the table. And notice what rest comes when faith thus dwindles the worth of the momentary arrangements here. The less of our energies are consumed in asserting ourselves, and scrambling for our rights, and cutting in before other people, so as to get the best places for ourselves, the more we shall have to spare for better things; and the more we live in the future, and leave God to order our ways, the more shall our souls be wrapped in perfect peace. Mark the conduct of the man of sense. We can fancy the two standing on the barren hills by Bethel, from one of which, as travellers tell us, there is precisely the view which Lot saw. He lifted up his greedy eyes, and there, at his feet, lay that strange Jordan valley with its almost tropical richness, its dark lines of foliage telling of abundant water, the palm-trees of Jericho perhaps, and the glittering cities. Up there among the hills there was little to tempt,-rocks and scanty herbage; down below, it was like the lost Eden, or the Egypt from which they had but lately come.
What need for hesitation? True, the men of the plain were ‘wicked and sinners before the Lord exceedingly,’ as the chapter says with grim emphasis. But Lot evidently never thought about that. He knew it, though, and ought to have thought about it. It was his sin that he was guided in his choice only by considerations of temporal advantage. Put his action into words, and it says, ‘Grass for my sheep is more to me than fellowship with God, and a good conscience.’ No doubt he would have had salves enough. ‘I do not need to become like them, though I live among them.’ ‘A man must look after his own interests.’ ‘I can serve God down there as well as up here.’ Perhaps he even thought that he might be a missionary among these sinners. But at bottom he did not seek first the kingdom of God, but the other things.
We have seldom the choice put before us so dramatically and sharply; but it is as really presented to each. There is the shameless cynicism of the men who avowedly only ask the question, ‘Will it pay?’ But there are subtler forms which affect us all. It is the standing temptation of Englishmen to apply a money standard to everything, to adopt courses of action of which the only recommendation is that they promote getting on in the world. Men who call themselves Christians select schools for their children, or professions for their boys, or marriages for their daughters, down in Sodom, because it will give them a lift in life which they would not get up in the starved pastures at Bethel, with nobody but Abram and his like to associate with. If the earnestness with which men pursue an end is to be taken as any measure of its importance in their eyes, it certainly does not look much as if modern average Christians did believe that it was of more moment to be united to God, and to be growing like Him, than to secure a good large share of earthly possessions. Tried by the test of conduct, their faith in getting on is a great deal deeper than their faith in getting up. But if our religion does not make us put the world beneath our feet, and count all things but loss that we may win Christ, we had better 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 choice. But we may so far anticipate the future narrative as to point out that it affords a plain instance of the great truth that the sure way to lose the world as well as our own souls, is to make it our first object. He would have been safe if he had stopped up among the hills. The shadowy Eastern kings who swooped down on the plain would never have ventured up there. But when we choose the world for our portion, we lay ourselves open to the full weight of all the blows which change and fortune can inflict, and come voluntarily down from an impregnable fastness to the undefended open.
Nor is this all; but at the last, when the fiery rain bursts on the doomed city, Lot has to leave all the wealth for which he has sacrificed conscience and peace, and escapes with bare life; he suffers loss even if he himself is ‘saved as dragged through the fire.’ The world passeth away and the lust thereof, but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever. The riches which wax not old, and need not to be left when we leave all things besides, are surely the treasures which the calmest reason dictates should be our chief aim. God is the true portion of the soul; if we have Him, we have all. So, let us seek Him first, and, with Him, all else is ours.
Fuente: Expositions Of Holy Scripture by Alexander MacLaren
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Gen 13:1
1So Abram went up from Egypt to the Negev, he and his wife and all that belonged to him, and Lot with him.
Gen 13:1 Abram returns from Egypt to the Negev. The Negev means the dry southern portions of Canaan. He had migrated to this same region earlier (cf. Gen 12:9) and will return to it again in Gen 20:1. It is also where Isaac lived (cf. Gen 24:62).
Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley
Up = Palestine an ascent from Egypt.
south = Hebrew. the Negeb, S. of Judea, N. from Egypt. Compare Gen 11:9.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Thirteenth chapter of the book of Genesis. In chapter twelve, we find that Abraham had gone down into Egypt because of the famine. And there as the result of a lack of faith and trust in God to take care of him, he had Sarai pass herself off as his sister. But God brought a plague upon the Egyptians because the Pharaoh had more or less taken her into his harem and he rebuked Abraham for the deception and ordered his men to allow Abraham to travel freely. And so now Abraham is returning from Egypt in chapter thirteen.
He went up out of Egypt, he, and his wife, and all that he had, and Lot with him, into the south ( Gen 13:1 ).
That would be into the south part of the land of Canaan into the area of Beersheba, Kadesh, Barnea, Hebron there in the southern part.
And Abram was very rich in cattle, in silver, and in gold ( Gen 13:2 ).
So God had blessed Abraham in a material way, “rich in cattle, silver, gold.”
And he went on his journeys from the south even to Bethel, unto the place where his tent had been at the beginning, between Bethel and Hai ( Gen 13:3 );
So when Abraham first came into the land, his first stop was at Shechem, and then he came back towards the Jordan River at a high point. This is the highest point in the Jerusalem range of mountains, which begins actually in the area of Samaria and goes almost to Beersheba. Just before you get to Beersheba, you, the Jerusalem mountains sort of fade out. But this is the highest point and there is this mountain between the city of Bethel and Hai, the mountain in which he had just a tremendous view of the entire land. Abraham, when he first came there, was able to see the entire land, and there he built an altar unto the Lord and worshipped the Lord, and now he returned again to this spot of Bethel.
The place is actually sort of a significant place. It was near Bethel there that Jacob was fleeing from the wrath of his brother Esau, and he used a pillow of a rock, and he had a dream and the awareness of the presence of God. And there God made the covenant with Jacob, and said, “I am going to be with you whithersoever you go. I’m going to bless you. I’m going to prosper you and I’m going to bring you back into this land”. And Jacob sort of made his deal with God and said, “If You’ll be with me, if You’ll bless me and prosper me, I’ll give you a tenth of everything I get”.
And so Jacob made his deal with God and he left from the place of Bethel. Later on in Jacob’s career, God said to him, “I am the God of Bethel” ( Gen 31:13 ). And the Lord commanded him to return to Bethel. It was at Bethel that Jacob first became conscious of God, and God then challenged him to return to that place, really, of your first consciousness; more or less as Jesus called upon the church of Ephesus to return to their first love, that place where you first met God or you first became conscious of God.
And it seems that God seeks to call us back to that place of our beginning, the beginning of our faith, the beginning of our devotion, the beginning of that excitement of knowing God and walking with God. Sometimes we begin to take things for granted. Our Christian experience begins to sort of just become a prosaic kind of a thing. I just, you know, go along with it and I lose the excitement.
God said to Israel at one time where is the excitement of the espousal? You know, when I first called you out and upon all the people with holiness unto the Lord. In other words, the consciousness of the people was a God-consciousness. They were so aware of the presence of God and they were so excited in the things of God. And God is saying, where is the excitement of that espousal when I first drew you out of Egypt and all of you were aware and conscious of Me?
And we see movements of God’s spirit such as we are experiencing here. And it’s so exciting just the work of the Lord and the excitement of everyone just being, you know, turned on for Jesus and just, you know, we realize His presence, His power. We see His work. And there is that beauty of the excitement of God’s work in our midst. It’s always a sad and tragic day when that excitement begins to wane a bit and we begin to take for granted those things that at one time were so special and important and exciting to us. God help us that we will never take for granted His goodness, His grace and the blessings that we’ve experienced. I pray that that excitement shall never diminish. But each day we’ll be excited with the presence of God and with the work and the power of His Spirit within our lives. That we’ll never lose that just overawed kind of an experience that God is working in our midst. God is demonstrating His love and His power. That we’ll always have that fresh relationship with Jesus Christ.
And so Abraham returned to Bethel, the place where he had built an altar and offered a sacrifice unto God and God had first promised to him the whole land that was before him.
And Lot also, which went with Abram, had his flocks, and his herds, and his tents. And the land was not able to bear them, that they might dwell together: for the substance was great, so that they could not dwell together. And there developed a strife between the herdsmen of Abram’s cattle and the herdsmen of Lot’s cattle: the Canaanite and the Perizzite dwelled in the land ( Gen 13:5-7 ).
And so here there began to be a division between Lot and Abraham. Lot was Abraham’s nephew but Lot’s father Haran died very early. And Lot was left as an orphan. And so Abraham more or less adopted, inasmuch as he did not have any children of his own up to this point. He had more or less adopted Lot and raised Lot. So Lot was really like a son to Abraham and journeyed with him. But now they had both become very prosperous, the hand of the Lord’s blessing upon their lives.
And you remember Abraham had about three hundred menservants that he could arm for battle, gives you a size idea of the size of the multitude that was going with Abraham and Lot was probably just about in the equal position. And so because the land just wasn’t big enough to-for all of them to graze their cattle and sheep together, and strife began to rise up between the servants of Lot and the servants of Abraham.
Abraham called Lot.
And he said unto him, Let there be no strife, I pray thee, between me and thee, and between my herdsmen and thy herdsmen; for we are brothers. Is not the whole land before thee? separate thyself, I pray thee, from me: and if you will take the left hand, I will go to the right; if you’ll depart to the right hand, then I will go to the left. And Lot lifted up his eyes, and beheld all the plain of Jordan, that it was well watered every where, before the LORD destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, it was even as the garden of the LORD, like the land of Egypt, as thou comest to Zoar ( Gen 13:8-10 ).
So at that time, of course, it was not too long after the flood. The great African rift was probably somehow related to the flood. As we mentioned, there was a whole change in the geographical surface of the earth at the time of the flood. And in the beginning, the Dead Sea was formed actually, because there was no outlet for the Jordan River. And in the beginning there would not have been the high salt content which has been leached out of the soil through the years. And because there is no outlet for the Dead Sea, all of the mineral salt content has just continued to build up over the millennia so that today, of course, there is not possible that anything can live in the Dead Sea. But at that time, there was probably not the high concentration of salts that we have today. And before Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed, it was all well watered and it was a place of really lush vegetation.
Of course, you’re in a deep depression, twelve hundred feet below sea level, almost thirteen hundred feet below sea level there at the surface of the Dead Sea and the weather is tropical-type weather; gets very hot in the summertime and stays quite mild in the wintertime. Usually in the wintertime it’s in the seventies, high seventies, low eighties, can get up into the nineties even during the wintertime down there. And so it’s great for growing tropical kind of foods-papaya, mango, and of the tropical types of foods. And of course, all kinds of vegetation, citrus fruits and so forth grow very profusely down there around Jericho today, where they have a good water supply, fresh water supply.
So it is interesting because you’re in such a deep rift, so low that there are springs that just come out of the mountains and flow then on into the valley. And before the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, much more it was like the garden of the Lord. It was like the Garden of Eden. So Lot looked down at that lush tropical area and he chose to move down in that direction.
And Lot chose all of the plain of Jordan; and Lot journeyed east: and they separated themselves one from the other. And Abram dwelled in the land of Canaan, and Lot dwelled in the cities of the plain, and he pitched his tent toward Sodom ( Gen 13:11-12 ).
This was, you might say, sort of the beginning of the backsliding of Lot. First of all, his choice was a fleshly choice. He really didn’t consider Abraham and Abraham’s needs. But looking to himself first, he chose the plain of Jordan and then he pitched his tent toward Sodom. And next time we find him, he is sitting in the gates of Sodom, or actually he’s living in Sodom because he’s captured as he lives in Sodom. So the beginning, pitching toward Sodom, attracted somehow by this wicked city.
But the men of Sodom were wicked and sinners before the LORD exceedingly ( Gen 13:13 ).
It’s a very wicked place and yet Lot seemed to be somehow attracted by it. There does seem to be a certain type of an attraction to sin. Satan does make it look very attracting. “There is a way that seemeth right unto man, but the end thereof are the ways of death” ( Pro 14:12 ). You want to look down the road and find out where it leads to. Sin can be very exciting. Sin can be very thrilling. It would be wrong to say that it isn’t. It can be very pleasurable, but it eventuates in death. The wise man will look down and see where is the road leading. It might be a fun road to travel. It might be filled with allurement, excitement, but where is the path leading me?
My ambition is to someday ride the rapids either in the Grand Canyon or up in Idaho. I just would love to get on a raft and go down the rapids. I think it would be a-I’m just looking forward to someday doing that, either now or in the millennium but someday I’m going to ride the rapids. But there are rapids that I have no desire to ride and those are the rapids above Niagara Falls. Now I don’t doubt, but what they’re just as exciting as the Grand Canyon or any other rapids you might ride, but I don’t like where it is. So you go down; wee, fun, exciting, thrill, thrill. But man, the roar of the falls is getting louder. You’re heading for destruction. And so the person in the path of sin, excitement, thrilling, but you’re heading towards destruction. “The end thereof are the ways of death.”
Lot was attracted. He pitched his tent toward Sodom; this exceedingly wicked and sinful city even before Lot ever got there. “And Abram dwelled in the land of Canaan, Lot dwelled in the cities of the plain, he pitched his tent.”
And then the LORD said unto Abram, after that Lot was separated from him ( Gen 13:14 ),
It was probably a difficult experience. Lot had become like a son to Abraham. He was close. He loved him and parting is never an easy experience. You see Lot taking off, and it’s always harder to be the one that’s left. It’s always easier, I think, to go than to be the one that’s left behind. And to see them going always gives you sort of an empty, sinking feeling as they sort of disappear over the hill, you know. And I can imagine for Abraham it was a-here he’d been traveling for years together now, for probably something like fifty years they’ve been together, close. And now, he sees Lot taking off and there has to be an ache in the heart, a lump in the throat. And so the LORD comes to comfort Abraham. “And the LORD said unto Abraham after that Lot was departed from him.”
Lift up now thine eyes, and look from the place where thou art northward, southward, eastward, westward: For all the land which you see, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed for ever ( Gen 13:14-15 ).
God’s promise to Abraham; from the area there at between Bethel and Hai, this mountain peak, looking towards the north you see the area of Samaria. You can look clear on up and see Mount Hermon on a clear day. And he wasn’t bothered with smog in those days. Looking towards the east, you see the mountains of Moab. Looking towards the south, you see the area of Jerusalem, the southern ranges of Jerusalem, mountains clear on down to the area of Beersheba. Looking towards the west you see the Sharon plains and the Mediterranean. And so God said just look to the north, the south, the east, the west. Just as far as you can see, Abraham, I’m going to give you this land to you and to your seed. And God was going to give it to him forever.
But Jimmy Carter’s going to take away part of it from him. What’s that make him? I get in trouble with these remarks. I’ll get a dozen letters tomorrow, but they just come out. I’d have to apologize to people. I guess I’m too open. I just say what’s in my mind. But anyhow
And I will make thy seed as the dust of the earth: so that if a man can number the dust of the earth, then shall thy seed also be numbered ( Gen 13:16 ).
Now God promised, Hey, I’m going to multiply your seed like the dust of the earth. Now later on, we will get to it this evening a little later on. God said to Abraham in chapter fifteen, “Look up into the heavens and I am going to make your seed like the stars of the sky innumerable” ( Gen 15:5 ). Hey, that’s an interesting, interesting thing because modern science in that day thought that there were six thousand one hundred and twenty-six stars. They didn’t think they were innumerable. Many of the ancient people had counted the stars. And up until the time of Galileo, we didn’t realize that there were so many stars out there in the universe.
But now, they estimate the number of stars to be just so vast that you really can’t count them all. There are billions of galaxies like our Milky Way galaxy, and there are billions of stars in our Milky Way galaxy. Someone has estimated that there might be as many as ten to the twenty-fifth power stars. But it’s also interesting they’ve estimated that if you would take the amount of sand in a cubic inch, and take the volume of the earth, there’s probably ten to the twenty-fifth grains of sand that make up the earth.
So when God’s saying I’m going to make your seed as the sands of the sea or as the dust of the earth, and then as the stars of heaven, they’re probably sort of an equal number here. But the interesting thing is God said the whole idea is that they’ll be innumerable. You won’t be able to count them.
Now God’s promise was that you can’t count them and David’s sin was what? He tried to count them. He took a census. God didn’t want a census taken of His people because God’s promise is they’re going to be innumerable as the sands of the sea. You’re not going to be able to count them. David’s sin was in taking a census and counting the people and it brought God’s judgment against Israel because of David’s sin in counting the people. So since then, they didn’t take census in Israel, but everyone had to put a shekel into the temple treasury and then they’d count the shekels.
But the Orthodox Jew to the present day will not count off in a group. If you’re in a group and you’re playing party games, you’ve got a number in the group; an Orthodox Jew will not be numbered. And so they’ll say, “You’re not one, not two, not three, not four, not five”. You can always figure out ways to get around things, you know. So we’re not really not numbering because you’re not one and you’re not two. But the promise of God is the dust of the earth cannot be counted or numbered, so the descendants that I am going to give unto thee.
Now the Lord said
Arise, and walk through the land through the length and the breadth of it; for I will give it unto thee. Then Abram removed his tent, and came and dwelt in the plain of Mamre, which is in Hebron, and built there an altar unto the LORD ( Gen 13:17-18 ).
So Abraham moved from the place about twenty miles north of Jerusalem or twelve, fifteen miles north of Jerusalem actually to a place approximately twenty-two miles south of Jerusalem, still on the Jerusalem hills or the mountains of Jerusalem they call them, down now south of the valley of Eshcol. Now Eshcol was a place with a beautiful stream and well-watered and the grapes in the area of Eshcol were just phenomenal. They still are today. Some of the most delicious grapes ever had in our life came from the valley of Eshcol and right near of course is adjacent to the area of Hebron.
When Joshua and Caleb came spying out the land some four hundred years later in order to prove to the people that the land was a very fertile land, they picked a cluster of grapes that was so big that they had to carry it in a staff between them. And they took back this huge cluster of grapes to show the people, hey, this land is really fertile. This is great.
So Abraham moved south, plains of Mamre which are near Hebron some twenty miles or so south from Jerusalem.
“
Fuente: Through the Bible Commentary
Thus, delivered by the divine intervention, Abram set his face again toward the line of the divine purpose and returned to Bethel. In this act is seen the victory of faith over failure.
It was at this crisis that the separation came between Abram and Lot. The occasion was strife between herdsmen, but the reason is to be found in the differing principles governing the lives of the two men. Abram was following God. Lot had been following Abram; and while in the deepest desire of his life he was loyal to God, the lack of direct communion seems to have resulted in clouding his vision and lowering his ideals. In the hour of crisis he made his own choice and it was the choice of a man attempting to compromise. The conflict of desire within him is seen in the phrases, ‘like the garden of Jehovah, like the land of Egypt.” If these two things could be made contributory, then success was ensured by all the standards of human measurement.
Abram is seen in direct contrast to Lot in every way. Lot chose for himself. God chose for Abram. Lot chose by sight; “And Lot lifted up his eyes, and beheld.” Abram, by faith, chose not to choose; and now Jehovah brought him into the place of sight on the basis of faith: “Lift up now thine eyes.” Lot, having chose, obtained, and yet did not possess. Abram, trusting God, received from Him the title deeds to all the land, even including that which Lot had chosen for himself.
Abram immediately moved his tent and built his altar. In this connection the strength of faith is most clearly seen. Dependent on the promise of a seed to be as the dust of the earth, which at this time must have appeared to be contrary to all the probabilities of Nature, he took possession of the land by faith.
Fuente: An Exposition on the Whole Bible
Abram and Lot Part
Gen 13:1-13
The patriarch, like a restored backslider, made his way back to the old spot, on the highlands of Bethel, where his first tent and altar had stood. Through his wanderings hitherto there had been a depressing element of worldliness in his camp, through the presence of Lot, who, like many more, was swept along by his uncles religion, but had little of his own. Feeling that separation was inevitable, and that God would surely care for him, Abram offered Lot his choice. See Psa 16:5. The younger man chose according to the sight of his eyes. In his judgment he gained the world-but see 2Pe 2:7-8. The world is full of Lots-shallow, impulsive, doomed to be revealed by their choice and end. Let there be no strife! Blessed are the peacemakers! Wherever the interests of peace can be conserved through the sacrifice of your own interests, be prepared to forfeit the advantage, but stand like a rock when Gods truth is in balance.
Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary
Gen 13:10-13
That Lot was a good man in the ground of his character there is no reason to doubt. But good men have their besetting sins. Lot’s was worldliness, and it cost him dear.
I. Consider some features of the choice which Lot made. (1) Worldly advantage was the chief element in determining his place in life. The volcanic fires, slumbering beneath, made the plain of Sodom so fertile that its riches had become proverbial; and the Jordan, which has now so short a course to the Dead Sea, then wandered through the plain, like the rivers of Eden. Let’s eye regarded neither the dangers sleeping beneath, nor the light of God above, but only the corn and wine and verdant pastures. (2) Lot’s choice betrayed a want of generosity. Abraham gave to Lot the selection of place, and had Lot been capable of appreciating his generosity he would have declined to avail himself of the offer. But he grasped at it eagerly and took the richest side. Such men are the most unsatisfactory of friends, paining us constantly by their selfishness, and failing us in the hour of need. (3) Lot’s choice showed disregard of religious privileges. The sins of the men of Sodom were of a peculiarly gross and inhuman kind; had Lot’s religion been warm and bright he would not have ventured among them. He may have excused himself to his conscience by saying that he was going to do good, but when he left Sodom he could not count a single convert.
II. Consider the consequences of Lot’s choice. (1) As he made worldly advantage his chief aim, he failed in gaining it.
Twice he lost his entire possessions; he left Sodom poorer than he entered it. He was stripped of the labours of years, and dared not even look behind on the ruin of his hopes. (2) As Lot failed in generosity to Abraham, he was repeatedly brought under the weightiest obligations to him. He took an unfair advantage of Abraham, but ere many years had passed he owed all he had-family, property, liberty-to Abraham’s courageous interposition. (3) Lot’s disregard of spiritual privileges brought on him a bitter entail of sin and shame. His own religious character suffered from his sojourn in Sodom. This alone can account for the grievous termination of his history. His life remains as a warning against the spirit of worldliness. Both worlds frequently slip from the grasp in the miserable attempt to gain the false glitter of the present.
J. Ker, Sermons, p. 70.
Reference: Gen 13:10-13.-M. Nicholson, Communion with Heaven, p. 171.
Gen 13:10-11
The lesson to be gained from the history of Abraham and Lot is obviously this: that nothing but a clear apprehension of things unseen, a simple trust in God’s promises, and the greatness of mind thence arising, can make us act above the world-indifferent, or almost so, to its comforts, enjoyments, and friendships; or, in other words, that its goods corrupt the common run even of religious men who possess them.
I. Abraham and Lot had given up this world at the word of God, but a more difficult trial remained. Though never easy, yet it is easier to set our hearts on religion or to take some one decided step, which throws us out of our line of life and in a manner forces upon us what we should naturally shrink from, than to possess in good measure the goods of this world and yet love God supremely. The wealth which Lot had hitherto enjoyed had been given him as a pledge of God’s favour, and had its chief value as coming from Him. But surely he forgot this, and esteemed it for its own sake, when he allowed himself to be attracted by the riches and beauty of a guilty and devoted country.
II. God is so merciful that He suffers not His favoured servants to wander from Him without repeated warnings. Lot had chosen the habitation of sinners; still he was not left to himself. A calamity was sent to warn and chasten him: he and his property fell into the hands of the five kings. This was an opportunity of breaking off his connection with the people of Sodom, but he did not take it as such.
III. The gain of this world is but transitory; faith reaps a late but lasting recompense. Soon the angels of God descended to fulfil in one and the same mission a double purpose: to take from Lot his earthly portion, and to prepare for the accomplishment of the everlasting blessings promised to Abraham; to destroy Sodom, while they foretold the approaching birth of Isaac.
J. H. Newman, Parochial and Plain Sermons, vol. iii., p. 1.
References: Gen 13:10-12.-Old Testament Outlines, p. 8. Gen 13:11-Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. x., p. 27, vol. xx., p. 80. Gen 13:12.-R. Redpath, Thursday Penny Pulpit, vol. ix., p. 287. Gen 13:12, Gen 13:13.-R. C. Trench, Sermons, New and Old, p. 258.
Gen 13:18
(with Gen 14:13)
Mamre is the first village that comes before us distinctly in any authentic history. If Ararat was the cradle of the races of our world, Mamre was the cradle of the Church.
I. Mamre was a church among the trees.
II. It was a refuge for faith. Abraham and the patriarchs were emigrants; they left for the honour of God. The East is full of traditions concerning Abraham and his hatred to idolatry, and how he forsook the worship of the fire and the sun. He had come from the neighbourhood where the Babel society was founded,-faith, not in God, but in the vanity of bricks it had all ended in confusion, but the sacred memories of Mamre, where Abraham reared an altar to the Lord, these linger and send out their influence still. A high faithfulness ruled the life of Mamre, the life of domestic piety,-the first story given us of the life of faith, where Abraham raised an altar and called upon the name of the Lord.
III. The village of Mamre was the village of sacred promise. What night was that, when among its moorlands the Lord appeared unto Abraham in a vision and consecrated those heights by the glowing promises which we still recognise as true? In that little mountain hamlet was given the promise of Messiah’s reign.
IV. Mamre: what guests came thither? Here was that great entertainment made, “where,” says quaint Thomas Fuller, “the covert of the tree was the dining-room, probably the ground the board, Abraham the caterer, and Sarah the cook; a welcome their cheer; angels, and Christ in the notion of an angel, their guests.”
V. At Mamre are the oldest authentic graves of this earth-among them the grave of Abraham, the friend of God.
E. Paxton Hood, Preacher’s Lantern, vol. iii., p. 167.
References: Gen 13.-F. W. Robertson, Notes on Genesis, p. 39; R. S. Candlish, Book of Genesis, vol. i., p. 194; Parker, vol. i., p. 200, and Pulpit Analyst, vol. ii., p. 334. Gen 14:1-17.-Homiletic Quarterly, vol. v., p. 87.
Fuente: The Sermon Bible
CHAPTER 13 The Return from Egypt and Separation from Lot
1. Back to Bethel (Gen 13:1-4)
2. The strife (Gen 13:5-7)
3. The separation. Lot in Sodom (Gen 13:8-13)
4. The third communication of Jehovah (Gen 13:14-18)
Abram is graciously brought back. Abram could not have remained in Egypt forever. So the believer who has wandered away from the Lord will be restored. How precious the altar at Bethel must have been to him. Dispensationally Abrams going down to Egypt foreshadows the going down of his posterity.
Lots character is brought out in his selfish choice. He had not so much followed the Lord as he followed Abram. He is Self-centered, and unlike Abram looking to the things unseen, he is occupied with the things which are seen, with the earth and earthly possession. Lot is a type of the world-bordering, carnally minded, professing Christian. He lifts up his eyes and beholds a well-watered plain, beautiful as the garden of the Lord. He chooses all the plain of Jordan and pitched his tent toward Sodom. That Sodom and Gomorrah were fast ripening for the day of burning and destruction, that the men in Sodom were wicked and sinners well known in the day when Lot made his choice, is not taken into consideration by him. There was no prayer, no consultation with the Lord from the side of Lot. His eyes behold only the beautiful and well-watered Plain; there must have been a feverish haste to make his decision. Nor did Lot go at once into Sodom. He nears Sodom gradually. Perhaps at first he had no thought of having fellowship with the wicked men of Sodom, but he got there all the same. All is written for our learning. Decline begins gradually, but always leads into the world.
And Abram gazed too over the fertile plains. Some time after he looked again. And he looked toward Sodom and Gomorrah, and toward all the land of the plain, and beheld, and lo, the smoke of the country went up as the smoke of a furnace (Gen 19:28). Was Abram sorry then for his choice? Do not look upon the fairness of the world; remember a little while longer and wrath and judgment will be poured upon the world now under condemnation.
Another communication and promise is received by Abram from Jehovah.
Fuente: Gaebelein’s Annotated Bible (Commentary)
Chapter 18
The Strife Between Abraham and Lot
There was a strife between the herdmen of Abrams cattle and the herdmen of Lots cattle: and the Canaanite and the Perizzite dwelled then in the land.
Gen 13:1-18
Genesis 13 records one of the saddest, most troubling, most distressing, most shameful experiences in the lives of Gods people in this world. This chapter describes strife between Abraham and Lot, a strife which led to separation, and a separation which led to even greater sorrow. This was a strife between members of the same family. Abraham was Lots Uncle. It was a strife between brethren, strife between two men who had enjoyed the closest possible spiritual communion and fellowship. Abraham was Lots spiritual father. He was the instrument by whom Lot had learned the gospel. And it was strife in the church of God. The whole church of God in the world at this time was the family of Abraham. And Lot was a member of that blessed family.
Domestic trials, family quarrels, and strife in the house of God are not easy to bear. We would all prefer to pass through this world without trouble. If we must have trouble, we would prefer to have it anywhere than at home. Jacob would have preferred not to endure the trial he had with the loss of Joseph. David would have preferred to avoid the trials he had to endure from Michael, Amnon, and Absalom. And Abraham would have much preferred to live out his days with Lots constant companionship; but it must not be. Gods people all must through much tribulation enter into the kingdom of God. Much of that tribulation will come from our own homes.
Why is this? Why do believers have to endure domestic trials, particularly strifes, and quarrels, and divisions in our homes and in our churches? Three reasons are obvious. First, our faith must be tried in all directions. Just as silver and gold must be tried by the fire, not to destroy it, but to separate the precious metal from the dross, just as the diamond must be cut to shape it into a valuable gem, our trials are intended by our God to purify our hearts and mold us into the image of his dear Son. Second, our trials are designed to make us long for heaven. When God permits strife to rise between believers, especially of the same family, it is to remind us that this world of sin, strife, and sorrow is not our home. Third, these painful, domestic troubles are permitted by God, they are brought to pass by the wise, unerring providence of our heavenly Father, that we may learn by them, that we may learn patience, forbearance, and kindness toward one another.
God permitted the strife between Abraham and Lot to arise, come to a head, and erupt in permanent separation, disgraceful as it was, and recorded for us in the Holy Scriptures, so that we might learn from their mistakes.
Abraham and Lot were both saved men. Both were chosen of God. Both were redeemed by the blood of Christ. Both were called by the Spirit. Both believed God. Both were righteous before God, made righteous by having the righteousness of God in Christ imputed to them. Both are seated together now before the throne of God and of the Lamb. But, while they lived in this world, strife between their herdsmen brought strife between and divided them.
A Shameful Quarrel
Strife between brethren is always repugnant, bringing reproach upon the gospel we believe and upon the God we serve. The God of glory appeared unto Abraham when he was in Mesopotamia. The Lord God chose Abraham, called him alone, and made a covenant with him (Gen 12:1-3).
I do not know how much Abraham knew; but he was not an ignorant, barbarian. He knew and believed the gospel. When he was 75 years old, God promised to send his Son, the Lord Jesus Christ, into this world through the loins of Abraham (Gal 3:13-16); and Abraham believed God. Believing God, his faith was imputed to him for righteousness (Rom 4:3; Rom 4:13; Rom 4:23-25).
After the death of Terah, his father, Abraham left Haran, came into Canaan, and pitched his tent at Bethel. There he built an altar and called upon the name of the Lord. Bethel was the house of God to Abraham. Yet, he left Bethel because of the famine that arose in the land. He went down into Egypt for a while. Now, Abraham has returned from Egypt with his wife Sarah, all his possessions, all his servants, and with Lot. They all came back to Bethel. That is where Genesis 13 begins.
When he got back to Bethel, I am sure Abraham must have thought, Now my trials and troubles are all over. I am back in the place of God. It will be smooth sailing from now on. About the time he got settled, just as he had begun to gather his family for worship again at Bethel, strife broke out between his servants and the servants of Lot. This strife between Abraham and Lot was a very shameful, needless thing.
It was particularly shameful, because Abraham and Lot were both blessed of God with great wealth. They had as much of this worlds goods as they could possibly need (Gen 13:2; Gen 13:6). If one or the other of them had been poor and needy we might understand jealousy and strife between them. But both of these men were filthy rich. The word translated rich in verse two has many shades of meaning. It means rich, as our translation indicates. It also means honorable. It could also be translated heavy. Riches are a burden. Those who seek to be rich load themselves with thick clay (Hab 2:6).
In commenting upon the fact that riches are a heavy burden, Matthew Henry wrote, There is a burden of care in getting them, fear in keeping them, temptation in using them, quilt in abusing them, sorrow in losing them, and a burden of account, at last, to be given up concerning them.
Certainly, riches may be a great blessing of Gods providence. Abraham was a man rich in faith and rich in this worlds goods. If well-managed, earthly wealth is a friend to faith. It furnishes men with the opportunity to do much good. But very few men can be both wealthy and useful. I have seen a good many men make advancement in the world. But I have seen very few make advancement both in riches and in grace. How often people say, If I had just a little more, I could do so much more for the cause of Christ. But, usually, the more people get the less they give, the less they attend the worship of God, and the less they do for Christ, his people, and the furtherance of the gospel. Wise is that man who has learned to pray – Give me neither poverty nor riches; feed me with food convenient for me: Lest I be full and deny thee, and say, Who is the Lord? Or lest I be poor, and steal, and take the name of my God in vain (Pro 30:8-9). Beware of covetousness! Beware of the deceitfulness of riches! All of Lots woes began when his herds and his gold began to increase!
This was a shameful quarrel because Abraham and Lot were brothers and friends (Gen 13:8). They were physically related. Lot was Abrahams nephew. More importantly, they were spiritual brethren. Abraham was Lots spiritual father. When he left his fathers house, Abraham told Lot what God had revealed to him and urged Lot to join him. They walked together for years in the pursuit of Gods will and glory. But now they had a falling out. They were both chosen of God and called. They were both believers. They were both heirs of eternal life. But they fell into strife. There is something peculiarly sinful about strife between believers.
Lot owed Abraham everything, both materially and spiritually. He knew nothing, but what Abraham taught him. He had nothing, but what Abraham gave him. And he had for years followed Abraham as Abraham followed God. But now he is willing to part company with the best friend he had in this world for a little more property. How fickle men are, even believing men, when left to themselves! At one time, the Galatians were willing to pluck out their eyes and give them to Paul. But in time, they turned against him. Paul and Barnabas labored together for the cause of Christ. Then, they fell out over Mark. Strife between brethren is a reproach. It is always a reproach. It is always petty, too. Brethren do not fall out over the gospel. If the gospel is at stake, we must part company with those who oppose it. But brethren quarrel about petty things, things that really amount to nothing but pride. What can be more shameful?
This strife between Abraham and Lot was particularly disgraceful because — The Canaanite and the Perizzite dwelled then in the land (Gen 13:7). It gave the enemies of God occasion to blaspheme. The Spirit of God here indicates that this was, above all else, the great shame of this strife between Abraham and Lot The heathen observed it. They had seen Abraham and Lot worshipping at the same altar. Now they saw them fighting over water and grazing rights!
Exemplary Conduct
Abraham had his faults. I do not suggest that he was a perfect man. We saw his weakness in chapter 12, when he was in Egypt. But in this strife, it was Abraham who moved to put it to an end. His conduct throughout the matter exemplified what believers ought to do in such matters (Gen 13:8-9).
Abrahams behavior was conciliatory. He was a man of peace. It was in his heart, as much as possible, to live peaceably with all men, especially with those who believe. He knew the value and blessedness of peace. Abraham knew that the beginning of strife is as when one letteth out water. Once it begins, it is almost impossible to stop. He had learned to therefore leave off contention, before it be meddled with (Pro 17:14). Abraham took the initiative (Gen 13:8). He preferred the glory of God to his own will. He was more concerned for the gospel and the worship of God than he was for his own rights. The souls of men were of greater concern to Abraham than cattle, water, and grass. He preferred yielding to Lots greed to fighting with his brother and friend. He was magnanimous man.
Lot should have yielded to Abraham. God had given the land to Abraham. It was all his. Abraham was the older. Abraham was richer and stronger. Lot owed everything to Abraham. Abraham was Gods spokesman. But Lot was a petty, little man, obstinate, and self-willed. Abraham was gracious and condescended to Lots pleasure. He was generous, magnanimous, even to his own hurt. Worldlings, looking at Abraham, would say, You fool! But Abraham sought the glory of God. He turned the other cheek (Mat 5:39). He took the wrong, and allowed himself to be defrauded (1Co 6:7). He made himself servant to Lot (1Co 9:19; Mat 20:26-28). Why? He did it for two reasons: (1.) To keep Lots friendship, and (2.) For the honor of God.
This is exemplary Christianity. Christianity is more than doctrines, and creeds, and ordinances. Christianity is Christ in us. And if Christ is in us, he will stick out in our lives.
Abraham was generous. He waved his rights and cheerfully gave Lot whatever he wanted. It does not appear that he was even slightly troubled by the fact that Lot took the best for himself. In fact, it seems that Abraham wanted Lot to have the best. Why? How could he behave this way? Abraham believed God. He loved Lot. Abraham was dead to this world!
A Lamentable Choice
Abraham and Lot were standing on one of the high mountains of Canaan, perhaps Mt. Hebron. Looking to the east, Lot beheld all the well-watered, fertile plains of Sodom and the rich hills of Moab. It reminded him of the garden of Eden, which he had heard Abraham describe. And he chose that to be his portion (Gen 13:10-13). He left the tents of Abraham for the tents of Sodom. He left the altar of Abraham for the hills of Moab. He left the worship of Bethel for the riches of the plain. He saw. He coveted. He took.
Without regard for anything spiritual, his own soul, or the glory of God, Lot chose the rich plains of Sodom. His choice was sad. It tells us much about Lot. He had too much love for this world. And he had too little concern for his own soul, and the souls of those who were under his influence. There were no prophets in Sodom, only riches. There was no altar at which to worship God in Sodom, only luscious looking grass. There was no believers in Sodom , only worldlings.
From the moment that Lot made his choice, he began to decline. He did not go directly into Sodom. But step by step, he hardened his heart and seared his conscience, until he convinced himself that the best thing he could do for himself, his family, and his servants was to move into Sodom. He lifted up his eyes and beheld the land. Then, he chose the plains of Sodom. Soon, he separated himself from Abraham. He dwelt in the cities of the plains for a while. Then, he pitched his tent toward Sodom. At last, he dwelt in Sodom. There he was elected to the city council. He became of man of great respectability among the Sodomites, when he had no respectability left.
Do you see how lamentable Lots choice was?
A Costly Choice
Lots choice, in the end, cost him everything he cherished, except his own soul. He lost all influence for God with his family, servants, and neighbors. He seems to have lost all spiritual communion, fellowship, and instruction. He lost his daughters, sons-in-laws, and grandchildren to the Sodomites. He lost all his earthly possessions. He lost his wife. He lost his last two daughters in his drunken incest. He lost everything but his soul. In fact, were it not for what is recorded in 2 Peter 2, we would be compelled to conclude that Lot was a man altogether without grace. Abraham lost nothing. He gave up everything, but the honor of God, the glory of God, and his love for Lot; but he lost nothing (Gen 13:14-18)!
Let every child of God always endeavor to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. Avoid strife with brethren at all costs. Love not the world.. It is the love of the world and the love of self which lies at the root of all strife among believers. How shameful! In all our earthly decisions, we must take care not to neglect the welfare of our souls. In all things, endeavor to do that which is right, walk with God, and live in peace.
The very mention of the name Lot echoes the words of Jonah, — Salvation is of the Lord! Lot was a saved man, a sinner saved by grace alone, through the merits of Christs blood and righteousness, without any works of his own. Like every saved sinner, Lot was saved by Gods sovereign election, blood atonement, imputed righteousness, and infallible grace.
Fuente: Discovering Christ In Selected Books of the Bible
am 2086, bc 1918
the south: The south of Canaan; as in leaving Egypt, it is said he “came from the south,” – Gen 13:3, and the southern part of the promised land lay north-east of Egypt. Gen 12:9-20, Gen 20:1, Gen 21:33, Jos 10:40, Jos 18:5, 1Sa 27:10, 2Sa 24:7
Reciprocal: Gen 11:27 – Lot Num 13:17 – southward Deu 8:13 – General
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Abram and Lot
Gen 13:1-14
INTRODUCTORY WORDS
Let us bring before you the “as” and “so” of the Lord’s Return. The days of Lot are likened unto the days of the Coming of the Son of Man.
Our Lord did not hesitate to reach back into the historical, distant past, and then look forward to the prophetical, distant future, and say, “as” and “so.”
He knew the details of the days of Lot, for He was there. He knew the details of the day of His Coming, for He lives in one eternal “now,” and He is there. That which is “misty” to man is “clear sky” to Him.
In the days of Lot the wickedness of man had come to the full, and the judgments of God, with miraculous power, fell upon man to his utter undoing.
In the days of the Coming of the Son of Man, the world will be ripe in its iniquity and sin; and the judgments of God will again fall in miraculous power.
The judgments of God in those days will be followed in close parallel in the day of Christ’s Return to the Mount of Olives. The comparisons of those days of Lot, with the times of the ending of this age, are too many for the space of our study.
With bowed head, we marvel at the majesty of the Lord’s vision, as He spoke this “as” and “so.” His words went across the whole opinion of man. He dared to say what unregenerate man had never dared or cared to say. The world wants smooth words, and flattering words, words of optimism, and of the “upward trend.” Christ spoke words to the contrary.
The world wants us to prophesy “success,” Christ prophesied “failure.” The Lord even brought the success of the ministrations of the Spirit, and of the Church, in this day of grace, into seeming disrepute. He was, however, in fact, not speaking of the Spirit’s failure, nor of the Church’s collapse, He was only showing that man, even under such benign privileges, would prove himself altogether corrupted.
The wonder of wonders is that the nineteen hundred years that have passed since our Lord reached back to the days of Lot, and said, “As,” and then looked down to the days of His Coming again, and said “so,” have proved that the Lord’s words were true. The “so” of our day is even now fast running into the mold of the “as” of that early historic day. It is now as it was then. Our conclusion is that we are drawing very near to the days of the Coming of the Son of Man.
Just this one word more. Let no man become discouraged or shaken in his faith by means of the present apostasy, and the prevailing world-wickedness of men. The present day, with all of its sin and sorrow, should only settle, strengthen, and establish faith, for Christ’s own prophecy has become history; His “as” has become “so,” even as He said.
I. ABRAM WAS VERY RICH (Gen 13:2)
There are some who imagine that being rich is impossible for real saints. How then about Abram? It is the love of money which is the root of all evil. They who will be rich pierce themselves through with many sorrows.
1. The bane of wealth. The bane of wealth is to love money, and to set one’s affection upon it. He who loves his money will make money for money’s sake. He will hoard his riches, gloat upon his wealth, and, in every way prove himself miserly. No matter what the need of others may be, he will hoard all he has, and close his ears to every cry of the poor. He will lay his treasures up for himself.
2. The blessing of riches. In the first place, Abram did not obtain his riches through worldly means. It was God who increased his store. When the king of Sodom wanted to enrich Abram, the Patriarch said, “I will not take any thing that is thine, lest thou shouldest say, I have made Abram rich.”
Again, Abram never counted himself more than a mere tent dweller. He had much of this world’s riches, yet he never set his heart on such things. He lived looking for a City whose Builder and Maker is God. At any moment Abram was ready to let go all that he possessed that he might enter into that richer inheritance above.
One other thing, we are sure that Abram used his goods to help others. His spirit of fairness to his nephew Lot is so plainly seen in today’s study, as he gave Lot the first choice of the land, that we believe this same spirit marked his whole career.
II. LOT ALSO WAS RICH (Gen 13:5)
Why did Christ say, “As in the days of Lot,” and not “as in the days of Abraham?” The Lord was giving a picture of world-end conditions. He said that those conditions would be like the days of Lot. Not like Lot, alone, but like the days of Lot.
1. Lot’s day was a day of eating and drinking, buying and selling, marrying and giving in marriage. This, some one may say, is the case of all days. True; however, there was something in these very things that distinguishes them. All may eat and drink, all may buy and sell, all may marry and give in marriage, but the ideals that govern these necessary marks of daily living are distinct in different people. Some there are who do good and needed things in a wrong way. They abuse their rightful privileges.
It is all right to eat and drink, it is all wrong to be intemperate, and given to surfeiting. It is all right to marry and to give in marriage, but it is all wrong to be given over to licentiousness and lewdness, and to marry out of the will of the Lord.
It is all right to buy and sell, but it is all wrong to be given over to the love of money, and to heap up treasures for the satisfying of the lustings of the flesh.
Abram did all of these things but he did none of them as Lot did them. Abram sent Eliezar a long way, back to Haran to get a wife for Isaac. Abram was rich, he did not enrich himself on the king of Sodom or the Sodomites.
Lot married his daughters into the fast life of Sodom, and he sought to dwell in Sodom in order to enrich himself with Sodom’s money.
The “days of Lot” were days of sinful shame and lusting. Into that method of living and thinking Lot soon became engulfed. His family also became engulfed with him, and so deeply so, that two of his daughters and their husbands were lost in the overthrow of Sodom, while his wife turned back and became a pillar of salt.
III. THEY COULD NOT DWELL TOGETHER (Gen 13:6)
Abram was rich in cattle. Lot also, who went with him, had flocks and herds and tents. The time came when there was strife between Abram’s herdsmen and Lot’s herdsmen. Then, they were forced to separate.
Abram said unto Lot, “Let there be no strife, I pray thee, between me and thee * * for we be brethren,” In all of this there is a tremendous lesson for us. If two groups cannot agree, and they yet be brethren, let them separate in peace. Striving among saints is very grievous to the Lord, and its fruit is contention, bitterness, and evil words.
In our day we have seen groups of saints who had no vital differences about them, separating from one another simply because they could not agree on some method of operation. If they had merely separated in peace it would not have been so bad, however, they who had been in sweet fellowship immediately after their separation began to malign one another. Why do saints not follow the beautiful spirit which marked Abram’s separation from Lot? They separated to avoid strife and not to engender it. Together they could not walk in peace, apart, they could and did maintain a true fraternity.
IV. ABRAM’S CORDIALITY TOWARD LOT (Gen 13:9)
When the time of separation came, Abram said unto Lot, “Is not the whole land before thee? separate thyself, I pray thee, from me: if thou wilt take the left hand, then I will go to the right; or if thou depart to the right hand, then I will go to the left.”
Whatever else may be said this action on the part of Abram was magnanimous. Abram showed nothing at all by way of avarice or of self-seeking. He simply gave his nephew Lot a full sweep of everything, Abram was the senior and he was also the superior. It was Lot who had gone with Abram, not Abram with Lot. Abram could rightfully have taken the first choice; he could even have commanded Lot to have gone to the left, or to the right. He rather gave Lot the place of precedence, and of choice.
Abram was sincerely more concerned with the things of Lot than with his own things. Should not our greatest joy be to prove a blessing to others? Should we forever be thinking of self, living for self, and laying up treasures for self? God forbid.
Jesus Christ went about doing good. When He left Heaven, He left in behalf of others. When He lived, He lived for others. When He died, He died for others. Most remarkable of all, the “others” for whom He lived, to whom He came, and for whom He died, were “enemies.” For a good man some would dare to die, but Christ commended His love, in that, while we were yet sinners, He died for us.
The Apostle Paul followed in the footsteps of his Lord. He, also, went about in the interest of others. He yielded up all that the world might have given him, that he might give his best to men.
V. LOT’S SELF-SEEKING (Gen 13:10-11)
With a free hand before him, Lot, in the spirit of self-consideration and self-advantage, lifted up his eyes. He did not say unto his uncle Abram, “Take thou the choicest of the land.” He chose the best for himself. This was all in direct contrast to the spirit that dominated Abram.
The true character of Lot now began to exert itself. He beheld that the plain of the Jordan was well-watered everywhere, so he chose all the plain, and journeyed East. He journeyed into a land that seemed to him to be the garden of the Lord. As he parted that day from Abram, and took up his march he went as he believed into a land of fatness. He felt that prosperity and power were his. No doubt, Lot thought that with the wonderful pastures for his cattle and with Sodom and Gomorrah as the market for their sale, he would soon eclipse his uncle in. riches.
In all of this Lot went contrary to the spirit of his Heavenly Master. God has said, “Seekest thou great things for thyself, seek them not.” Again, God has said, “Look not every man on his own things, but every man also on the things of others.”
He who lives for self-glory or riches will surely come to poverty. He who seeketh his own will sooner or later succumb under the power of selfishness.
Lot did not seek Divine guidance. He was his own guide. He thought that he could see a long way off, but he was in fact shortsighted. Had Lot gone to God, God would no doubt have told him that while the land he chose seemed a goodly land, yet, it would lead him to poverty instead of plenty, and to sorrow instead of song.
It is not in a man to direct his own steps. The difficulty with us is that we are shortsighted and cannot see afar off. We know not what a day may bring forth. We know not what obstacles lie before us. Let us ask God to make our choices.
VI. PITCHING TOWARD SODOM (Gen 13:12)
How significant are the words, “Lot dwelled in the cities of the plain, and pitched his tent toward Sodom”! The goal of Lot’s ambition was Sodom. The cities of the plain were only steppingstones toward his ideal.
As Lot moved his way toward Sodom, he was steadily pressing toward an ideal which to him seemed the greatest good in life.
He and his wife, no doubt, talked over the wonderful hour when they could reach Sodom, a city which stood for the climax of world dominion and power. Their dream was not only to dwell in Sodom, but to wield the power of plenty and position among its people. Lot sought human greatness and human authority.
It was not a matter of one day, but of weeks and months before Lot attained his ideal. We would ask every young person to ponder the path which they are now treading, and to lift their eyes toward the city of their dreams. Remember, they that will be rich pierce themselves through with many sorrows. Remember, that those who love the world and the things which are in it cannot truly love the Father.
How the words ring out, “But the men of Sodom were wicked and sinners before the Lord exceedingly.” Perhaps, as Lot pitched his tent toward Sodom, he was thinking not so much of the villainy of the Sodomites as of his own wealth and attainments.
When wealth, however, is secured at the cost of spiritual life and contact, it will prove a curse instead of a blessing. When, becoming rich is dependent upon becoming mixed and mingled with the wicked and with sinners, riches had better be foregone.
There is something more valuable than money. There is something more profitable than success-that something is the favor of the Lord with peace and joy of heart.
VII. ABRAM’S RICH REWARD (Gen 13:14)
It was just after Lot had separated himself from Abram and had started on his way toward Sodom; it was just after Abram had told Lot that the whole land lay before him, and that he, Lot, could take his choice-it was then that the Lord appeared unto Abram.
To Abram the Lord said, “Lift up now thine eyes, and look from the place where thou art northward, and southward, and eastward, and westward: for all the land which thou seest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed forever.”
Surely it is better to let God direct one’s life. The Lord has said, “The liberal soul shall be made fat,” and God certainly enriched Abram.
When the Lord said to Abram, “All the land which thou seest, to thee will I give it,” He included the very land which Abram had just given to Lot.
The sorrow in Lot’s choice was that Lot was to attain to a height of glory and honor and power, with riches, only to fall. He got, only to lose. He builded for a fire. He laid up store where moth and rust corrupt.
“With Abram it was different. That which God gave to Abram was by Divine decree secured unto Abram’s sons, yea, God gave the land unto Abram and his seed forever. The wily Turk and the roaming Arab are usurpers today in the land of Palestine. They may hold certain deeds to certain properties in and around Jerusalem, but in the archives of Heaven, the deeds are made out granting that land unto Abram and to his seed forever.
As we stand thirty-five hundred years down the stream of time, since God told Abram that the land was his forever, what do we see? We see the Children of Israel, Abram’s seed, once more turning their faces toward the promised land. They are about to inherit every foot of ground that God ever gave to Abram.
How much better, therefore, was Abram’s choice than Lot’s! Lot chose soil and “land and lost it. Abram chose God and as a result he got soil as an everlasting possession.
AN ILLUSTRATION
Abram’s riches in grace were made ripe in trials and testings.
Mr. Spurgeon said:
“‘Fruit that hath but little sun can never be ripe.’ We have had practical proof of this, for during the year 1879, there being a scant measure of sunshine, the fruit was never properly ripened, and was therefore destitute of flavor and sweetness. Whatever might be its outward appearance, the berry was insipid and altogether unlike what the sun would have made it had he smiled upon the swelling fruit.
Thus, without communion with God, no soul can develop its graces, neither can those graces become what they should be. No measure of care or effort can make up for the light of the Father’s face; neither can attendance upon means of grace nor the use of religious exercises supply the lack. Fellowship with God we must have, or the essential honey of love will be deficient, the bloom of joy will be wanting, the aroma of zeal and earnestness will be missed. We may have the virtues by name, and we may exhibit some feeble, insipid imitation of them, but the secret savor and mystic richness of grace will not be in us unless we abide in the full light of Divine love.
Lord, evermore be as the sun unto our souls, that we may be as fruit fully ripe, attaining to all the perfection and maturity of which our nature is capable.”
Fuente: Neighbour’s Wells of Living Water
Gen 13:1. Into the south That is, the southern part of Canaan, from whence he had come, Gen 12:9, which, however, was north-east of Egypt. The Scriptures being written principally for the Jews, its language, respecting the situation of places, is accommodated to their manner of speaking.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Gen 13:2. Very rich. Here is another proof of Gods fidelity in fulfilling his promises to Abraham. This has often been the lot of faithful men.
Gen 13:9. Separate thyself. Generous actions excite generous sentiments. Aristippus being angry with shines sent for him, and said, You are aware that I, as the elder, might exercise a compulsive power. True, replied shines, I am indeed the cause of the quarrel, and you are the author of friendship.
Gen 13:10. The garden of the Lord. Augustine thinks this text a full proof that Eden was not a spiritual, but a real terrestrial abode. Isa 41:3. Lot chose the plain irrigated by the Jordan; and having little regard to religion in this instance, he lost all he had by disastrous events. He should have left the choice to his uncle, and counselled with the Lord.
Gen 13:18. Plain of Mamre. Hebrews ailon is rendered oak, by the LXX. So chap. 12., the oak, grove, or holt of Moreh. So Jdg 9:6; the oak of the pillar which was in Sichem. Jerome does not appear to be supported in rendering this word plain, though followed by many versions. Mamre, the name of some Amorite, as Gen 14:24, who had given his name to the country, as was the ancient custom of men. Psa 49:11.
REFLECTIONS.
Abraham, after the famine was over, hasted out of Egypt to the land of his pilgrimage; and his first object was, to go to the place of the altar, and thank the Lord for his preservation. Devotion, after deliverance from great afflictions, is peculiarly seasonable, and a debt we owe to God. In the quarrel which happened between the herdsmen, Abraham acted towards Lot a condescending and generous part. When disputes arise between religious families, they are often so intemperately conducted as to occasion injury to their souls, and scandal to the cause of God. When envy and selfish passions are suffered to prevail, they destroy union of spirit and concord in the church. But when those evils do arise, they may, on the contrary, be so managed as to reflect very great honour on the christian character. Let them, like Abraham, make disinterested and liberal proposals, or refer the dispute to arbitration; and by acting ingenuously the souls of good men will, after an explanation, become the more united.
Abraham after becoming rich was not the less pious. He was neither haughty in spirit, nor extravagant in equipage, nor voluptuous in living. He still retained his simplicity of life. What a pattern for men whom providence has prospered in the world!
As guardian to Lot, his character is equally high. He received the dying charge of Haran, and executed it as unto God, who ever lives the orphans father, and the orphans friend. All tutors and guardians have here a perfect model for imitation.
But did Lot err? Was he his own master before he had acquired discretion? Was he attracted merely by the rich pasturage of the Jordan; and did he in the time of danger, instead of trusting in the promise, seek refuge in Sodom? Ah, worldly prudence may serve our interests for the moment; but it is often followed with disappointment and shame. One false step may be the total ruin of a whole family.
After Lots separation, the Lord once more met Abraham in sacrifice, and renewed the covenant, promising also that as the dust of the earth, and as the stars of heaven are innumerable, so he would make his posterity. It is thus that christian families, before and after remarkable changes in their houses, should meet with God at the throne of grace in extraordinary devotion. The Lord will accept their offering, and crown it with new promises and abundant blessings.
Fuente: Sutcliffe’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Genesis 13
The opening of this chapter presents to us a subject of immense interest to the heart, namely, the true character of divine restoration. When the child of God has, in any way, declined in his spiritual condition, and lost his communion, he is in great danger, when conscience begins to work, of failing in the apprehension of divine grace, and of stopping short of the proper mark of divine restoration. Now, we know that God does everything in a way entirely worthy of Himself. Whether He creates, redeems, converts, restores, or provides, He can only act like Himself. What is worthy of Himself is, ever and only, His standard of action. This is unspeakably happy for us, inasmuch as we would ever seek to “limit the Holy One of Israel;” and in nothing are we so prone to limit Him as in His restoring grace. In the case now before us, we see that Abraham was not only delivered out of Egypt, but brought back” unto the place where his tent had been at the beginning,….. unto the place of the altar which he had made there at the first: and there Abraham called on the name of the Lord.” Nothing can satisfy God, in reference to a wanderer or backslider, but his being entirely restored. We, in the self-righteousness of our hearts, might imagine that such an one should take a lower place than that which he had formerly occupied; and so he should, were it a question of his merit or his character; but, inasmuch as it is, altogether, a question of grace, it is God’s prerogative to fix the standard of restoration; and His standard is set forth in the following passage “If thou wilt return, O Israel, return to me.” It is thus that God restores, and it would be unworthy of Himself to do anything else. He will either not restore at all, or else restore, in such a way, as to magnify and glorify the riches of His grace. Thus, when the leper was brought back, he was actually conducted “to the door of the tabernacle of the congregation.” When the prodigal returned, he was set down at the table with the father. When Peter was restored, he was able to stand before the men of Israel and say, “ye denied the Holy One, and the Just” – the very thing which he had done himself, under the most aggravated circumstances. In all these cases, and many more which might be adduced, we see the perfectness of God’s restoration. He always brings the soul back to Himself, in the full power of grace, and the full confidence of faith. “If thou wilt return, return lo me.” “Abraham came unto the place where his tent had been at the beginning.
Then, as to the moral effect of divine restoration, it is most deeply practical. If legalism gets its answer in the character of the restoration, antinomianism gets its answer in the effect thereof. The restored soul will have a very deep and keen sense of the evil from which it has been delivered, and this will be evidenced by a jealous, prayerful, holy, and circumspect spirit. We are not restored in order that we may, the more lightly, go and sin again, but rather that we may “go and sin no more.” The deeper my sense of the grace of divine restoration, the deeper will be my sense of the holiness of it also. This principle is taught and established throughout all scripture?; but especially in two well-known passages, namely, Ps. 23: 3, and 1 John 1: 9; “He restoreth my soul: He leadeth me in the paths of righteousness for his name’s sake.” And, again, “If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.” The proper path for a divinely-restored soul, is “the path of righteousness.” In other words, having tasted divine grace, we walk in righteousness. To talk of grace, while walking in unrighteousness, is, as the apostle says, to turn “the grace of our God into lasciviousness.” If grace reigned through righteousness unto eternal life,” it also manifests itself in righteousness, in the outflow of that life. The grace that forgives us our sins, cleanses us from all unrighteousness. Those things must never be separated. When taken together, they furnish a triumphant answer to the legalism and antinomianism of the human heart.
But there was a deeper trial for Abraham’s heart than even the famine, namely, that arising from the company of one who, evidently, was not walking in the energy of personal faith, nor in the realisation of personal responsibility. It seems plain that Lot was, from the very beginning, borne onward rather by Abraham’s influence and example, than by his own faith in God. This is a very common case. If we look down along the history of the people of God, we can easily see how that, in every great movement produced by the Spirit of God, certain individuals have attached themselves thereto who were not personally participators of the power which had produced the movement. Such persons go on for a time, either as a dead weight upon the testimony. or an active hindrance to it. Thus, in Abraham’s case, the Lord called him to leave his kindred; but he brought his kindred with him. Terah retarded him in his movement, until death took him out of the way. Lot followed him somewhat further, until “the lusts of other things” overpowered him, and he entirely broke down.
The same thing is observable in the great movement of Israel out of Egypt. “A mixed multitude” followed them, and caused much defilement, weakness, and sorrow, for we read, in Numbers 11, “the mixed multitude that was among them fell a lusting: and the children of Israel also wept again, and said, who shall give us flesh to eat.” So also, in the early days of the Church; and not only so, but in every revival which has taken place therein, down to the present day, many have been acted upon by various influences, which, not being divine, proved evanescent; and the persons so acted upon, sooner or later, gave way, and found their proper level. Nothing will endure but that which is of God. I must realise the link between me and the living God. I must know myself as one called of Him into the position which I occupy, else I shall have no stability, and exhibit no consistency therein. It will not do for us to follow in the track of other people, merely because it is their track. God will graciously give each a path to walk in, a sphere to move in, and a responsibility to fulfil; and we are bound to know our calling and the functions thereof, that, by His grace ministered to our souls daily, we may work therein effectually, to His glory. It matters not what our measure may be, provided it be what God hath dealt to us. We may have “five talents,” or we may have but “one;” still if we use the “one,” with our eye fixed on the Master, we shall just be as sure to hear from His gracious lips the words, “well done,” as if we had used the “five.” This is encouraging. Paul, Peter, James, and John had each his peculiar measure, his special ministry; and so with all; none needs to interfere with another. A carpenter has a saw and a plane, a hammer and a chisel, and he uses each as he needs it. Nothing can be more worthless than imitation. If, in the natural world, we look at the various orders of creation, we see no imitation. ALL have their proper sphere, their proper functions. And if it be thus in the natural world, how much more in the spiritual. The field is wide enough for all. In every house there are vessels of various sizes and various shapes. The master wants them all.
Let us, therefore, my beloved reader, search and see whether we are walking under a divine or a human influence; whether our faith stands in the wisdom of man, or in the power of God; whether we are doing things because others have done them, or because the Lord has called us to do them; whether we are merely propped up by the example and influence of our fellow, or sustained by personal faith in God. These are serious inquiries. It is, no doubt, a happy privilege to enjoy the fellowship of our brethren; but if we are propped up by them, we shall soon make shipwreck. So also, if we go beyond our measure, our action will be strained and unsightly, uneasy and unnatural. It is very easy to see when a man is working in his place, and according to his measure. ALL affectation, assumption, and imitation, is contemptible in the extreme. Hence, though we cannot be great, let us be honest; and though we cannot be brilliant, let us be genuine. If a person goes beyond his depth, without knowing how to swim, he will surely flounder. If a vessel put out to sea, without being sea-worthy and in trim, it will surely be beaten back into harbour, or lost. Lot left “Ur of the Chaldees,” but he fell in the plains of Sodom. The call of God had not reached his heart, nor the inheritance of God filled his vision. Solemn thought! may we ponder it deeply? Blessed be God, there is a path for each of His servants, along which shines the light of His approving countenance, and to walk therein should be our chief joy. His approval is enough for the heart that knows Him. True, we may not always be able to command the approval and concurrence of our brethren; we may frequently be misunderstood; but we cannot help these things. “The day” will set all this to rights, and the loyal heart can contentedly wait for that day, knowing that then “every man shall have praise of God.”
But it may be well to examine, more particularly, what it was that caused Lot to turn aside off the path of public testimony. There is a crisis in every man’s history, at which it will, assuredly, be made manifest on what ground he is resting, by what motives he is actuated, and by what objects he is animated. Thus it was with Lot. He did not die at Charran; but he fell at Sodom. The ostensible cause of his fall was the strife between his herdmen and those of Abraham; but the fact is, when one is not really walking with a single eye and purified affections, he will easily find a stone to stumble over. If he does not find it at one time, he will at another. If he does not find it here, he will find it there. In one sense, it makes little matter as to what may be the apparent cause of turning aside; the real cause lies underneath, far away, it may be, from common observation, in the hidden chambers of the heart’s affections and desires, where the world in some shape or form, has been sought after. The strife between the herdmen might have been easily settled without spiritual damage to either Abraham or Lot. To the former, indeed, it only afforded an occasion for exhibiting the beautiful power of faith, and the moral elevation, the heavenly vantage ground, on which faith ever sets the possessor thereof. But to the latter, it was an occasion for exhibiting the thorough worldliness of his heart. The strife no more produced the worldliness in Lot than it produced the faith in Abraham; it only manifested, in the case of each, what was really there.
Thus it is always: controversies and divisions arise in the Church of God, and many are stumbled thereby, and driven back into the world, in one way or another. They then lay the blame on the controversy and division, whereas the truth is, that these things were only the means of developing the real condition of the soul, and the bent of the heart. The world was in the heart, and would be reached by some route or another; nor is there much of moral excellency exhibited in blaming men and things, when the root of the matter lies within. It is not that controversy and division are not to be deeply deplored: assuredly they are. To see brethren contending in the very presence of “the Canaanite and the Perizzite is truly lamentable and humiliating. Our language should ever be, “Let there be no strife, I pray thee, between me and thee….. for we are brethren.” Still, why did not Abraham make choice of Sodom? Why did not the strife drive him into the world? Why was it not an occasion of stumbling to him? Because he looked at it from God’s point of view. No doubt, he had a heart that could be attracted by “well-watered plains,” just as powerfully as Lot’s heart; but then he did not allow his own heart to choose. He first let Lot take his choice, and then left God to choose for him. This was heavenly wisdom. This is what faith ever does: it allows God to fix its inheritance, as it also allows Him to make it good. It is always satisfied with the portion which God gives. It can say, the lines are fallen to me in pleasant places; yea, I have a goodly heritage.” It matters not where “the lines” fall; for, in the judgement of faith, they always “fall in pleasant places,” just because God casts them there.
The man of faith can easily afford to allow the man of sight to take his choice. Because, “If thou wilt take the left hand, then I will go to the right; or if thou depart to the right hand, then I will go to the left.” What beautiful disinterestedness and moral elevation we have here! and yet what security! It is certain that, let nature range where it will, let it take its most comprehensive grasp, its boldest and highest flight, there is never the slightest danger of its laying its hand upon faith’s treasure. It will seek its portion in quite an opposite direction. Faith lays up its treasure in a place which nature would never dream of examining; and, as to its approaching thereto, it could not if it would; and it would not if it could. Hence, therefore, faith is perfectly safe, as well as beautifully disinterested, in allowing nature to take its choice.
What, then, did Lot choose, when he got his choice. He chose Sodom. The very place that was about to be judged. But how was this? Why select such a spot? Because he looked at the outward appearance, and not at the intrinsic character and future destiny. The intrinsic character was “wicked.” Its future destiny was “judgement” – to be destroyed by “fire and brimstone out of heaven.” But, it may be said, “Lot knew nothing of all this.” Perhaps not, nor Abraham either; but God did; and had Lot allowed God to “choose his inheritance for him,” He, certainly, would not have chosen a spot that He Himself was about to destroy. He did not, however. He judged for himself. Sodom suited him, though it did not suit God. His eye rested on the “well-watered plains,” and his heart was attracted by them. “He pitched his tent toward Sodom.” Such is nature’s choice! “Demas hath forsaken me, having loved this present world.” Lot forsook Abraham for the same reason. He left the place of testimony, and got into the place of judgement.
“And the Lord said unto Abram, after that Lot was separated from him, Lift up now thine eyes, and look from the place where thou art, northward, and southward, and eastward, and westward; for all the land which thou seest, to thee will give it, and to thy Seed for ever.” The strife” and “separation,” so far from damaging Abraham’s spiritual condition, rather brought out, in full relief, his heavenly principles, and strengthened, in his soul, the life of faith. Moreover, it cleared the prospect for him, and delivered him from the company of one who could only prove a dead weight. Thus it worked for good, and yielded a harvest of blessing. It is, at once, most solemn, and yet most encouraging, to bear in mind that, in the long run, men find their proper level. Men who run unsent, break down, in one way or another, and find their way back to that which they profess to have left. On the other hand, those who are called of God, and lean on Him, are, by His grace, sustained. “Their path is as the shining light, which shineth more and more unto the perfect day.” The thought of this should keep us humble, watchful, and prayerful. “Let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall,” for, truly, “there are first that shall be last, and there are last that shall be first.” “He that endureth to the end, the same shall be saved,” is a principle which, whatever be its specific application, has a wide moral bearing. Many a vessel has sailed out of harbour, in gallant style, with all its canvass spread, amid cheering and shouting, and with many fair promises of a first-rate passage; but, alas! storms, waves, shoals, rocks, and quicksands, have changed the aspect of things; and the voyage that commenced with hope, has ended in disaster. I am, here, only referring to the path of service and testimony, and, by no means, to the question of a man’s eternal acceptance in Christ. This latter, blessed be God, does not, in any wise, rest with ourselves, but with Him who has said, “I give unto my sheep eternal life, and they shall never perish, neither shall any pluck them out of my hand.” But, do we not know, that many Christians set out on some special course of service or testimony, under the impression that they are called of God thereto, and, after a time, they break down? Unquestionably. And, further, very many set out in the profession of some special principle of action, respecting which they have not been divinely taught, or the consequences of which they have not maturely considered in the presence of God, and, as a necessary result, they themselves have been found, after a time, in the open violation of those very principles. ALL this is deplorable, and should be carefully avoided. It tends to weaken the faith of God’s elect, and causes the enemies of the truth to speak reproachfully. Each one should receive his call and his commission directly from the Master Himself. ALL whom Christ calls into any special service, He will, infallibly, maintain therein, for He never sent any one a warfare at his own charges. But if we run unsent, we shall not only be left to learn our folly, but to exhibit it.
Yet, it is not that any one should set himself up as the impersonation of any principle, or as an example of any special character of service or testimony. God forbid. This would be the most egregious folly, and empty conceit. It is a teacher’s business to set forth Gods Word; and it is a servant’s business to set forth the Master’s will; but while all this is fully understood and admitted, we must ever remember the deep need there is of counting the cost, ere we undertake to build a tower, or go forth to war. Were this more seriously attended to, there would be far less confusion and failure in our midst. Abraham was called of God from Ur to Canaan, and, hence, God led him forth on the way. When Abraham tarried at Charran, God waited for him; when he went down into Egypt, He restored him; when he needed guidance, He guided him; when there was a strife and a separation, He took care of him; so that Abraham had only to say, “Oh, how great is thy goodness which thou hast laid up for them that fear thee; which thou hast wrought for them that trust in thee, before the sons of men.” He lost nothing by the strife. He had his tent and his altar before; and he had his tent and his altar afterwards. “Then Abram removed his tent, and came and dwelt in the plain of Mamre, which is in Hebron, and built there an altar unto the Lord.” Lot might choose Sodom; but as for Abraham, he sought and found his all in God. There was no altar in Sodom. Alas! all who travel in that direction are in quest of something quite different from that. It is never the worship of God, but the love of the world, that leads them thither. And even though they should attain their object, what is it? How does it end? Just thus, “He gave them their request, but sent leanness into their souls.”
Fuente: Mackintosh’s Notes on the Pentateuch
Gen 12:1 to Gen 25:18. The Story of Abraham.In this section the three main sources, J. E, P are present. Gunkel has given strong reasons for holding that J is here made up of two main sources, one connecting Abraham with Hebron, the other with Beersheba and the Negeb. The former associates Abraham with Lot. (For details, see ICC.) On the interpretation to be placed on the figures of Abraham and the patriarchs, see the Introduction. The interest, which has hitherto been diffused over the fortunes of mankind in general, is now concentrated on Abraham and his posterity, the principle of election narrowing it down to Isaac, Ishmael being left aside, and then to Jacob, Esau being excluded.
Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible
RECOVERY
At last Abram “went up,” leaving Egypt behind and coming into the south of the land of Canaan. Again Lot is mentioned as accompanying his uncle Abram. But Abram had been greatly enriched in Egypt (v.2), and Lot also had been prospered. There are two distinct lessons here. Typically speaking, God will use even the history of our failure to result in spiritual blessing. Such is His sovereign grace. But on the other hand, literally speaking, temporal blessings do not mean spiritual prosperity.
But the grace of God leads Abram back to Bethel, “the house of God” (v.2). If we are to be properly restored after failure, we must return to the place from which we departed, and here it is emphasized that it was the place he had first pitched his tent between Bethel and Ai, the place of decision to leave behind his former life in favor of the interests of God. Besides this, further emphasis is given it as “the place of the altar,” where he had given God the positive honor that belongs to Him. Here for the first time since his leaving that place do we read that he “called upon the name of the Lord” (v.4). Compare Chapter 13:8. Does this not tell us that we are not having true communion with God if we are away from His place
SEPARATION BETWEEN ABRAM AND LOT
Now the wealth of both Abram and Lot raises a serious problem. Their possessions were too great to allow them to subsist comfortably together. Quarreling began between their herdsmen (v.7). At the same time it is noted that “the Canaanites and the Perizzites then dwelt in the land.” Is this not told us because they would be observers, and likely to mock at the friction between brethren, specially those who were believers in the living God? If believers today have quarrels, the world is quick to ridicule the testimony of the Lord rather than to be impressed by it.
Abram did not want to continue any such friction: he would not make this an issue with his nephew, but instead asked him that there should be no conflict between them or between their herdsmen, for they were brethren (v.8). He saw only one solution to the problem, that they should separate from one another (v.9). Lot had been in a good measure dependent on Abram’s leading, and should have by this time learned to have such wisdom as to depend on the Lord for himself. But though he had not really learned this, it was time that he must be on his own.
His lack of faith is seen immediately when Abram offers him the opportunity to take the first choice as to where he wanted to dwell. Instead of his depending on the Lord, and therefore rightly giving the first choice to his uncle, “he lifted up his eyes” (v.10), but not high enough! He had no idea of asking the Lord’s guidance. What tragic mistakes we can make by following such and example! He is guided only by what his eyes saw. The plain of Jordan was well watered everywhere — though it is added “before the Lord destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah.” So indeed the world has been greatly blessed by God, but in spite of this the ominous shadow of coming judgment hangs over it!
Lot sees that it was “like the garden of the Lord,” that is, Eden. Thus today, many people are deceived by what appears to be a virtual return to paradise in spite of God’s having forbidden the possibility of this (Gen 3:24) because of man’s sin. Also, the plain appeared to Lot “like the land of Egypt.” He had learned by his uncle’s taking him down to Egypt that the world can be an appealing place to the eye. He had not been properly recovered from the mistake of his experience there.
Abram was willing to leave the choice with God as to where he should go: Lot was not. He chose for himself, and embarked on a downward course toward the east (the direction from which they had originally come). Abram dwelt in the more rugged areas of Canaan, reminding us of the rigorous exercise of the trials of faith through which the Lord sees fit to lead a believer who purposes to walk with Him. This is not an easy path, but it is by all means the most happy path, for the Lord is there to encourage and strengthen faith for whatever needs may arise.
Lot chose to settle “in the cities of the plain,” drifting toward Sodom (v.12). He wanted the easiest circumstances, and of course in Sodom he found the people who love the easiest circumstances, those who were “wicked exceedingly and sinners against the Lord.” If we seek only to please ourselves, we shall soon find company who have the same unwholesome inclinations. But it is unbelievers who throw themselves unreservedly into this kind of a life. Lot, as a believer, did have reservations, but allowed himself to settle among those with no such reservations. Thus it will be for a Christian who is only half hearted as regards his testimony for the Lord Jesus. Peter tells us concerning Lot, “that righteous man, dwelling among them, tormented his righteous soul from day to day by seeing and hearing their lawless deeds” (2Pe 2:8).
ABRAM ENCOURAGED AND STRENGTHENED
Now that Lord had chosen for himself what he wanted, the Lord tells Abram “lift up you eyes” (v.14). This is just what Lot had done (v.10), but he had limited his sight to what appealed to him. God tells Abram to look to the north, south, east and west, for He would give Abram and his descendants all the land that he saw. How much broader is God’s view than that of our natural selfishness! For the believer is told today, “all things are yours: whether Paul or Apollos or Cephas, or the world, or life, or death, or things present, or things to come — all are yours. And you are Christ’s, and Christ is God’s” (1Co 3:21-23). All is ours, but we do not have the headache of maintaining it. The Lord Himself is our capable custodian of it! And we are His!
More than this, God would increase Abram’s descendants “as the dust of the earth” (v.16). The man of faith will always prove fruitful in the end. It may seem otherwise to us because of the long delay, as it did to Abram, but God’s promise was absolute: it could not possibly fail. At this time God only speaks of “the dust of the earth,” for He infers only an earthly people, primarily Israel, though later (Gen 15:5). He tells Abram his seed would be as the stars of heaven, involving the great number called “sons of Abraham,” whose inheritance is in heaven, as Galations 3:7 tells us, “Therefore know that only those who are of faith are sons of Abraham.”
On that occasion (Gen 15:15) Abram was told that he would not personally have part in an earthly inheritance, but would go to his fathers and “be buried in a good old age”. Also Heb 11:10 tells us, “he was looking for the city which has foundations, whose architect and builder is God.” Verse 16 further describes the city as “a heavenly one.”
Therefore the Lord tells Abram, “Arise, walk through the land in the length of it and he breadth of it; for I will give it unto thee” (v.17). He was not to settle down and take possession of any part of the land, but pass through all of it, as Stephen says in Act 7:5 : “God gave him no inheritance in it not even enough to set his foot on. But even when Abraham had no child He promised to give it to him for a possession, and to his descendants after him.”
HIS THIRD ALTAR
Abram moves on then to dwell “by the terebinth (or oak) trees of Mamre, which are in Hebron,” and there built his third altar to the Lord. Mamre means “fatness” and Hebron “communion.” This appropriately follows the second altar, which was that of decision (between Bethel and Ai ch.12:8). True decision to put God’s interests first will lead to fatness, that is, spiritual prosperity, which is found in communion with the Lord. This is therefore the altar of communion, for communion with God is based upon the truth of the person of the Lord Jesus (the altar), and involving also His sacrifice, for this was the purpose of the altar. There is no approaching God without this.
Fuente: Grant’s Commentary on the Bible
13:1 And {a} Abram went up out of Egypt, he, and his wife, and all that he had, and Lot with him, into the south.
(a) His great riches gotten in Egypt, did not hinder him in following his vocation.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
Abram returned from Egypt through the Negev and settled down near his former location between Bethel and Ai.
"Of special interest is that in Gen 12:10 to Gen 13:4 Lot occupies the same position as that of the ’mixed multitude’ (Exo 12:38) in the narrative of Genesis 41 -Exodus 12. In other words the author apparently wants to draw the reader’s attention to the identification of Lot with the ’mixed multitude.’ It is as if Lot is seen in these narratives as the prefiguration of the ’mixed multitude’ that comes out of Egypt with the Israelites." [Note: Sailhamer, The Pentateuch . . ., p. 38.]
Note also Lot’s similarity to Esau.
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
LOTS SEPARATION FROM ABRAM
Gen 13:1-18
ABRAM left Egypt thinking meanly of himself, highly of God. This humble frame of mind is disclosed in the route he chooses; he went straight back “unto the place where his tent had been at the beginning, unto the altar which he had made there at the first.” With a childlike simplicity he seems to own that his visit to Egypt had been a mistake. He had gone there supposing that he was thrown upon his own resources, and that, in order to keep himself and his dependants alive, he must have recourse to craft and dishonesty. By retracing his steps and returning to the altar at Bethel, he seems to acknowledge that he should have remained there through the famine in dependence on God.
Whoever has attempted a similar practical repentance, visible to his own household and affecting their place of abode or daily occupations, will know how to estimate the candour and courage of Abram. To own that some distinctly marked portion of our life, upon which we entered with great confidence in our own wisdom and capacity, has come to nothing and has betrayed us into reprehensible conduct, is mortifying indeed. To admit that we have erred and to repair our error by returning to our old way and practice, is what few of us have the courage to do. If we have entered on some branch of business or gone into some attractive speculation, or if we have altered our demeanour towards some friend, and if we are finding that we are thereby tempted to doubleness, to equivocation, to injustice, our only hope lies in a candid and straightforward repentance, in a manly and open return to the state of things that existed in happier days and which we should never have abandoned. Sometimes we are aware that a blight began to fall on our spiritual life from a particular date, and we can easily and distinctly trace an unhealthy habit of spirit to a well-marked passage in our outward career; but we shrink from the sacrifice and shame involved in a thoroughgoing restoration of the old state of things. We are always so ready to fancy we have done enough, if we get one heartfelt word of confession uttered; so ready, if we merely turn our faces towards God, to think our restoration complete. Let us make a point of getting through mere beginnings of repentance, mere intention to recover Gods favour and a sound condition of life, and let us return and return till we bow at Gods very altar again, and know that His hand is laid upon us in blessing as at the first.
Out of Egypt Abram brought vastly increased wealth. Each time he encamped, quite a town of black tents quickly rose round the spot where his fixed spear gave the signal for halting. And along with him there journeyed his nephew, apparently of almost equal, or at least considerable wealth; not dependent on Abram, nor even a partner with him, for “Lot also had flocks and herds and tents.” So rapidly was their substance increasing that no sooner did they become stationary than they found that the land was not able to furnish them with sufficient pasture. The Canaanite and the Perizzite would not allow them unlimited pasture in the neighbourhood of Bethel; and as the inevitable result of this the rival shepherds, eager to secure the best pasture for their own flocks and the best wells for their own cattle and camels, came to high words and probably to blows about their respective rights.
To both Abram and Lot it must have occurred that this competition between relatives was unseemly, and that some arrangement must be come to. And when at last some unusually blunt quarrel took place in presence of the chiefs, Abram divulges to Lot the scheme which had suggested itself to him. This state of things, he says, must come to an end; it is unseemly, unwise, and unrighteous. And as they walk on out of the circle of tents to discuss the matter without interruption, they come to a rising ground where the wide prospect brings them naturally to a pause. Abram looking north and south and seeing with the trained eye of a large flock-master that there was abundant pasture for both. turns to Lot with a final proposal: “Is not the whole land before thee? Separate thyself, I pray thee, from me: if thou wilt take the left hand, then I will go to the right; or if thou depart to the right hand, then I will go to the left.”
Thus early did wealth produce quarrelling among relatives. The men who had shared one anothers fortunes while comparatively poor, no sooner become wealthy than they have to separate. Abram prevented quarrel by separation. “Let us,” he says, “come to an understanding. And rather than be separate in heart, let us be separate in habitation.” It is always a sorrowful time in family history when it comes to this, that those who have had a common purse and have not been careful to know what exactly is theirs and what belongs to the other members of the family, have at last to make a division and to be as precise and documentary as if dealing with strangers. It is always painful to be compelled to own that law can be more trusted than love. and that legal forms are a surer barrier against quarrelling than brotherly kindness. It is a confession we are sometimes compelled to make, but never without a mixture of regret and shame.
As yet the character of Lot has not been exhibited, and we can only calculate from the relation he bears to Abram what his answer to the proposal will probably be. We know that Abram has been the making of his nephew, and that the land belongs to Abram; and we should expect that in common decency Lot would set aside the generous offer of. his uncle and demand that he only should determine the matter. “It is not for me to make choice in a land which is wholly yours. My future does not carry in it the import of yours. It is a small matter what kind of subsistence I secure or where I find it. Choose for yourself, and allot to me what is right.” We see here what a safeguard of happiness in life right feeling is. To be in right and pleasant relations with the persons around us will save us from error and sin even when conscience and judgment give no certain decision. The heart which feels gratitude is beyond the need of being schooled and compelled to do justly. To the man who is affectionately disposed it is superfluous to insist upon the rights of other persons. The instinct which tells a man what is due to others and makes him sensitive to their wrongs will preserve him from many an ignominious action which would degrade his whole life. But such instinct was a-wanting in Lot. His character, though in some respects admirable, had none of the generosity of Abrams in it. He had allowed himself on countless previous occasions to take advantage of Abrams unselfishness. Generosity is not always infectious; often it encourages selfishness in child, relative, or neighbour. And so Lot, instead of rivalling, traded on his uncles magnanimity; and chose him all the plains of Jordan because in his eye it was the richest part of the land.
This choice of Sodom as a dwelling-place was the great mistake of Lots life. He is the type of that very large class of men who have but one rule for determining them at the turning points of life. He was swayed solely by the consideration of worldly advantage. He has nothing deep, nothing high in him. He recognises no duty to Abram, no gratitude, no modesty; he has no perception of spiritual relations, no sense that God should have something to say in the partition of the land. Lot may be acquitted of a good deal which at first sight one is prompted to lay to his charge, but he cannot be acquitted of showing an eagerness to better himself, regardless of all considerations but the promise of wealth afforded by the fertility of the Jordan valley. He saw a quick though dangerous road to wealth. There seemed a certainty of success in his earthly calling, a risk only of moral disaster. He shut his eyes to the risk that he might grasp the wealth; and so doing, ruined both himself and his family.
The situation is one which is ceaselessly repeated. To men in business or in the cultivation of literature or art, or in one of the professions, there are presented opportunities of attaining a better position by cultivating the friendship or identifying oneself with the practice of men whose society is not in itself desirable. Society is made up of little circles, each of which has its own monopoly of some social or commercial or political advantage, and its own characteristic tone and enjoyments and customs. And if a man will not join one of these circles and accommodate himself to the mode of carrying on business and to the style of living it has identified with itself, he must forego the advantages which entrance to that circle would secure for him. As clearly as Lot saw that the well-watered plain stretching away under the sunshine was the right place to exercise his vocation as a flock-master, so do we see that associated with such and such persons and recognised as one of them, we shall be able more effectively than in any other position to use whatever natural gifts we have, and win the recognition and the profit these gifts seem to warrant. There is but one drawback. “The men of Sodom were wicked and sinners before the Lord exceedingly.” There is a tone you do not like; you hesitate to identify yourself with men who live solely and with cynical frankness only for gain; whose every sentence betrays the contemptible narrowness of soul to which worldliness condemns men; who live for money and who glory in their shame.
The very nature of the world in which we live makes such temptation universal. And to yield is common and fatal. We persuade ourselves we need not enter into close relations with the persons we propose to have business connections with. Lot would have been horrified, that day he made his choice, had it been told him his daughters would marry men of Sodom. But the swimmer who ventures into the outer circle of the whirlpool finds that his own resolve not to go further presents a very weak resistance to the waters inevitable suction. We fancy perhaps that to refuse the companionship of any class of men is pharisaic; that we have no business to condemn the attitude towards the Church, or the morality, or the style of living adopted by any class of men among us. This is the mere cant of liberalism. We do not condemn persons who suffer from smallpox, but a smallpox hospital would be about the last place we should choose for a residence. Or possibly we imagine we shall be able to carry some better influences into the society we enter. A vain imagination; the motive for choosing the society has already sapped our power for good.
Many of the errors of worldly men only reveal their most disastrous consequences in the second generation. Like some virulent diseases they have a period of incubation. Lots family grew up in a very different atmosphere from that which had nourished his own youth in Abrams tents. An adult and robust Englishman can withstand the climate of India: but his children who are born in it cannot. And the position in society which has been gained in middle life by the carefully and hardily trained child of a God-fearing household may not very visibly damage his own character, but may yet be absolutely fatal to the morality of his children. Lot may have persuaded himself he chose the dangerous prosperity of Sodom mainly for the sake of his children; but in point of fact he had better have seen them die of starvation in the most barren and parched desolation. And the parent who disregards conscience and chooses wealth or position, fancying that thus he benefits his children, will find to his life-long sorrow that he has entangled them in unimagined temptations.
But the man who makes Lots choice not only does a great injury to his children, but cuts himself off from all that is best in life. We are safe to say that after leaving Abrams tents Lot never again enjoyed unconstrainedly happy days. The men born and brought up in Sodom were possibly happy after their kind and in their fashion; but Lot was not. His soul was daily vexed. Many a time while hearing the talk of the men his daughters had married, must Lot have gone out with a sore heart, and looked to the distant hills that hid the tents of Abram, and longed for an hour of the company he used to enjoy. And the society to which you are tempted to join yourself may not be unhappy, but you can take no surer means of beclouding, embittering, and ruining your whole life than by joining it. You cannot forget the thoughts you once had, the friendships you once delighted in, the hopes that shed brightness through all your life. You cannot blot out the ideal that once you cherished as the most animating element of your life. Every day there will be that rising in your mind which is in the sharpest contrast to the thoughts of those with whom you are associated. You will despise them for their shallow, worldly ideas and ways; but you will despise yourself still more, being conscious that what they are through ignorance and upbringing, you are in virtue of your own foolish and mean choice. There is that in you which rebels against the superficial and external measure by which they judge things, and yet you have deliberately chosen these as your associates, and can only think with heart-broken regret of the high thoughts that once visited you and the hopes you have now no means of fulfilling. Your life is taken out of your own hands; you find yourself in bondage to the circumstances you have chosen; and you are learning in bitterness, disappointment, and shame, that indeed “a mans life consisteth not in the abundance of the things which he possesseth.” To determine your life solely by the prospect of worldly success is to risk the loss of the best things in life. To sacrifice friendship or conscience to success in your calling is to sacrifice what is best to what is lowest, and to bind yourself to the highest human happiness. For happily the essential elements of the highest happiness are as open to the poor as to the rich, to the unsuccessful as to the successful-love of wife and children, congenial and educating friendships, the knowledge of what the best men have done and the wisest men have said; the pleasure and impulse, the sentiments and beliefs which result from our knowledge of the heroic deeds done from year to year among men; the enlivening influence of examples that tell on all men alike, young and old, rich and poor; the insight and strength of character that are won in the hard wrestle with life; the growing consciousness that God is in human life, that He is ours and that we are His-these things and all that makes human life of value are universal as air and sunshine, but must be missed by those who make the world their object.
Though in point of fact Lot cut himself off by his choice from direct participation in the special inheritance to which Abram was called by God, it might perhaps be too much to say that his choice of the valley of Jordan was an explicit renunciation of the special blessedness of those who find their joy in responding to Gods call and doing His work in the world. It might also be extravagant to say that his choice of the richest land was prompted by the feeling that he was not included in the promise to Abram, and might as well make the most of his present opportunities. But it is certain that Abrams generosity to Lot arose out of his sense that in God he himself had abundant possession. In Egypt he had learned that in order to secure all that is worth having a man need never resort to duplicity, trickery, bold lying. He now learns that in order to enter on his own God-provided lot, he need shut no other man out of his. He is taught that to acknowledge amply the rights of other men is the surest road to the enjoyment of his own rights. He is taught that there is room in Gods plan for every man to follow his most generous impulses and the highest views of life that visit him.
It was Abrams simple belief that Gods promise was meant and was substantial, that made him indifferent as to what Lot might choose. His faith was judged in this scene, and was proved to be sound. This man, whose very calling it was to own this land, could freely allow Lot to choose the best of it. Why? Because he has learned that it is not by any plan of his own he is to come into possession; that God Who promised is to give him the land in His own way, and that his part is to act uprightly, mercifully, like God. Wherever there is faith, the same results will appear. He who believes that God is pledged to provide for him cannot be greedy, anxious, covetous; can only be liberal, even magnanimous. Any one can thus test his own faith. If he does not find that what God promises weighs substantially when put in the scales with gold: if he does not find that the accomplishment of Gods purpose with him in the world is to him the most valuable thing, and actually compels him to think lightly of worldly position and ordinary success; if he does not find that in point of fact the gains which content a man of the world shrivel and lose interest, he may feel tolerably certain he has no faith and is not counting as certain what God has promised.
It is commonly observed that wealth pursues the men who part with it most freely. Abram had this experience. No sooner had he allowed Lot to choose his portion than God gave him assurance that the whole would be his. It is “the meek” who “inherit the earth.” Not only have they, in their very losses and while suffering wrong at the hands of their fellows, a purer joy than those who wrong them; but they know themselves heirs of God with the certainty of enjoying all His possessions that can avail for their advantage. Declining to devote themselves as living sacrifices to business they hold their soul at leisure for what brings truest happiness, for friendship, for knowledge, for charity. Even in this life they may be said to inherit the earth, for all its richest fruits are theirs-the ground may belong to other men, but the beauty of the landscape is theirs without burden-and ever and anon they hear such words as were now uttered to Abram. They alone are inclined or able to receive renewed assurances that God is mindful of His promise and will abundantly bless them. It is they who are in no haste to be rich, and are content to abide in the retired hill-country where they can freely assemble round Gods altar; it is they who seek first the kingdom of God and make sure of that, whatever else they put in hazard, to whom Gods encouragements come. You wonder at the certainty with which others speak of hearing Gods voice and that so seldom you have the joy of knowing that God is directing and encouraging you. Why should you wonder, if you very well know that your attention is directed mainly to the world, that your heart trembles and thrills with all the fluctuations of your earthly hopes, that you wait for news and listen to every hint that can affect your position in life? Can you wonder that an ear trained to be so sensitive to the near earthly sounds, should quite have lost the range of heavenly voices?
Of the assurance here given him Abram was probably much in need when Lot had withdrawn with his flocks and servants. When the warmth of feeling cooled and allowed the somewhat unpleasant facts of the case to press upon his mind; and when he heard his shepherds murmuring that, after all the strife they had maintained for their masters rights, he should have weakly yielded these to Lot; and when he reflected, as now he inevitably would reflect, how selfish and ungrateful Lot had shown himself to be, he must have been tempted to think be had possibly made a mistake in dealing so generously with such a man. This reflection on himself might naturally grow into a reflection upon God, Who might have been expected so to order matters as to give the best country to the best man. All such reflections are precluded by the renewed grant he now receives of the whole land.
It is always as difficult to govern our heart wisely after as before making a sacrifice. It is as difficult to keep the will decided as to make the original decision; and it is more difficult to think affectionately of those for whom the sacrifice has been made, when the change in their condition and our own is actually accomplished. There is a natural reaction after a generous action which is not always sufficiently resisted. And when we see that those who refuse to make any sacrifices are more prosperous and less ruffled in spirit than ourselves we are tempted to take matters into our own hand, and, without waiting upon God, to use the worlds quick ways. At such times we find how difficult it is to hold an advanced position, and how much unbelief mingles with the sincerest faith, and what vile dregs of selfishness sully the clearest generosity: we find our need of God and of those encouragements and assistances He can impart to the soul. Happy are we if we receive them and are enabled thereby to be constant in the good we have begun; for all sacrifice is good begun. And as Abram saw, when the cities of the plain were destroyed, how kindly God had guided him; so when our history is complete, we shall have no inclination to grumble at any passage of our life which we entered by generosity and faith in God, but shall see how tenderly God has held us back from much that our soul has been ardently desiring, and which we thought would be the making of us.