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 show thee:
1. Now the lord said ] Lit. “and Jehovah said.” The narrative opens with characteristic simplicity, and with the abruptness possibly indicating its selection from a group of similar traditions.
the lord said ] Here, as elsewhere, we must not suppose that “the word of Jehovah” was accompanied either by any external manifestation, or by an audible sound. God in old times “hath spoken unto the fathers” even as He speaks now to those who hear His voice, “in divers manners” (Heb 1:1).
out of thy country kindred father’s house ] See Gen 24:7. The threefold tie of land, people, and home, is to be severed. Abram is to lay the foundations of the Chosen People independently of any obligation or favour due to local environment or personal association. He is to rely only on his God. Thus the first trial of the patriarch’s faith requires him, ( a) to renounce the certainties of the past: ( b) to face the uncertainties of the future: ( c) to look for and to follow the direction of Jehovah’s will. Cf. Heb 11:8, “by faith Abraham, when he was called, obeyed to go out and he went out, not knowing whither he went.”
the land that I will shew thee ] The country is not designated by name: an additional test of faith.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
– The Call of Abram
6. shekem Shekem, the upper part of the back. Here it is the name of a person, the owner of this place, where afterward is built the town called at first Shekem, then Flavia Neapolis, and now Nablous. ‘elon the oak; related: be lasting, strong. moreh In Onkelos plain; Moreh, archer, early rain, teacher. Here the name of a man who owned the oak that marked the spot. In the Septuagint it is rendered hupseegeen.
8. beyt–‘el, Bethel, house of God. yam sea, great river, west. ay, Ai, heap.
9. negeb south.
The narrative now takes leave of the rest of the Shemites, as well as the other branches of the human family, and confines itself to Abram. It is no part of the design of Scripture to trace the development of worldliness. It marks its source, and indicates the law of its downward tendency; but then it turns away from the dark detail, to devote its attention to the way by which light from heaven may again pierce the gloom of the fallen heart. Here, then, we have the starting of a new spring of spiritual life in the human race.
Gen 12:1-3
Having brought the affairs of Terahs family to a fit resting point, the sacred writer now reverts to the call of Abram. This, we have seen, took place when he was seventy years of age, and therefore five years before the death of Terah. The Lord said unto Abram. Four hundred and twenty-two years on the lowest calculation after the last recorded communication with Noah, the Lord again opens his mouth, to Abram. Noah, Shem, or Heber, must have been in communication with heaven, indeed, at the time of the confusion of tongues, and hence, we have an account of that miraculous interposition. The call of Abram consists of a command and a promise. The command is to leave the place of all his old and fond associations, for a land which he had not yet seen, and therefore did not know. Three ties are to be severed in complying with this command – his country, in the widest range of his affections; his place of birth and kindred comes closer to his heart; his fathers house is the inmost circle of all his tender emotions. All these are to be resigned; not, however, without reason. The reason may not be entirely obvious to the mind of Abram. But he has entire faith in the reasonableness of what God proposes. So with reason and faith he is willing to go to the unknown land. It is enough that God will show him the land to which he is now sent.
Gen 12:2-3
The promise corresponds to the command. If he is to lose much by his exile, he will also gain in the end. The promise contains a lower and higher blessing. The lower blessing has three parts: First, I will make of thee a great nation. This will compensate for the loss of his country. The nation to which he had hitherto belonged was fast sinking into polytheism and idolatry. To escape from it and its defiling influence was itself a benefit; but to be made himself the head of a chosen nation was a double blessing. Secondly, And bless thee. The place of his birth and kindred was the scene of all his past earthly joys. But the Lord will make up the loss to him in a purer and safer scene of temporal prosperity. Thirdly, And make thy name great. This was to compensate him for his fathers house. He was to be the patriarch of a new house, on account of which he would be known and venerated all over the world.
The higher blessing is expressed in these remarkable terms: And be thou a blessing. He is to be not merely a subject of blessing, but a medium of blessing to others. It is more blessed to give than to receive. And the Lord here confers on Abram the delightful prerogative of dispensing good to others. The next verse expands this higher element of the divine promise. I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee. Here the Lord identifies the cause of Abram with his own, and declares him to be essentially connected with the weal or woe of all who come into contact with him. And blessed in thee shall be all the families of the ground. The ground was cursed for the sake of Adam, who fell by transgression. But now shall the ground again participate in the blessing. In thee. In Abram is this blessing laid up as a treasure hid in a field to be realized in due time. All the families of mankind shall ultimately enter into the enjoyment of this unbounded blessing.
Thus, when the Lord saw fit to select a man to preserve vital piety on the earth and be the head of a race suited to be the depository of a revelation of mercy, he at the same time designed that this step should be the means of effectually recalling the sin-enthralled world to the knowledge and love of himself. The race was twice already since the fall put upon its probation – once under the promise of victory to the seed of the woman, and again under the covenant with Noah. In each of these cases, notwithstanding the growing light of revelation and accumulating evidence of the divine forbearance, the race had apostatised from the God of mercy, with lamentably few known exceptions. Yet, undeterred by the gathering tokens of this second apostasy, and after reiterated practical demonstration to all people of the debasing, demoralizing effect of sin, the Lord, with calm determination of purpose, sets about another step in the great process of removing the curse of sin, dispensing the blessing of pardon, and eventually drawing all the nations to accept of his mercy. The special call of Abram contemplates the calling of the Gentiles as its final issue, and is therefore to be regarded as one link in a series of wonderful events by which the legal obstacles to the divine mercy are to be taken out of the way, and the Spirit of the Lord is to prevail with still more and more of men to return to God.
It is sometimes inadvertently said that the Old Testament is narrow and exclusive, while the New Testament is broad and catholic in its spirit. This is a mistake. The Old and New Testaments are of one mind on this matter. Many are called, and few chosen. This is the common doctrine of the New as well as of the Old. They are both equally catholic in proclaiming the gospel to all. The covenant with Adam and with Noah is still valid and sure to all who return to God; and the call of Abram is expressly said to be a means of extending blessing to all the families of man. The New Testament does not aim at anything more than this; it merely hails the approaching accomplishment of the same gracious end. They both concur also in limiting salvation to the few who repent and believe the gospel. Even when Abram was called there were a few who still trusted in the God of mercy. According to the chronology of the Masoretic text, Heber was still alive, Melkizedec was contemporary with Abram, Job was probably later, and many other now unknown witnesses for God were doubtless to be found, down to the time of the exodus, outside the chosen family. God marks the first symptoms of decaying piety. He does not wait until it has died out before he calls Abram. He proceeds in a leisurely, deliberate manner with his eternal purpose of mercy, and hence, a single heir of promise suffices for three generations, until the set time comes for the chosen family and the chosen nation. Universalism, then, in the sense of the offer of mercy to man, is the rule of the Old and the New Testament. Particularism in the acceptance of it is the accident of the time. The call of Abram is a special expedient for providing a salvation that may be offered to all the families of the earth.
In all Gods teachings the near and the sensible come before the far and the conceivable, the present and the earthly before the eternal and the heavenly. Thus, Abrams immediate acts of self-denial are leaving his country, his birthplace, his home. The promise to him is to be made a great nation, be blessed, and have a great name in the new land which the Lord would show him. This is unspeakably enhanced by his being made a blessing to all nations. God pursues this mode of teaching for several important reasons. First, the sensible and the present are intelligible to those who are taught. The Great Teacher begins with the known, and leads the mind forward to the unknown. If he had begun with things too high, too deep, or too far for the range of Abrams mental vision, he would not have come into relation with Abrams mind. It is superfluous to say that he might have enlarged Abrams view in proportion to the grandeur of the conceptions to be revealed.
On the same principle he might have made Abram cognizant of all present and all developed truth. On the same principle he might have developed all things in an instant of time, and so have had done with creation and providence at once. Secondly, the present and the sensible are the types of the future and the conceivable; the land is the type of the better land; the nation of the spiritual nation; the temporal blessing of the eternal blessing; the earthly greatness of the name of the heavenly. And let us not suppose that we are arrived at the end of all knowledge. We pique ourselves on our advance in spiritual knowledge beyond the age of Abram. But even we may be in the very infancy of mental development. There may be a land, a nation, a blessing, a great name, of which our present realizations or conceptions are but the types. Any other supposition would be a large abatement from the sweetness of hopes overflowing cup.
Thirdly, these things which God now promises are the immediate form of his bounty, the very gifts he begins at the moment to bestow. God has his gift to Abram ready in his hand in a tangible form. He points to it and says, This is what thou presently needest; this I give thee, with my blessing and favor. But, fourthly, these are the earnest and the germ of all temporal and eternal blessing. Man is a growing thing, whether as an individual or a race. God graduates his benefits according to the condition and capacity of the recipients. In the first boon of his good-will is the earnest of what he will continue to bestow on those who continue to walk in his ways. And as the present is the womb of the future, so is the external the symbol of the internal, the material the shadow of the spiritual, in the order of the divine blessing. And as events unfold themselves in the history of man and conceptions in his soul within, so are doctrines gradually opened up in the Word of God, and progressively revealed to the soul by the Spirit of God.
Gen 12:4-5
Abram obeys the call. He had set out from Ur under the revered guardianship of his aged father, Terah, with other companions, as the Lord had spoken unto him. Lot is now mentioned as his companion. Terahs death has been already recorded. Sarai is with him, of course, and therefore it is unnecessary to repeat the fact. But Lot is associated with him as an incidental companion for some time longer. The age of Abram at the second stage of his journey is now mentioned. This enables us to determine, as, we have seen, that he departed from Ur five years before.
Gen 12:5
This is the record of what is presumed in the close of Gen 12:4; namely, the second setting out for Kenaan. Abram took. He is now the leader of the little colony, as Terah was before his death. Sarai, as well as Lot, is now named. The gaining they had gained during the five years of their residence in Haran. If Jacob became comparatively rich in six years Gen 30:43, so might Abram, with the divine blessing, in five. The souls they had gotten – the bondservants they had acquired. Where there is a large stock of cattle, there must be a corresponding number of servants to attend to them. Abram and Lot enter the land as men of substance. They are in a position of independence. The Lord is realizing to Abram the blessing promised. They start for the land of Kenaan, and at length arrive there. This event is made as important as it ought to be in our minds by the mode in which it is stated.
Gen 12:6-9
Abram does not enter into immediate possession, but only travels through the land which the Lord had promised to show him Gen 12:1. He arrives at the place of Shekem. The town was probably not yet in existence. It lay between Mount Gerizzim and Mount Ebal. It possesses a special interest as the spot where the Lord first appeared to Abram in the land of promise. It was afterward dedicated to the Lord by being made a Levitical town, and a city of refuge. At this place Joshua convened an assembly of all Israel to hear his farewell address. So Joshua made a covenant with the people that day, and set them a statute and an ordinance in Shekem Jos. 24:1-25. The particular point in the place of Shekem where Abram halted is the oak of Moreh; so called, probably, from its planter or owner. The oak attains to great antiquity, and a single tree, well grown, becomes conspicuous for its grandeur and beauty, and was often chosen in ancient times as a meeting-place for religious rites.
And the Kenaanite was then in the land. – This simply implies that the land was not open for Abram to enter upon immediate possession of it without challenge. Another was in possession. The sons of Kenaan had already arrived and preoccupied the country. It also intimates, or admits, of the supposition that there had been previous inhabitants who may have been subjugated by the invading Kenaanites. Thus, ‘az then alludes to the past, as in Gen 4:26. Some of these former inhabitants will meet us in the course of the narrative. It admits also of the supposition that the Kenaanites afterward ceased to be its inhabitants. Hence, some have inferred that this could not have been penned by Moses, as they were expelled after his death. If this supposition were the necessary or the only one implied in the form of expression, we should acquiesce in the conclusion that this sentence came from one of the prophets to whom the conservation, revision, and continuation of the living oracles were committed. But we have seen that two other presuppositions may be made that satisfy the import of the passage. Moreover, the first of the three accounts for the fact that Abram does not instantly enter on possession, as there was an occupying tenant. And, finally, the third supposition may fairly be, not that the Kenaanites afterward ceased, but that they should afterward cease to be in the land. This, then, as well as the others, admits of Moses being the writer of this interesting sentence.
We are inclined to think, however, that the term Kenaanite here means, not the whole race of Kenaan, but the special tribe so called. If the former were meant, the statement would be in a manner superfluous, after calling the country the land of Kenaan. If the proper tribe be intended, then we have evidence here that they once possessed this part of the land which was afterward occupied by the Hivite and the Amorite Gen 34:2; Jos 11:3; for, at the time of the conquest by Abrams descendants, the mountainous land in the center, including the place of Shekem, was occupied by the Amorites and other tribes, while the coast of the Mediterranean and the west bank of the Jordan was held by the Kenaanites proper (Josephus v. 1; xi. 3). This change of occupants had taken place before the time of Moses.
Gen 12:7
And the Lord appeared unto Abram. – Here, for the first time, this remarkable phrase occurs. It indicates that the Lord presents himself to the consciousness of man in any way suitable to his nature. It is not confined to the sight, but may refer to the hearing 1Sa 3:15. The possibility of God appearing to man is antecedently undeniable. The fact of his having done so proves the possibility. On the mode of his doing this it is vain for us to speculate. The Lord said unto him, Unto thy seed will I give this land. Unto thy seed, not unto thee. To Abram himself he gave none inheritance in it, no, not so much as to set his foot on Act 7:5. This land which the Lord had now shown him, though at present occupied by the Kenaanite invader. An altar. This altar is erected on the spot which is hallowed by the appearance of the Lord to Abram. The place of Shekem might have been supposed to have received its name from Shekem, a son of Gilead Num 26:31, did we not meet with Shekem, the son of Hamor, in this very place in the time of Jacob Gen 34:2. We learn from this the precariousness of the inference that the name of a place is of later origin because a person of that name lived there at a later period. The place of Shekem was doubtless called after a Shekem antecedent to Abram. Shekem and Moreh may have preceded even the Kenaanites, for anything we know.
Gen 12:8-9
From the oak of Moreh Abram now moves to the hill east of Bethel, and pitches his tent, with Bethel on the west and Ai on the east. These localities are still recognized – the former as Beiten, and the latter as Tell er-Rijmeh (the mount of the heap). Bethel was a place, adjacent to which was the town called Luz at the first Gen 28:19. Jacob gave this name to the place twice Gen 28:19; Gen 35:15. The name, then, was not first given at the second nomination by him. It follows that it may not have been first given at his first nomination. Accordingly we meet with it as an existing name in Abrams time, without being constrained to account for it by supposing the present narrative to have been composed in its present form after the time of Jacobs visit. On the other hand, we may regard it as an interesting trace of early piety having been present in the land even before the arrival of Abram. We shall meet with other corroborating proofs. Bethel continued afterward to be a place hallowed by the presence of God, to which the people resorted for counsel in the war with Benjamin Jdg 20:18, Jdg 20:26, Jdg 20:31; Jdg 21:2, and in which Jeroboam set up one of the golden calves 1Ki 12:29.
On the hill east of this sacred ground Abram built another altar; and called upon the name of the Lord. Here we bare the reappearance of an ancient custom, instituted in the family of Adam after the birth of Enok Gen 4:26. Abram addresses God by his proper name, Yahweh, with an audible voice, in his assembled household. This, then, is a continuation of the worship of Adam, with additional light according to the progressive development of the moral nature of man. But Abram has not yet any settled abode in the land. He is only surveying its several regions, and feeding his flocks as he finds an opening. Hence, he continues his journey southward.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Gen 12:1-3
Now the Lord had said unto Abram, get thee out of thy country
Abrahams action
His obeying the call and command of God, wherein four circumstances are very remarkable.
1. The time when it was when God called.
2. The place from whence God called him.
3. The country whither he was called.
4. The reason or end why he was thus said unto by the great God.
I. First of the first, to wit, THE TIME WHEN ABRAHAM WAS CALLED. It was while he lived in Ur of the Chaldees; for Abraham lived with his father Terah in that place, and in Haran, or Charan, a city of Mesopotamia, till he was seventy-five years old (Gen 12:4, and Act 7:2-4). There and then did the God of glory appear to Abraham (Gen 11:28). This that blessed pro-martyr Stephen (being filled with the Holy Ghost) intimateth, to convince those superstitious and bloodthirsty Jews (who conceited that religion was confined to Canaan or Jerusalem) that Abraham had the true religion even in Chaldea and in Charan, before ever he saw Canaan or received circumcision, or before any ceremonies were appointed by the ministry of Moses, and before there was either tabernacle or temple. When Abraham dwelt with his father on the other side of Euphrates, and served idols (Jos 24:2), even then did God call him out of his country, making him to follow His call to obedience, not knowing whither he went (Heb 11:8), no, nor much caring, so long as he had God by the Hand, or might follow Him as his Guide step by step. By faith Abraham when called obeyed (Heb 11:8). The Greek word imports reverence and obedience. He did not stop his ear to this great Charmer (Psa 58:4-5), but he listened and hearkened to Gods call with an awful respect. Thus Abraham did not dispute, but dispatch Gods command; but immediately departed without solicitation or carnal reasonings against it (Gen 12:4). His inner and outer man were relatives; so it should be with us.
II. The second circumstance is THE PLACE FROM WHENCE, which is two fold.
1. Ur.
2. Haran.
(1) Parents ought not to hinder their children from good and from obedience to God. Here Terah, the old father, did not rebuke Abraham his son for being too full of fancy, nor charged him (upon his blessing) to abide in his native country, and not to be so fantastical as to follow so fond a call that told him not of the place whither he was to go; he did not say to his son, Wilt thou leave a certainty for an uncertainty, or wilt thou be wiser than all thy forefathers? etc. Let parents learn from hence to further, and not to hinder, their children in the good ways of God; honour is the reward of the former, but dishonour (if no more) of the latter.
(2) Mans heart needeth many pulls from Gods hand before man can complete his obedience to God. Here God gives Abraham two calls or pulls before he pulled him to the Land of Promise. The first pull bringeth him only from Ur to Haran; there he settleth, and gathereth much goods Gen 12:5).
(3) All carnal respects must be subject to the spiritual, and all carnal relations must be bewailed (Deu 21:11-12), yes, and relinquished (Psa 45:10).
(4) Divine vocation and adoption floweth wholly and solely from free grace. Nimrods Church (as one saith) had almost swallowed up Abraham, while he was young, serving other gods as well as Nabor and Terah, who (as some Rabbins say) got his living by making and selling of images. Yet out of this root so idolatrous, both on father and mothers side, the whole stock of Israel sprang, to be an adopted people to God. Even Abraham, as well as the rest, until God called him to His foot (Isa 41:2) from the feet of idols, and from this bell of Babel, were he born at that time. This doth most highly advance the greatness of the free grace of God, thus to call whom He will (Mar 3:13), and to have mercy on whom He will Rom 9:15-16). God found even Abraham himself ungodly Rom 4:2; Rom 4:5); but He did not leave him so. God must make us good, or He will never find us so.
III. THE PLACE WHITHER ABRAHAM WAS CALLED. This was not named. God did not tell it him in his ear, yet showed it him to his eye (Gen 12:7; Gen 13:14).
1. Wherever Abraham was, his chief care was to be going on still toward the south (Gen 12:9), as towards the sun. So should all the children of Abraham travel towards the Sun of Righteousness (Mal 4:2), setting forth early as morning seekers (Pro 8:17), and making progress in grace (2Pe 3:18), as from glory to glory (2Co 3:18).
2. His first care in all places where he came was to build an altar to his God; and so it should be ours. We are a kingdom of priests (1Pe Rev 1:6), and we have an altar (Heb 13:10), which is Christ, who sanctifies the sacrifice (Mat 23:19); we should build this altar in our hearts Eze 36:26).
3. Abraham built his altars, although the Canaanites were then n the land; and it is a wonder they did not stone him for so doing, which certainly they would have done had not God restrained them. Thus ought all the spiritual seed of Abraham to shine as lamps in the midst of a crooked and cursed generation (Php 2:15; Mat 5:16; 1Pe 2:12), holding forth the word of life. We should set up our altars in sight and despite of idolaters, as Abraham, and call them Jehovah nissi, the Lord is my banner, as Moses did (Exo 17:15).
4. Abraham was the first man who had God most familiarly appearing to him; and the sight of the Canaanite did not so much discourage him as the sight of his God did encourage him (1Sa 30:6).
5. We should look upon our all with a pilgrims eye, and use our all with a pilgrims mind. It was a mighty work of Abrahams faith to behave himself as a stranger on earth, because he knew himself a citizen of heaven Heb 11:9-10, etc.); so we (Eph 2:19-20).
IV. THE END WHY GOD CALLED ABRAHAM. It was only to take possession of Canaan, not to enjoy it as a present inheritance; for we find that he was famished twice out of this good Land of Promise. First into Egypt Gen 12:10); and, secondly, into Gerar, the Philistines country Gen 20:1). Yet did he ever make Canaan his retreating place, sojourning in it for a hundred years–the remnant of his life. From which learn–
1. The most fruitful land may be made barren for the wickedness of those that dwell in it (Psalm evil. 34). God can famish our Canaan to us Zep 2:11).
2. Suppose we be forced into Egypt or Philistia, to seek for that we cannot find in a famished land of promise; yet this is our best retreating place when God heals our backslidings (Hos 14:4). Alas! we are over-apt to slip out of the land of promise, as Adam was out of paradise, and Abraham out of Canaan; but the Lord keeps the feet of His saints (1Sa 2:9). Obj. Though Heb 11:8 saith, God called Abraham to Canaan to receive an inheritance there; and Act 7:5 saith, Yet God gave him no inheritance in it, not so much as to set his foot on.
These two seeming contradictory places are thus reconciled:
1. Abraham did inherit Canaan mystically, as that land was a type of heaven. God may deny literally, yet grant mystically or spiritually.
2. He did inherit it in his posterity (though not in his person) 430 years after the promise (Gal 3:17). Thus God kept His promise with him; and so He doth with us, though we see not the performance thereof.
This was Abrahams ease; yet took he possession of the land because of his title to it, which was threefold.
1. By way of promise. God made Canaan to belong unto Abraham by making a promise of it to him no less than four times (Gen 12:7; Gen 13:15; Gen 15:7; Gen 17:8). This promise of God (being a four-fold cord) Abraham accounts his best freehold. Thus it is with all the faithful, as it was with the father of the faithful: such have the spirit of truth to assure them of their interest in Divine promises (2Co 1:22; 2Co 5:5; Eph 1:14). It is an earnest. This makes them exceeding rich, though they see not the actual performance of them in their day. Wealth lieth in good bills and bonds, under Gods own hand and seal, all signed in His word, and sealed by His spirit. He therefore accounts heavenly promises far better than earthly performances. As Abraham did only take possession of Canaan, which afterwards he was to inherit, so a Christian takes possession of heaven, with his name written in it (Luk 10:20), and with his heart panting towards it (2Pe 3:12).
2. By way of conquest. Canaan belonged to Abraham in his conquering Chedarlaomer, etc. (Gen 14:4; Gen 15:17). This great king was the son of Elam, the son of Shem (Gen 10:22), and, according to Noahs prophecy–Canaan shall be Shems servant (Gen 9:26)–this Chedarlaomer was lord over the Canaanites and over those chief cities which stood in the plains of Jordan. Abraham conquers him in battle; so Canaan became the conquerors by conquest; he became the heir of Canaan. The history holds forth this mystery: that all Christians, the children of Abraham, are by their new birth born heirs of heaven, the celestial Canaan; they should therefore be valiant for it (Jer 9:3).
3. By way of purchase Canaan was Abrahams. Though all the land was his by promise, yet he procures only a burying place by purchase (Gen 23:16, etc.), not having a foot of it for his own present possession. This purchased burying place was an earnest for all the rest; hence all the patriarchs dying after desired to be buried in it (Gen 47:30; Gen 50:25). A sepulchre of ones own was a sign of firm possession (Isa 22:16).All his children must write after his copy of obedience, which, in its transcendency, hath a threefold excellency. It was an obedience so transcendant as to be–
1. Without hesitation.
2. Without reservation.
3. Without limitation. Of these in order–
1. It was obedience without hesitation. He used no disputation in the case; he falls not upon arguing with God in any carnal reasonings against his call and command, saying, I cannot apprehend any urgent occasion why I should forsake my own native country; and may not I justly suspect it no better than a piece of sublime folly to go I know not whither, and to leave a certainty for an uncertainty? Is not one bird in the hand (as saith the proverb) better than two in the bush? He doth not allege, Lord, first satisfy my scruples, and convince my judgment that it is my duty, and then will I follow and obey Thee. No, he doth not dispute, but despatch; he cloth not say (as those recusants in the gospel said), Suffer me first to go and bury my father (Mat 8:21); or, I have bought a piece of ground, and I must needs go to prove it, etc. (Luk 14:18-20). Neither did Abraham dare to do as better men than those aforesaid, even as Moses (Exo 3:11; Exo 4:1-31; Exo 10:1-29; Exo 11:1-10; Exo 12:1-51; Exo 13:1-22), or as Jeremy (Jer 1:6), who both do bring in theircarnal reasonings strongly to confute God and His call. It is not a good angel, but the evil one that opens our mouths to make replies upon such a sovereign Master. Our Lord is wiser for us than we can be for ourselves; our fleshly wisdom is enmity against God (Rom 8:7).
2. As Abrahams obedience was without hesitation, or any contrary disputes against Gods call, so it was without reservation he resigns up himself to the command of God, not by halves, but wholly, without any ifs or ands, as we say. What we do herein must be done with our whole heart, with all our heart, with all our soul, and with all our strength. God gives a whole Christ to us, and shall not we give a whole heart to Him?
3. As Abrahams obedience was without hesitation and reservation, so it was without limitation. It is too, too common with us, as it was with Israel, to limit the Holy One of Israel (Psa 78:41), especially in four respects:
1. In respect of time.
2. Of place.
3. Of means.
4. Of manner.
Nay, even professors themselves will not own God, unless He appear to them in their own manner; whereas God showeth Himself in divers manners (Heb 1:1). Hence have we many famous remarks, as–
1. That though blind obedience as to man is abominable, yet as to God it is highly commendable; such as this of Abrahams was.
2. Though this obedience of Abraham was a blind obedience as to his own will, yet was it not so as to Gods will; for Gods will was the rule of Abrahams obedience.
3. Though Abraham knew not whither he went (Heb 11:8), yet he knew well with whom he went, even One with whom he was sure he could not possibly miscarry.
4. Abraham knew not, yet followed, not knowing whither. But we know (from the sure word of prophecy) whither our way leadeth–to wit, to heaven. It is a shame for us not to follow. Abrahams following God blindfold brought him to the earthly Canaan; but our following God with our eyes opened will bring us to the heavenly country. (C. Ness.)
Abraham: the emigrant
The call and migration of the patriarch suggest two thoughts.
I. THE RISE OF PERSONAL RELIGION. Piety may vary in its form in different persons and times, but in its spirit it is unchanging.
1. It takes its rise in God. Abram was called. Jehovah said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, etc. It was not poverty that drove Abram from his native country; it was not persecution; it was not that love of a migratory life which is natural to an Oriental: his journey to Canaan was wholly due to a spiritual inspiration. God chose Abram (Neh 9:7) to be a child of grace–a justified sinner (Gal 3:8). It was God who gave this son of idolaters all his grandeur of soul and his marvellous appreciation of the true and the eternal. The conversion of every believer is similar. Personal religion always takes its rise in God–in His sovereign choice (2Ti 1:9), in His Divine power (JohnPhp 1:6), and in His wonderful love (Eph 2:4-5). No sinner has ever of his own accord quitted his native land of spiritual darkness and death.
2. It is the fruit of a Divine revelation. Jehovah revealed himself to Abram as the one living and true God, and in summoning him to emigrate to Canaan, made him a magnificent promise. The God of Shem is now the God of Abram. We are not to understand, indeed, that the patriarchs religious knowledge was at first either extensive or minute. But as each successive revelation was made to him, he learned more of the nature of God, and of the sublimity of his own destiny, until at length he was able to rejoice in the anticipation of the coming of Christ (Joh 8:56) and in the hope of a glorious immortality (Heb 11:10; Heb 11:13-16). Had the God of Glory not appeared to him, the patriarch would in all likelihood have died a pagan in the land of his fathers. Religion cannot be generated in any heart apart from a Divine revelation of some sort. There must be some knowledge of the truth.
3. It is the product of an earnest faith. By faith Abraham, when he was called, obeyed. The truth that was made known to him would have had no influence upon him had he not believed it. Not reason alone is the basis of personal religion, for reason alone would lead to rationalism. Neither is it feeling alone, for that would develop into mysticism. The man of God is a man of faith.
II. THE DEVELOPMENT OF PERSONAL RELIGION. Piety has its fundamental and formative principles, but it has also its developments of these. It has fruits as well as roots. Abrams piety developed in a complete renunciation of his old life; and the new life which he henceforth followed had at least three strongly marked characteristics. It was–
1. A life of implicit trust in God. Abrams first act of faith was followed by a confirmed habit of trustfulness. He struck the roots of his soul deep down into the invisible.
2. A life of conscious strangeness on the earth. Abram was content to be a stranger and a sojourner in the holy land.
3. A life which shall merge into a blessed immortality. Abram longed for a fatherland, but not for the land of his earthly forefathers. He might have re-crossed the Euphrates, but he never did so. The home that he learned with increasing eagerness to desire was the dwelling place of his Father in heaven (Heb 11:10; Heb 11:14-16). How large the personal interest which the believer has in heaven! He shall yet dwell in it as his fatherland. (Charles Jerdan, M. A. , LL. B.)
The call of Abram
I. In the call of Abram we see AN OUTLINE OF THE GREAT PROVIDENTIAL SYSTEM UNDER WHICH WE LIVE. II. GREAT LIVES ARE TRAINED BY GREAT PROMISES. The promise to Abram–
1. Throws light on the compensations of life.
2. It shows the oneness of God with His people.
3. It shows the influence of the present over the future.
III. THERE WILL ALWAYS BE CENTRAL FIGURES IN SOCIETY, men of commanding life, around whom other persons settle into secondary positions. This one man, Abram, holds the promise; all the other persons in the company hold it secondarily.
IV. ABRAM SET UP HIS ALTAR ALONG THE LINE OF HIS MARCH.
V. The incident in Gen 12:10-12 shows WHAT THE BEST OF MEN ARE WIZEN THEY BETAKE THEMSELVES TO THEIR OWN DEVICES. As the minister of God, Abram is great and noble; as the architect of his own fortune, he is cowardly, selfish, and false.
VI. NATURAL NOBLENESS OUGHT NEVER TO BE UNDERRATED (Gen 12:18-20). In this matter Pharaoh was a greater, a nobler man than Abram.
VII. The whole incident shows THAT GOD CALLS MEN TO SPECIAL DESTINIES, and that life is true and excellent in itself and in its influences only in so far as it is Divinely inspired and ruled. (J. Parker, D. D.)
Abrams training
I. ALL THE LIFE OF ABRAHAM WAS A SPECIAL TRAINING FOR A SPECIAL END. Chosen, as are all Gods instruments, because he was capable of being made that which the Lord purposed to make him, there was that in him which the good Spirit of the Lord formed, through the incidents of his life of wandering, into a character of eminent and single-hearted faithfulness.
II. THIS WORK WAS DONE NOT FOR HIS OWN SAKE EXCLUSIVELY. He was to be a father of many generations. The seed of Abraham was to be kept separate from the heathen world around it, even until from it was produced the Desire of all nations; and this character of Abraham was stamped thus deeply upon him, that it might be handed on through him to his children and his childrens children after him.
III. And so to A WONDERFUL DEGREE IT was; marking that Jewish people, amongst all their sins and rebellions, with such a peculiar strength and nobleness of character; and out in all its glory, in successive generations, in judge and seer and prophet and king, as they at all realized the pattern of their great progenitor, and walked the earth as strangers and pilgrims, but walked it with God, the God of Abraham and their God. (Bishop Samuel Wilberforce.)
A call from God
I. AT SOME TIME IN OUR LIVES A CALL FROM GOD SENDS ITS TRUMPET TONE THROUGH EACH OF OUR SOULS, as it did when Abraham heard it, and he went forth with the future stretching broad and far before him
II. GODS CALL TO ABRAHAM WAS:
1. A call to closer communion with Himself.
2. A call which led him to break with his past.
3. A call into loneliness.
III. The reason why so many of us, who are good and honourable men, never become men of great use and example and higher thought and true devotion, IS THAT WE DARE NOT BE SINGULAR. We dare not leave our kindred or our set. We will not leave our traditional views and sentiments, and we cannot leave our secret sins. God speaks, and we close our eyes and turn away our heads, and our hearts answer, I will not come. How long will all this last? Will it last until another solemn voice shall speak to us, and at the call of death we say, I come? (W. Page-Roberts, M. A.)
Lessons from the life of Abraham
I. Notice FIRST THE CALL OF ABRAHAM.
1. The call was addressed to him suddenly.
2. It required him to forsake his country and his kindred, while giving him no hope of return.
3. It sent him on a long and difficult journey, to a country lying more than three hundred miles away. Yet Abraham obeyed in willing submission to the command of God.
II. Notice ABRAHAMS CONQUEST OVER THE KINGS. This is the first battle recorded in the Word of God. It was after his rescue of Lot that Abraham was met by the mysterious Melchizedek. An awful shade of supernaturalism still rests upon this man, to whom some of the attributes of the Godhead seem to be ascribed, and who is always named with God and with Gods Son. There are two lessons deducible from Abrahams conquests.
1. That military skill and experience are often easily vanquished by untaught valour, when that is at once inspired by impulse, guided by wisdom, and connected with a good cause.
2. That Christian duty varies at different times and in different circumstances.
III. Notice THE COVENANTS WHICH WERE ESTABLISHED BETWEEN ABRAHAM AND GOD. From them we learn–
1. Gods infinite condescension.
2. Our duty of entering into covenant with God in Christ. From the history of Abraham we see that Gods intention was:
(1) To secure to Himself one great accession from the idolatrous camp.
(2) To send Abraham as a forerunner and a first step into the land which God had selected as His peculiar prosperity.
(3) To create a family link of connection between God and a distinct race of people for long ages. (G. Gilfillan.)
The call of Abram
The life of Abram approaches completeness. In the Scriptures more space is devoted to him than to all that went before him put together. In the narrative before us we have the starting point of all that was illustrious and good in his life, and, we might almost say, of all Gods gracious interpositions for the race. It is also full of valuable instruction, certain interesting points of which it is our present purpose to notice.
1. It reminds us of Gods patient concern for the ways and welfare of men. The call of Abram was a summons to leave the land of his birth and early associations, and to go forth, under Divine leadership, to another of which he should be told. The purpose of the call was that, in him, the race might religiously start anew.
2. The narrative reminds us of the discrimination with which God selects and trains the instruments of His merciful purposes. His elections and selections are unexplained and often great mysteries. But never are they without reason. Divine sovereignty does not disregard the fitness of things, nor willingly suffer powers to go to waste. The choice fell upon Abram because he was the right man. He had natural gifts of no common order. That he was able to break away from the powerful force of custom and surrounding opinion, even at the Divine command, evinced independence and strength. The ready respect paid him by small and great was a testimony to his commanding powers. Upon the single occasion when valour for the right moved him to go out to battle against certain marauding kings, he displayed military genius which in other times might have made him a great general. It was not, however, for his natural gifts, but for his moral qualities chiefly, that he was selected. He was a man of large faith and prompt obedience.
3. Again, we have here a reminder of the fidelity with which God sustains and cheers those who promptly obey. With a view to such cheer and support it may have been that Abrams first stopping place was in the delicious plan of Moreh, the place of Sichem, of the luxuriant verdure of which travellers speak in the most enthusiastic terms. Says Professor Robinson, We saw nothing to compare with it in all Palestine. To new converts God often grants special foretastes of their final reward, visions of light and cheer. But delightful as was this sight and rest, it was not all. To Abram, at Sichem, was granted a vision of God Himself.
4. Note, again, the outward expression here shown to be natural to a vigorous faith. Without any distinct command, so far as appears, at Sichem, his first halting place in Canaan, Abram makes haste to build an altar unto the Lord. This he does again at Bethel. Yet again we find him doing the same at Beersheba and at Hebron. These altars were intended to be channels of worship and memorials of Divine mercies. By means of them he publicly professed his own faith in a strange land, and consecrated his promised possession to the Lord. By such means he also the more effectually guarded his children and household against the ensnaring influence of idolatrous and worldly neighbours. And all this he did with cost. Not only did it consume time and labour, it required courage. Abram was a wanderer among peoples proud, fierce, and vindictive; whose worship was idolatry; and among whom his singularity and the rebuke of his example would both provoke derision and excite hostility. Yet never does he withhold or conceal the expression of his reverent faith.
5. Last of all, we have here a hint of the kind of greatness most gratefully and lastingly remembered. It is four thousand years since Abram lived, and yet his memory not only survives, it is green. By multitudes it is cherished with homage and affection. In a recent public address, the missionary Dr. Jessup told this story of his sainted father. In the latter years of his life he was afflicted with a peculiar kind of paralysis. His memory was cleft in twain. That of secular things was gone. His legal knowledge, his great law library, his court house, his old associates on the bench of Pennsylvania, and even the names of his own children, were forgotten. But the Bible, the family altar, the church, the missionary work, and his Saviour Jesus Christ, were all fresh in his memory as ever. The worldly had faded; the spiritual was green. So it may be with all the good in the world to come. So it measurably is now. They see worth and beauty only in that which allies to God. In good mens hearts only the good will have everlasting remembrance. It was his simple trust and prompt, steadfast obedience, the entire self-abnegation with which he surrendered everything to the Divine call, which made him for all after-ages, and in the memories of the good, the hero that he was. By like childlike confidence and cheerful self-surrender we may win like approval with God, if not equal greatness in human sight. (H. M. Grout, D. D.)
A call to emigrate
Abrams emigration teaches by example precisely the same profound and universal lesson of spiritual life which Jesus taught in words: Whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not all that he hath, he cannot be My disciple. St. Francis of Assisi, and many like him, have read this evangelical call to renounce the world too literally. Nevertheless, if we would choose and pursue the heavenly country to which God is calling us, there must be in the heart of each of us a virtual leaving of father and mother, a forsaking of all that we have, in order to be Christs followers. Of this we have the first great type in the emigration of Abram. Besides, God cut him off from kindred that He might draw him closer to Himself. If renunciation for Gods sake be the condition of strong piety, solitary converse with God is its nurse. Emigration often does a great deal for a man. By throwing him back for aid upon his own resources, it teaches him to help himself, and develops the manhood that is in him. The emigration of a godly man at Gods call does still more for him. It forces him to lean much on God, Who becomes his only constant comrade and unfailing helper. It throws him back at each emergency upon the spiritual resources of faith, and trains into full maturity the graces of his religious nature. Inwardly, Abram could hardly have become the spiritual hero he was in later life, if he had not been forced to walk through the long trials of his exile with nothing but the unseen eternal God for his shield, and compelled to brood through homeless years over the mighty thoughts which God had uttered to his faith. (J. O. Dykes, D. D.)
The call to religion
The call to religion is not a call to be better than your fellows, but to be better than yourself. Religion is relative to the individual. (H. W. Beecher.)
The Divine summons
I. THIS CALL INVOLVED HARDSHIP. Each step of real advance in the Divine life will involve an altar on which some dear fragment of the self life has been offered; or a cairn beneath which some cherished idol has been buried.
II. BUT THIS CALL WAS EMINENTLY WISE.
1. Wise for Abraham himself. Nothing strengthens us so much as isolation. So long as we are quietly at rest amid favourable and undisturbed surroundings, faith sleeps as an undeveloped sinew within us; a thread, a germ, an idea. But when we are pushed out from all these surroundings, with nothing but God to look to, then faith grows suddenly into a cable, a monarch oak, a master principle of life.
2. Wise for the worlds sake. It is impossible to move our times, so long as we live beneath their spell; but when once we have risen up, and gone, at the call of God, outside their pale, we are able to react on them with an irresistible power. Archimedes vaunted that he could lift the world, if only he could obtain, outside of it, a pivot on which to rest his lever. Do not be surprised then, if God calls you out to be a people to Himself, that by you He may react with blessed power on the great world of men.
III. THIS CALL WAS ACCOMPANIED BY PROMISE. As a shell encloses a kernel, so do the Divine commands hide promises in their heart. If this is the command: Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ; this is the promise: And thou shalt be saved. If this is the command: Sell that thou hast and give to the poor; this is the promise: Thou shalt have treasure in heaven. If this is the command: Leave father and mother, houses and lands; this is the promise: Thou shalt have a hundred fold here, and everlasting life beyond.
IV. THIS CALL TEACHES US THE MEANING OF ELECTION. It was not so much with a view to their personal salvation, though that was included; but that they might pass on the holy teachings and oracles with which they were entrusted.
V. THIS CALL GIVES THE KEY TO ABRAHAMS LIFE.
1. He was from first to last a separated man.
2. But it was the separation of faith. Abrahams separation is not like that of those who wish to be saved; but rather that of those who are saved. Not towards the cross, but from it. Not to merit anything, but, because the heart has seen the vision of God, and cannot now content itself with the things that once fascinated and entranced it; so that leaving them behind, it reaches out its hands in eager longing for eternal realities, and thus is led gradually and insensibly out and away from the seen to the unseen, and from the temporal to the eternal. (F. B. Meyer, B. A.)
A call to emigrate
1. In the selection of men to be the organs or channels of His grace, Gods freedom of choice never excludes some natural fitness in the person chosen. When Abram, escorted by sorrowing relatives to the brink of the great flood, did finally set his whole encampment across the Euphrates and turn his face to the dreaded desert, which stretched, wide and inhospitable, between him and the nearest seats of men, he gave his first evidence of that trust in the unseen Eternal One, leading to unquestioning, heroic obedience, which must even then have formed the basis of his character, and of which his later life was to furnish so many illustrious examples.
2. The emigration of Abram, however, had other ends to serve besides testing his personal fitness to become the father of trustful and loyal souls.
(1) For one thing, it was advisable to make a clean break in the continuity of his family history. Only in this way could he become really a fresh point of departure for the human race. Had he remained in Padan-Aram. Abram would have been simply one among his brethren, a sheikh of influence among neighbour sheikhs, a continuator of the Terah name, not the originator of a new epoch.
(2) It was of still greater consequence to break him off from contact with the unwholesome influences which were already at work within his own family. To withdraw into a strange land, meant the abandonment of himself to the guidance of God alone. True piety, in its more masculine and self-conscious stages, always involves some such renunciation of natural supports. It does not always require a literal separation from home or friends, but it does require the withdrawal of the hearts deepest dependence from earthly props or ministers, in order to rest in a self-contained and unaided trust Upon the Unseen Arm. (J. O. Dykes, D. D.)
Abram the pilgrim
I. THE DIFFICULTIES OF THE LIFE OF FAITH.
1. Natural ties.
2. A desire to be satisfied with the present and visible.
3. Imperfect knowledge of the future.
II. THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE LIFE OF FAITH.
1. A firm belief in the testimony of God.
2. A proper estimate of the visible.
3. A worshipping life.
4. To be undismayed at improbabilities.
III. THE BLESSINGS OF SUCH A LIFE.
1. More than compensation for every natural loss.
2. Inward happiness in being the means of doing good to others.
3. It leads to a life of spiritual and eternal sight. (Homilist.)
The call of Abraham
1. Gods patience with sinful men is one of His most wonderful attributes. God makes a third trial in the call of Abram. So it often is with individual men. He makes and renews His gracious offers.
2. When the hour comes for some great work of God, He always has the man ready at His call.
3. When God commands, man has nothing to do but to obey. Obedience is the highest test of piety (Joh 14:21; Joh 14:23).
4. Genuine obedience is founded in faith.
5. The highest attainment of a Christian is a consecrated will. Learn this under the olive trees in the Garden of Gethsemane.
6. Every Christian is called of God to go out from the world and be separate. This sometimes involves painful and reluctant sacrifices. Old habits, old appetites, old friends, old associations, old modes of thought and action, may have to be abandoned, and the struggle may be severe. But, He that loveth father and mother more than Me is not worthy of Me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after Me, is not worthy of Me Mat 10:37-38).
7. Goodness is the only true greatness. No king, or noble, or hero of the earth bears such an honourable name as his who is known in the Book of books as The friend of God! (E. P. Rogers, D. D.)
The Divine call
I. A SUMMONS WAS GIVEN TO ABRAHAM FROM THE LORD.
1. It was explicit.
2. Unmistakable.
3. Repeated.
4. Contrary to the carnal inclinations.
II. THE CALL WAS SUSTAINED BY A PROMISE–the promise of guidance. The first call was to an indefinite land, the second to the land. This explains why there was a temporary residence in Haran. God did not tell him He would give him the land, but only that He would guide him to it. God does not reveal all the riches of His grace at once; that might overpower the soul. (F. Hastings.)
Abrahams call
I. ABRAHAM THE FATHER OF THE FAITHFUL.
1. A preeminent pattern or type of faith.
2. The first in whom the doctrine of justification by faith was clearly and openly displayed.
3. The federal head of all believers, Jewish or Gentile, receiving promises and commands which related less to himself than to his spiritual seed in every age.
II. ABRAHAM SETTING OUT ON HIS APPOINTED PILGRIMAGE.
1. His early life.
2. His call.
3. His destination.
4. His obedience.
III. OUR SETTING OUT FOR THE BETTER COUNTRY.
1. God speaks to us–by His Word; by His Spirit.
2. His call opens with a warning and reproof, and closes with a blessing.
3. The promise is indefinite.
4. Our walk is to be one of faith; purely so.
Conclusion:
1. Let us address the pilgrims.
2. Let us address those who stay among the idolaters. (T. G.Horton.)
The call of Abraham
I. GODS CALL.
1. The call was from the Lord. He put into Abrams mind good desires, and helped him to bring them to good effect.
2. The call was a distinct command. Abram was told to do something which was not easy; to give up much that was dear to him.
3. The call was accompanied by many gracious promises.
(1) God promised to guide him.
(2) God promised him posterity.
(3) God promised him renown.
(4) Chiefly, God promised to make him a blessing.
Thus the call to renounce is accompanied by an assurance that the believer shall receive at Gods hands great things.
II. ABRAHAMS FAITH.
1. Abraham did what God told him.
2. Abraham went where God led him.
3. Abraham remembered God at every stage of his journey. (W. S. Smith, B. D.)
A new dispensation
1. The election and selection of what became the people of God. Step by step we see in the history of the patriarchs this electing and separating process on the part of God. Both are marked by this two-fold characteristic: that all is accomplished, not in the ordinary and natural manner, but, as it were, supernaturally; and that all is of grace.
2. We mark a difference in the mode of Divine revelation in the patriarchal as compared with the previous period. Formerly, God had spoken to man, either on earth or from heaven, while now he actually appeared to them, and that specially, as the Angel of Jehovah, or the Angel of the Covenant.
3. The one grand characteristic of the patriarchs was their faith. The lives of the patriarchs prefigure the whole history of Israel and their Divine selection. (Dr. Edersheim.)
Separated from the world
It is a remarkable fact, that while the baser metals are diffused through the body of the rocks, gold and silver usually lie in veins; collected together in distinct metallic masses. They are in the rocks but not of them . . . And as by some power in nature God has separated them from the base and common earths, even so by the power of His grace will He separate His chosen from a reprobate and rejected world. (T. Guthrie, D. D.)
Deaf to Gods call
Some of us are as dead to the perception of Gods gracious call, just because it has been sounding on uninterruptedly, as are the dwellers by a waterfall to its unremitting voice. (A. Maclaren, D. D.)
Individual selection
The principle of individual selection in the matter of all great ministries is in keeping with the principle which embodies in a single germ the greatest forests. It is enough that God give the one acorn; man must plant it and develop its productiveness. It is enough that God give the one idea; man must receive it into the good soil of his love and hope, and encourage it to tell all the mystery of its purpose. So God calls to Himself, in holy solitude, one man, and puts into the heart of that man His own gracious purpose, and commissions him to expound this purpose to his fellow men. God never works from the many to the one; He works from one to the many. (J. Parker, D. D.)
Abraham–his call, justification, faith, and infirmity
I. HE IS CALLED BY THE LORD; by the immediate interposition of Jehovah. The God of glory, as Stephen testifies, appears to him;–there is a visible manifestation of the Divine glory; and the Divine voice is heard. The call is very peremptory–authoritative and commanding; and it is also very painful–hard for flesh and blood to obey. But along with the call, there is a very precious promise, a promise of blessings manifold and marvellous.
II. ABRAHAM COMMENCES HIS PILGRIMAGE AMID MANY TRIALS.
1. Sarai is barren.
2. He knows not whither he is going.
3. He breaks many ties of nature, the closest and the dearest.
4. His father is removed by death.
5. On reaching Canaan nothing is as yet given; he is a stranger and a pilgrim, wandering from place to place, from Sichem to Moreh, from Moreh to Bethel, pitching his tent at successive stations, as God, for reasons unknown, appoints his temporary abode (Gen 12:6-9).
6. And wherever he goes he finds the Canaanites; not congenial society and fellowship, but troops of idolaters; for the Canaanites were then in the land.
7. As if all this were not enough to try him, even daily bread begins to fail him. There is a famine in the land (Gen 12:10); and what now is Abram to do? He has hitherto been steadfast; he has builded an altar wherever he has dwelt, and has called on the name of the Lord (Gen 12:7-8). He has at all hazards avowed his faith, and sought to glorify his God; but it seems as if, from very necessity, he must at last abandon the fruitless undertaking. He is literally starved out of the land. Why, then, should he not go back to his ancient dwelling place, and try what good he can do, remaining quietly at home? What wonder can it be, if, in such circumstances, his high principle should seem for once to give way, through Satans subtlety, and his own evil heart of unbelief?
III. In Egypt, accordingly, for a brief space, the picture is reversed, and THE FAIR SCENE IS OVERCLOUDED. This man of God, being a man still, appears in a new light, or rather in the old light, the light of his old nature. He is tempted, and he falls; consulting his own wisdom, instead of simply relying on his God. He falls through unbelief; and his fall is recorded for our learning, that we may take heed lest we fall. In this incident, the temptation, the sin, the danger, and the deliverance, are all such as, in Abrams circumstances, might have befallen us. (H. S. Candlish, D. D.)
The call of Abraham
I. IT WAS MANIFESTLY DIVINE. This call could not have been an illusion, for–
1. To obey it, he gave up all that was dear and precious to him in the world. He could not have made such a sacrifice without a sufficient reason.
2. The course of conduct he followed could not have been of human suggestion. Abraham was not driven from his country by adverse circumstances, or attracted by the premise of plenty elsewhere. But he left a condition which would then be considered as prosperous, and cheerfully accepted whatever trials might await him.
3. The history of the Church confirms the fact that the call was Divine. The Christian Church was but a continuation of the Jewish, with added light, and fresh blessings. That Church must have had an origin in the dim past, sufficient to account for the fact of its existence.
II. IT DEMANDED GREAT SACRIFICES. Upon the Divine call, Abraham was not immediately rewarded with temporal blessings. Appearances were altogether against his deriving any advantages from obedience.
III. IT WAS AN EXAMPLE OF FAITH. The promise was made in general terms, and the good things to come, as far as Abraham was personally concerned, placed at an inaccessible distance.
1. Faith is required to brave the terrors of the unknown.
2. Faith trusts in God.
3. In religious faith there is an element of reason. Faith is not contrary to, only beyond, reason. To follow the promptings of faith is the noblest act of human reason.
IV. IT WAS ACCOMPANIED BY PROMISE. The promises made to Abraham may be considered in a two-fold light.
1. As they concerned himself, personally, He would have compensation for all the worldly loss he would have to endure.
(1) For the loss of country, God promised that He would make him a great nation.
(2) For the loss of his place of birth, God promised to bless him with a higher prosperity.
(3) For the loss of family distinction God promised to make his name great. Abraham had to leave his fathers house, but he was destined in the Providence of God to build up a more famous and lasting house. These promises may be considered–
2. In his relation to humanity. God said, Thou shalt be a blessing. This promise implied something grander and nobler than any personal benefits which Abraham could inherit. It was the higher blessing-the larger benefit. Religion means something more than the selfish enjoyment of spiritual good, and he who only considers the interests of his own soul has failed to catch the true spirit of it. Man approaches the nature of God when he becomes a source of blessing to others. It is more blessed to give than to receive. Abraham was to be a blessing to mankind in the highest sense. As a further expansion of this blessing promised to Abraham–(1) His cause was henceforth to be identified with the cause of God. I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee (Gen 12:3). God promised further, so to take sides with Abraham in the world, as to make common cause with him–share his friendships, and treat his enemies as His own. This is the highest possible pledge. This threatening against hostile people was signally fulfilled in the case of the Egyptians, Edomites, Amalekites, Moabites, Ammonites, and the greater nations–Assyrian, Chaldean, Persian, Greek, and Roman, which have fallen under the curse of God as here denounced against the enemies of the Church and kingdom of Christ. The Church is Gods. Her enemies are His. Her friends are His also, and no weapon that is formed against her shall prosper, for He who has all power given unto Him shall be with her faithful servants, even to the end of the world.
3. He was to be the source of the highest blessing to mankind. In thee shall all families of the earth be blessed. (T. H. Leale.)
The call of Abram
I. ABRAMS GENEALOGICAL CONNECTION.
1. He was of Shemitic stock.
2. The Shemitic stock was the theocratic line.
II. ABRAMS CALL.
1. This call was peremptory.
2. This call was gracious.
III. ABRAMS OBEDIENCE.
1. Prompt.
(1) Hesitation destroys the virtue of obedience.
(2) Promptness is the glory of true obedience.
2. Thorough.
3. Courageous.
IV. ABRAMS RELIGIOUS PRIVILEGES AND CHARACTERISTICS.
1. He was honoured with personal visitations from Jehovah.
2. His faith in the Divine promise was reassured.
3. His piety was real, habitual, and practical.
Lessons:
1. The characteristic of God as exemplified in the call of Abraham. Graciousness.
2. The essential condition of realizing the fulness of Divine blessing. Obedience.
3. The universal characteristic of true believers. Worship. (D. C. Hughes, M. A.)
The call of Abram
1. The grace of it. There appears no reason to conclude that he was better than his neighbours. He did not choose the Lord, but the Lord him, and brought him out from amongst the idolaters.
2. Its peremptory tone:–get thee out. The language very much resembles that of Lot to his sons-in-law, and indicates the great danger of his present situation, and the immediate necessity of escaping, as it were, for his life. Such is the condition of every unconverted sinner, and such the necessity of fleeing from the wrath to come, to the hope set before us in the Gospel.
3. The self-denial required by it.
4. The implicit faith which a compliance with it would call for. Abram was to leave all, and to go–he knew not whither–unto a land that God would show him. If he had been told it was a land flowing with milk and honey, and that he should be put in possession of it, there had been some food for sense to feed upon: but to go out, not knowing whither he went, must have been not a little trying to flesh and blood. Nor was this all; that which was promised was not only in general terms, but very distant. God did not tell him He would give him the land, but merely show him it. Nor did he in his lifetime obtain the possession of it: he was only a sojourner in it, without so much as a place to set his foot upon. (A. Fuller.)
Call and promise
In all Gods teachings the near and the sensible come before the far and the conceivable, the present and the earthly before the eternal and the heavenly. Thus Abrams immediate acts of self-denial are leaving his country, his birthplace, his home. The promise to him is to be made a great nation, be blessed, and have a great name in the new land which the Lord would show him. This is unspeakably enhanced by his being made a blessing to all nations. God pursues this mode of teaching for several important reasons.
1. The sensible and the present are intelligible to those who are taught. The great Teacher begins with the known and leads the mind forward to the unknown. If He had begun with things too high, too deep, or too fax for the range of Abrams mental vision, He would not have come into relation with Abrams mind. It is superfluous to say that He might have enlarged Abrams view in proportion to the grandeur of the conceptions to be revealed. On the same principle He might have made Abram cognisant of all present and all developed truth. On the same principle He might have developed all things in an instant of time, and so have had done with creation and providence at once.
2. The present and the sensible are the types of the future and the conceivable. The land is the type of the better land; the nation of the spiritual nation; the temporal blessing of the eternal blessing; the earthly greatness of name of the heavenly. And let us not suppose that we are arrived at the end of all knowledge. We pique ourselves on our advance in spiritual knowledge beyond the age of Abram. But even we may be in the very infancy of mental development. There may be a land, a nation, a blessing, a great name, of which our present realizations or conceptions are but the types. Any other supposition would be a large abatement from the sweetness of hopes overflowing cup.
3. These things which God now promises are the immediate form of His bounty, the very gifts He begins at the moment to bestow. God has His gift to Abram ready in His hand in a tangible form. He points to it and says, This is what thou presently needest; this I give thee with My blessing and favour.
4. But these are the earnest and the germ of all temporal and eternal blessing. Man is a growing thing, whether as an individual or a race. God graduates His benefits according to the condition and capacity of the recipients. In the first boon of His goodwill is the earnest of what He will continue to bestow on those who continue to walk in His ways. And as the present is the womb of the future, so is the external the symbol of the internal, the material the shadow of the spiritual in the order of the Divine blessing. (Prof. J. G. Murphy.)
The advantage of change
As Gotthold was examining with delight some double pinks, which at the time were in full blossom, he was told by the gardener that the same plants had in former years borne only single flowers, but that they had been improved and beautified by repeated transplantations, and that in the same manner a change of soil increases the growth, and accelerates the bearing of a young tree. This reminded Gotthold that the same happens to men. Many a man who at home would scarcely have borne even single flowers, when transplanted by Divine Providence abroad, bears double ones; another, who, if rooted in his native soil, would never have been more than a puny twig, is removed to a foreign clime, and there spreads far and wide and bears fruit to the delight of all.
Leaving all to follow God
I have been in Africa for seventeen years, and I never met a man yet who would kill me if I folded my hands. What has been wanted, and what I have been endeavouring to ask for the poor Africans, has been the good offices of Christians–ever since Livingstone taught me, during those four months that I was with him. In 1871, I went to him as prejudiced as the biggest atheist in London. To a reporter and correspondent, such as I, who had only to deal with wars, mass meetings, and political gatherings, sentimental matters were entirely out of my province. But there came for me a long time for reflection. I was out there away from a worldly world. I saw this solitary old man there, and asked myself, How on earth does he stop here–is he cracked, or what? What is it that inspires him? For months after we met I simply found myself listening to him, wondering at the old man carrying out all that was said in the Bible–Leave all things and follow Me. But little by little his sympathy for others became contagious; my sympathy was aroused; seeing his piety, his gentleness, his zeal, his earnestness, and how he went quietly about his business, I was converted by him, although he had not tried to do it. How sad that the good old man should have died so soon! How joyful he would have been if he could have seen what has since happened there! (H. M. Stanley.)
A great promise
Great lives are trained by great promises. God never calls men for the purpose of making them less than they are, except when they have been dishonouring themselves by sin. His calls are upward; towards fuller life, purer light, sweeter joy.
1. Look at this promise as throwing light upon the compensations of life. Abram is called to leave his Country, his kindred, and his fathers house, and, so far, there is nothing but loss. Had the call ended here, the lot of
Abram might have been considered hard; but when did God take anything from a man, without giving him manifold more in return? Suppose that the return has not been made immediately manifest, what then? Is today the limit of Gods working time? Has He no provinces beyond this little world? Does the door of the grave open upon nothing but infinite darkness and eternal silence? Yet, even confining the judgment within the hour of this life, it is true that God never touches the heart with a trial without intending to bring in upon it some grander gift, some tenderer benediction.
2. Look at this promise as showing the oneness of God with His people: I will bless them that bless thee, and curse them that curseth thee. The good man is not alone. Touch him, and you touch God. Help him, and your help is taken as if it were rendered to God Himself. This may give us an idea of the sublime life to which we are called–we live, and move, and have our being in God; we are temples; our life is an expression of Divine influence; in our voice there is an undertone of Divinity.
3. Look at this promise as showing the influence of the present over the future: In thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed. This is a principle, rather than an exception of true life. Every man should look upon himself as an instrument of possible blessing to the whole world. One family should be a blessing to all families within its influence. We should not be looking for the least, but for the greatest interpretations of life–not to make our life as little and ineffective as possible, but to give it fulness, breadth, strength: to which the weary and sorrowful may look with confidence and thankfulness. Christianity never reduces life to a minimum: it develops it, strengthens it in the direction of Jesus Christs infinite perfectness and beauty. (J. Parker, D. D.)
Gods promises
Gods promises are the comfort of my life. Without them I could not stand for an hour in the whirl and eddy of things, in the sweep and surge of the nations; but I cannot tell how He will fulfil them, any more than I can tell from just what quarter the first flock of blue birds will come in the spring. Yet I am sure that the spring will come upon the wings of ten thousand birds. (H. W. Beecher.)
Gods promises mysteriously dated
Gods promises are dated, but with a mysterious character; and, for want of skill in Gods chronology, we are prone to think God forgets us, when, indeed, we forget ourselves in being so bold to set God a time of our own, and in being angry that He comes not just then to us. (W. Gurnall.)
Gods promises present though not always seen
When the traveller starts by the railway, on a bright summer day, writes Champneys, his attention is drawn to the friends who stand to bid him good-bye; and as the train moves on more and more rapidly, the mile and half and quarter mile posts seem racing past him, and the objects in the far distance appear rapidly to change their places, and to move off the scene almost as soon as they have been observed upon it. Now the long train, like some vast serpent, hissing as it moves swiftly along, plunges underground. The bright sun is suddenly lost, but the travellers eye observes, for the first time perhaps, the railway carriage lamp; and though it was there all the while, yet because the sun made its light needless, it was not observed. Gods promises are like that railway light. The Christian traveller has them with him always, though when the sun is shining, and prosperity beaming upon him, he does not remark them. But let trouble come, let his course lie through the darkness of sorrow or trial, and the blessed promise shines out, like the railway lamp, to cheer him, and shed its gentle and welcome light most brightly when the gloom is thickest, and the sunshine most entirely left behind.
On promptitude in obeying the Divine call
There is an hour in all, ay, even in heathen and sensual minds, when the cry is heard, Come away hither, seek the far country; strike out on the spiritual and everlasting deep, looking not behind thee, cutting every tie that binds thee to this world, and be led to this, less by the hope of what is before, than by the horror of what is around, and by a simple-minded reliance upon the promise of thy God. In various manners and at divers times does this cry come, and in divers manners is it treated. Some obey, like Abraham, at once, and set out in search of the land before the voice has ceased to vibrate in their ears. Others delay for a while, and say, like Felix, Go thy way for this time, and when I have a more convenient season I will give thee an answer–a season which never comes. Others begin the journey with considerable promptitude and with great alacrity, but speedily become offended, turn round, and walk no more with Jesus; like Pliable, the first fit disenchants them in their childish anticipations, and they retrace their steps. Others are slow but sure in obeying the call of God; they perhaps hang off for a time, they count the cost, they consult, with the town clerk of Ephesus, and do nothing rashly, till the alarm of their hearts and the tumult of their doors become intolerable, and perhaps, as with Faithful, the man Moses steps in and tells them, that if they do not begone, he will burn their house over their heads, and then they address themselves to their journey. And others do not even enter into momentary parley; do not even at the knock condescend to look over the window, but abruptly, fiercely, and forever, refuse. The conduct of this last class is simply insane; it is that of a dying patient who excludes the physician, or of a man whose house is burning and will not permit the engines to play around it. The conduct of those who delay indefinitely the journey is only one shade less absurd, since the Paul once gone seldom returns; and though he were returning, there might be no inclination to hear him. The conduct of those who go forward a little way, and turn back at the first difficulty, is more contemptible still; it is cowardice coupled with folly; it is mean madness. He that deliberates, acts somewhat more wisely; but he too loses time; whereas, since we live in a world where death delays not, where judgment does not linger, nor damnation slumber, the loss of an hour may be the loss of all. Promptitude, valuable in all matters, is of the last importance in the affairs of the soul. Beware of saying, Serious things tomorrow. This saying once cost a man dear. It was a governor in Greece, against whom a conspiracy was formed. The night for its perpetration had arrived. He was engaged at a feast. A letter was handed in, and he was told to read it instantly, because it contained serious things. What was his reply? He thrust the letter under his pillow, and grasped again the wine cup, and cried out–Serious things tomorrow! But that tomorrow never came. At midnight was there a cry made, Behold the bridegroom cometh! The conspirators entered, disguised in the dress of females, and they killed the governor, with the letter lying unread beneath his pillow. Now let us imitate the manly decision and unfaltering firmness of Abraham. As we would reach Abrahams bosom, let us begin immediately to pursue Abrahams journey. Ledyard said, Tomorrow. Say we, Today. (G. Gilfillan.)
Abrahams call
This was Gods first revelation of Himself to Abraham. Up to this time Abraham to all appearance had no knowledge of any God but the deities worshipped by his fathers in Chaldea. Now, he finds within himself impulses which he cannot resist and which he is conscious he ought not to resist. He believes it to be his duty to adopt a course which may look foolish, and which he can justify only by saying that his conscience bids him. He recognizes, apparently for the first time, that through his conscience there speaks to him a God who is supreme. In dependence on this God he gathered his possessions together and departed. So far, one may be tempted to say, no very unusual faith was required. Many a poor girl has followed a weakly brother or a dissipated father to Australia or the wild west of America; many a lad has gone to the deadly west coast of Africa with no such prospect as Abraham. For Abraham had the double prospect which makes migration desirable. Assure the colonist that he will find land and have strong sons to till and hold and leave it to, and you give him all the motive he requires. These were the promises made to Abraham–a land and a seed. Neither was there at this period much difficulty inbelieving that both promises would be fulfilled. The land he no doubt expected to find in some unoccupied territory. And as regards the children, he had not yet faced the condition that only through Sarah was this part of the promise to be fulfilled. But the peculiarity in Abrahams abandonment of present certainties for the sake of a future and unseen good is, that it was prompted not by family affection or greed or an adventurous disposition, but by faith in a God whom no one but himself recognized. It was the first step in a life-long adherence to an Invisible, Spiritual Supreme. Under the simple statement The Lord said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, there are probably hidden years of questioning and meditation. Gods revelation of Himself to Abram in all probability did not take the determinate form of articulate command without having passed through many preliminary stages of surmise and doubt and mental conflict. But once assured that God is calling him, Abraham responds quickly and resolutely. The revelation has come to a mind in which it will not be lost. As one of the few theologians who have paid attention to the method of revelation has said: A Divine revelation does not dispense with a certain character and certain qualities of mind in the person who is the instrument of it. A man who throws off the chains of authority and association must be a man of extraordinary independence and strength of mind, although he does so in obedience to a Divine revelation; because no miracle, no sign or wonder which accompanies a revelation can by its simple stroke force human nature from the innate hold of custom and the adhesion to and fear of established opinion; can enable it to confront the frowns of men, and take up truth opposed to general prejudice, except there is in the man himself, who is the recipient of the revelation, and a certain strength of mind and independence which concurs with the Divine intention. That Abrahams faith triumphed over exceptional difficulties and enabled him to do what no other motive would have been strong enough to accomplish, there is therefore no call to assert. During his afterlife his faith was severely tried, but the mere abandonment of his country in the hope of gaining a better was the ordinary motive of his day. It was the ground of this hope, the belief in God, which made Abrahams conduct original and fruitful. That sufficient inducement was presented to him is only to say that God is reasonable. There is always sufficient inducement to obey God; because life is reasonable. No man was ever commanded or required to do anything which it was not for his advantage to do. Sin is a mistake. But so weak are we, so liable to be moved by the things present to us and by the desire for immediate gratification, that it never ceases to be wonderful and admirable when a sense of duty enables a man to forego present advantage and to believe that present loss is the needful preliminary of eternal gain. (M. Dods, D. D.)
Divine direction in everyday affairs
So, even a journey may be the outcome of an inspiration! Theres a Divinity that shapes our ends, rough hew them as we may. I feel life to be most solemn when I think that inside of it all there is a Spirit that lays out ones days work, that points out when the road is on the left and when it is on the right, and that tells one what words will best express ones thought. Thus is God nigh at hand and not afar off. The steps of a good man are ordered by the Lord. And thus, too, are men misunderstood: they are called enthusiasts, and are said to be impulsive; they are not safe men; they are here today and gone tomorrow, and no proper register of their life can be made. Of course we are to distinguish between inspiration and delusion, and not to think that every noise is thunder. We are not to call a maggot a revelation. What we are to do is this: We have to live and move and have our being in God; to expect His coming and long for it; to be patient and watchful; to keep our heart according to His word; and then we shall know His voice from the voice of a stranger, for the secret of the Lord is with them that fear Him. If God be our supreme consciousness He will reveal His providence without cloud or doubtfulness. I think it can be proved that the men who have done things apparently against all reason have often been acting in the most reasonable manner, and that inspiration has often been mistaken for madness. I feel that all the while you are asking me to give you tests by which you may know what is inspiration, you have little or nothing to do with such tests–you have to be right and then you will sure to do right. Possibly Abram may have got more credit for this journey than he really deserves. It is true that he knew not whither he went, and by so much this is what is called a leap in the dark; but Abram knew two things–
1. He knew at whose bidding he was going, and–
2. He knew what results were promised to his faith. To get a man to leave his country, his kindred, and his fathers house, you must propose or apply some very strong inducement. Now, it is worth while to take notice that from the very beginning God has never given a merely arbitrary command: He has never treated a man as a potter would treat a handful of clay: the royal and mighty command has always ended in the tenderness of a gracious promise. God has never moved a man merely for the sake of moving him; merely for the sake of showing His power: this we shall see in detail as we move through the wondrous pages, but I call attention to it now as strikingly illustrated in the case of Abram. Some of you yourselves may remember the words Get thee out, who have forgotten the accumulated and glorious blessing. Let us be just unto the Lord, and remember that He treats us as His sons and not as irresponsible machines. (J. Parker, D. D.)
And thou shalt be a blessing
A blessing to be diffused
When God called Abraham, and, in Abraham, the Jewish nation, He cradled them in blessings. This is the way in which He always begins with a man. If ever, to man or nation, He speaks otherwise, it is because they have made Him do so.
I. Many of us account religion rather as a possession to be held, or a privilege to be enjoyed, than as a life which we are to spread, a kingdom we are bound to extend. Consequently our religion has grown too passive. It would be healthier and happier if we were to cast into it more action.
II. Wherever Abraham went he shed blessings round him, not only by his prayers and influence, but by the actual charm of his presence. As Abraham was a blessing to the Jews, still more were the Jews a blessing to the world.
III. Then came the climax. He who so blesses with His blood, He who did nothing but bless, He was of the seed of Abraham.
IV. As joined to the mystical body of Christ, we are Abrahams seed, and one of the promises to which we are admitted is this, Thou shalt be a blessing. The sense of a positive appointment, of a destiny to do a thing, is the most powerful motive of which the human mind is capable. Whoever desires to be a blessing must be a man of faith, prayer, and love. (J. Vaughan, M. A.)
Usefulness
I. EVERY GOD-TRUSTING MAN IS A CENTRE OF BLESSING. Because God is at the centre of his soul.
II. A DEVOUT MAN IS A BLESSING TO THOSE WHO CAN RECEIVE HIS INFLUENCE.
III. THE MEASURE OF OUR FAITH DETERMINES THE BLESSING WE SHALL TRANSMIT TO OTHERS.
IV. TO BE A BLESSING THROUGH THE POWER AND FAVOUR OF GOD, IS THE HIGHEST HONOUR IN THE WORLD. (F. Hastings.)
Blest becoming a blessing
I. THE ASSURANCE OF DIVINE BLESSING IN CONNECTION WITH THE DIVINE CALL.
II. THAT SPIRITUAL BLESSING CAN ONLY BE REALIZED AND ENJOYED IN THE EXERCISE OF FAITH AND OBEDIENCE.
III. ONE GREAT PURPOSE OF GOD IN ELECTING AND BLESSING US IS, THAT WE MAY BECOME INSTRUMENTS OF BLESSING TO OTHERS.
IV. THERE IN AN ORDER AND A MEASURE APPOINTED BY GOD IN BLESSING US AND MAKING US INSTRUMENTS OF BLESSING. (G. W. Humphreys, B. A.)
Man must be good before he can do good
Before you can do good you must be made good; for who will look for water from a drained river, or that sweet grapes should grow upon a withered vine? (W. Secker.)
The blessed of God, a blessing to others
I. With regard to THE SPEAKER, it is the Lord Jehovah Himself. He alone can bless His people. I do not say, but the Lord may make use of the smallest instrumentality to bless His children. I do not deny the ministration of angels, though one knows so little about it. I do not undervalue their untiring zeal and great unwearied love. I believe they are always as ministering spirits sent forth to minister for them, who shall be heirs of salvation. Neither do I deny the instrumentality of man; and God may, and does, bless man to man. But all these things are but the streams–or the channels; the great source is God Himself. No one can bless the souls of His people but God Himself. Our wants are too many for any but God to supply them; our sins are too many for any but God to pardon them; our corruptions are too great for any but God to subdue them. Our waywardness is such, that nothing less than infinite patience could bear with us. And even the desires of the new nature are so great, that all heaven could not satisfy them, but as God fills all heaven with Himself.
II. But observe now, secondly, TO WHOM IT IS THAT THIS PROMISE BELONGS. I am quite ready to believe, and to acknowledge, that it was spoken primarily and especially to Abraham; but thanks be to God, we have been taught by the blessed Spirit, I trust, to know that there is not a promise in Gods Word but the child of God has it for his inheritance. The Lord has such a people; and they are dear to Him as the apple of His eye. He has chosen them in Christ Jesus before the world was; they are redeemed by precious blood; He forms them for His glory; He moulds them to His image, and they shall show forth His praise. No language can describe how precious they are to Him. He sees them in His Son; beholds them in the Beloved. They are dear to Him; the holy image in which they are renewed is precious to Him. The fruit of His own workmanship shall never perish, shall never be annihilated, shall never be destroyed. Their lives are precious to Him; and their deaths are precious. Their services are precious; the very tears they shed for sin are precious; the sighs that heave their bosom for sin, are all precious to Him. To them He looks; with them He dwells; and they are His jewels, and not one of them shall be lost. But yet they are a needy people, and they want His blessing. They want infinite power to sustain them; they want infinite wisdom to guide them; they want infinite love to bear their infirmities and weaknesses; and they want the patience of a God, to endure them to the end. Leave them to themselves, and they are no blessing, and can communicate no blessing to those around them; nay, leave them to themselves, and they shall be a curse to all around them. But these are they that are here spoken of as the inheritors of the promise–blessed through Abraham, and blessed with faithful Abraham.
III. Consider, thirdly, the riches–THE WONDROUS RICHES, THAT ARE TO BE FOUND IN THIS BLESSING. I will bless thee. Ah! what is there not included in this one idea? What limit is there, what boundary? What adequate conception can we form of the words–I will bless thee? It is not a mere general promise; it is a peculiar, personal, individual promise. For while all the members form one body, yet each member stands alone, and wants its own individual blessing; and each child of God wants his own individual blessing, and he has this individual promise given to him personally, the same as if there were no other upon the face of this earth. But here is another promise concerning them: not only I will bless thee, but I will make thy name great. This would almost seem as if it must belong exclusively to Abraham. The name of Abraham, you know, was a sort of object of idolatrous worship to the Jew: We be Abrahams seed, said they, and were never in bondage to any man. Think not, preached John the Baptist, to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father; for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham. He brought down their high thoughts, their carnal confidences, their reposing in Abraham, and laid them low; and there was no greater hindrance that He had to contend with than this. The parallelism, I confess, seems to cease here; and yet it is but in look–it is not in reality. I know the world has all mean words and mean names for the child of God. A saint–oh! it is the scorn of the world; it is the very ridicule of the world. Good man–man of piety–excellent man!–that may do; but a saint!–it is a term of ridicule. A saint? what a termof glory! Set apart by God, from before all worlds, for Himself; purchased by the blood of the everlasting covenant, and sanctified by God the eternal Spirit. See what a name this is; it is indeed a great name. A Christian–everyone has that name now; yet if I look at what a real Christian is, what a name it is! Anointed of the Holy Ghost with that unction that cometh down from Aaron, the true High Priest, our true Aaron, our great Melchisedec, flowing down from His head to the very skirts of His clothing; partaker of that Divine unction that teacheth all things; what a name of glory is His! Compared with it, all earthly names sink just into nothing. Children! dear children! And, a brother of Christ! But let me rather dwell on the third clause–thou shall be a blessing. There is something deeply affecting in the thought that an ungodly man is no blessing; he can be no blessing. Oftentimes he is the very opposite of blessing. An ungodly man is an evil, be he where he may. How many a father is a curse to his whole family! How many a mother is a plague sore to her whole family! How many a child is as a curse to all around! These things are not imaginations; they are truths–awful, solemn truths. But the child of God is a blessing, wherever he is. Wherever he acts as a child of God, in proportion as he bears the image of his Master, and reflects that image, he is a blessing; however feeble his gift, however small his grace, however circumscribed his place, he is a blessing, wherever he is and whatever he does. How shall I set before you the blessing attending holy example? Who can say how great a blessing attends the bold avowal of principles, the bold declaration of truth, the bold manifestation that we are on the Lords side? (J. H. Evans, M. A.)
The smile of God
I have seen in an African desert a beautiful patch of green, a luxurious blending of graceful palm waving grass, rippling spring, pendent fruits, and tropic flowers–an island of verdure, refreshment, and comfort, in the midst of a sea of sand, of dreary brushwood, and of stunted thorn. Hither came both man and beast, hot with travel, scorched with heat, oppressed with hunger, faint with thirst, and found food and drink, shelter and repose. The negroes who dwelt in the surrounding region called the weary tract around The Torment, because it was hard, dry, difficult, inhospitable. The patch of natural garden ground in the centre they called by an African word which means a god or a spirit in a good temper, or rather, the smile of God. The smile of God! Verily a good name and a beautiful; a smile that lightens the heart and cheers the lot of every drooping traveller that passes that way. As he gazes with hand-shaded eyes through the haze of the desert heat, and catches a glimpse of the green isle upon the border line, that smile of God begets a smile on his own tired and weary face, and with quickened step and hopeful eye he presses thitherward and rejoices in its cool and grateful shade! It may well be called The Smile of God! Just what that green oasis is to the tribes of Ham, the God-trusting, God-fearing man is to his fellow men, a centre of blessing, a precious possession, nothing other, nothing less than the Smile of God. It is not enough that you carry your light in a dark lantern, and flash it out on a Sunday, or on some occasion of special feeling, and then withdraw it as suddenly, to leave blinking spectators rather more uncertain as to your moral whereabouts than before; but rather like the electric flame, which is only toned down by the medium in which it burns, your humanity should exhibit the veiled but glowing light of life and love Divine that dwells behind. I remember seeing, on a certain festive occasion, nearly a thousand men marching through the streets of a northern city when the clock in the minster steeple was tolling out the midnight hour. Neither moon nor star appeared in the sombre sky, and the lamps along the streets were but as twinkling beads of light which vainly tried to lighten the gloom of the dull November air. But wherever the procession went, wherever the tramping of their feet was heard, the light, clear, full, and brilliant, lit up the streets and houses, illumined statues, and was flashed back from every window and every gilded sign. Every face shone bright, every form stood clear, and the dull, dark night, right up into the gloom above, glowed and gleamed as with the light of morn. How was this? Every man carried a pitch pine torch; each flashed its little measure of light upon the sombre gloom, and altogether they conquered darkness and created day! As a disciple of Christ, it is given to the Christian, not so much to carry a torch as to be a torch. He himself is to be set alight, and is to move in and out through the worlds sad shadow land, a peripatetic illumination, showing the beauty of goodness–dispensing the knowledge of God. Yours, O Christian, be it to exhibit all holy virtues, all kindly charities, all manly attributes, all Christly compassions, all godly speech and deed; and remember that if you are to be a true Christian, an Israelite indeed, the friend of God, the disciple of Christ, the heritor of heaven–you are to be–must be–a blessing! It is not enough that you are not a curse, thatyou do no ill and work no harm. The poisonous upas tree and the barren fig tree shall both be east into the fire. The captured rebel, caught red-handed, and the sentinel asleep at his post, alike are doomed. To cease to do evil is only the lesser half of the Christians code of law–he must learn to do well. Note, again, that just in proportion as a Christian is a blessing, he has a blessing. Kind words, they say, have kind echoes, but that is not all the truth. The echoes are more musical than the original, because God mingles a benediction in the tone. It is hard to say whether the sea or the land is the greater gainer by the race for giving: the sea into which the silver streams are rolled, or the land on which the jewels of the clouds are scattered, like the largess of a king.
And the more thou spendest
From thy little store,
With a double bounty,
God will give thee more.
I have said that the Christian is to be a blessing; that according as he is a blessing he has a blessing; but before all this comes something else. It is said of Abram, Thou shalt be a blessing; but there are vital words before that. Hark! I will bless thee. Thats how it is. Neither Abram nor you can either be a blessing or have a blessing, in the full, clear, and joyous sense, unless it be imparted from above. If this stream of blessing is to rise in your own soul, ripple along your pathway and cool the lips of others in its flow, then all your springs must be in God. He must be all in all–He, the God from whom all blessings flow. (J. J. Wray.)
Blessed and blessing
Grass-feeding animals while cropping their pastures are scattering and disseminating the seeds of the grasses; and the birds and insects while thrusting their beak or proboscis deep down into the nectaries of the flowers, are gathering and depositing again the fertilizing pollen.
The treasure house of grace
Survey this treasure house of grace; how rich! how full! The believer may say, This heritage is all my own. Measure, if it be possible, the golden chain which extends from one hand of God in eternity past to the other in eternity to come. Every link is a blessing. Behold the starry canopy. The glittering orbs outshine all beauty, and exceed all number. Such is the firmament of Christ. It is studded with blessings. But millions of worlds are less than the least; and millions of tongues are weak to tell them. Mark how they sparkle in the eye of faith. There are constellations of pardons. In Him we have redemption through His blood, even the forgiveness of sin. There is the bright shining of adoption into the family of God. As many as received Him, to them gave He power to become the sons of God. There is the milky-way of peace, perfect peace, heavens own peace. Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you. There is the morning star of sin destroyed. God, having raised up His Son Jesus, sent Him to bless you in turning away every one of you from His iniquities. There is the lustre of Divine righteousness. This is His name, whereby He shall be called, The Lord our Righteousness. There is the light of life, I give unto them eternal life. There is all glory. The glory, which Thou gavest me, I have given them. There is the possession of all present, and the promise of all future good. All things are yours, things present–things to come. There is the assurance that nothing shall harm. All things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to His purpose. Such is the blaze of blessings, on which the believer calmly gazes. But reader, are they yours? (Dean Law.)
The blessed life illustrated in the history of Abraham
It would seem the simplest thing in the world to come at once and be blest. Why not? Welt, there is a secret mistrust of God. Is not Abraham called upon to give up home, and kindred, and country, and everything? And we tremble. Our ways are not Gods ways; and our thoughts are not Gods thoughts. What He counts a blessing we dread rather than desire. We lose the blessed life through fear. Then there is a dulness, an inertness, a spiritual apathy about us. Like a talk about pictures to a blind man, like the pouring forth of a musicians soul to one who is utterly unsympathetic–alas! so does our God make His appeal to us. Sad enough it is that the appeal of God to the world should be unheeded and rejected. The Blessed Life–the Life of Faith–grows out of the knowledge of God; it is as we come to see how really good and loving our God is; how really blessed are His purposes concerning us; how lofty is the calling wherewith He doth call us; how graciously and tenderly He fulfils His purpose; thus is it that we learn to surrender ourselves wholly to Him for His own.
I. The blessed life is A REVELATION FROM GOD. Think of life as it presented itself to Abraham without God. Here am I in this pleasant and goodly land, he might have said to himself; a land endeared to me by the memory of my fathers and as the home of my people. Here are my friends; here is my business; my flocks and herds; my fertile pastures; and my faithful servants. Now I will set to work and do the best I can, toiling diligently day by day, and seeking at once to enrich myself and others by my labour. I have a goodly wife, whom my heart loves right well; who is as true to me as I am to her; who is watchful of my interests and eager for my comfort; diligent, thrifty, managing well. Then here have I also the opportunity of doing good. My brother Terah has left an orphan son. I will adopt him, and make him my care, and will seek his welfare; I will do by him as honestly and generously as if he were my own. I will set myself boldly against wrong; and I will set myself resolutely on the side of all that is good, and true and right in the world. So let me live and labour; and when my work is done I will lay me down and rest with my fathers. Yet all this time there lay about this man a larger life–infinitely higher, and deeper, and broader: a life opening up a new world, unfolding new capacities; a life blessed and enriched and ennobled by the Presence of God. Think of the soul finding its rest in God; the loneliness of life lost in His presence; the common toil glorified as His service; hope made boundless by His promise; and fear driven away by His abiding and eternal care! So God stood and called Abraham: Come forth into a land that I will show thee. And Abraham passed out into a life where his relation should be with the worlds Redeemer; where his example should stimulate the faithful of all time; to become a man whom all nations should call blessed. Into that fuller and larger life God is ever seeking to lead us by the revelation of Himself: I will bless thee;. . .thou shalt be a blessing.
II. The blessed life is A REVELATION OF GOD. It is quite possible for us to know God without entering into the fulness of the blessed life. Our dwellings limit the amount of heaven that we see by the size of the skylights; a foot square may admit light enough for a days work, and it may sometimes admit so much as half-an-hours sunshine. That is different from darkness, and much better. But that, too, is different from stepping out under the great heaven, being arched and domed about by it, and to find the golden sunshine flooding earth with blessedness and flashing in a myriad forms of beauty. I will bless thee; that blessing can only be ours when we let God Himself come to us. They who; rant the gifts of God only, and not Himself, must ever go without the best gift: that which is more than all gifts. The blessed life begins only when He Himself is welcomed, trusted, and loved, and when His will is accepted and rested in. I will–the blessed life begins with the heart reception of that I and of that will. And I am blest exactly in proportion as that I will becomes my will. I will bless thee. I have my thought and estimate of what is good; and my desires go forth eager for a score of things which seem to make up the true blessedness of life. By these desires my purposes are shaped, and life itself is determined. Yet what do I know? See, here in the doorway of the mothers house is the little child. Like us, it too has its thought of what is good, and has the fullest confidence in its judgment and wisdom. It thinks it knows all the world, and can manage quite well without anybodys help. So away it goes out on to the crowded pavement; on across the perils of the streets; now amidst the roar of the traffic and rush of carriages it stands bewildered and lost. There is but one safety; but one blessedness. It is to put the hand in His, to accept His guidance, to surrender the will to Him, to make His way my way, quite sure that the truest blessing I can find is to let God have His own will and His own way with me in everything. As many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the children of God. The blessed life is that into which God only can lead us.
III. The blessed life is A REVELATION FOR ME. When we get as far as this do we begin to sigh? Yes, I know all this is what I ought to be; and of course it is what I want to be! But it is such hard work: struggling striving, failing. Stay a moment. Have you not begun the sentence at the wrong end? The first word is I, not thee. Put it in the right order. First, I–God comes to thee; make room. I will–not what you are, but whatGod wills is what you have to think of next. I will bless. There, throw back the shutters, and let the sunshine in. I will bless–thee. That is the right order: leave that thee until you get the other side of the blessing. When I begin with myself, what blessed life is possible? But when I begin with God, the blessed life is just the commonplace, and the highway wherein I do walk. I will bless thee. Of course He will; He can do nothing but bless. Was not this fair world once in chaos and darkness: a dreary waste? but, lo! it made room for Him and His Will; and then the stars shone in the heavens, and the dry land appeared, and the grass grew, and the fishes swam, and the beasts roamed, and the birds sang, and at last there was the finished bliss of Paradise, and all was very good. To make room for Him and for His will is alway to make room for blessing. Yet neither Paradise nor heaven have such a wondrous manifestation of Gods eagerness to bless as that with which He meets us in all the rich provisions of His grace. I will bless thee. It is not only as we count will. With us to will is oftentimes as idle as to wish. Hemmed in by a thousand hindrances, our lofty will is mocked by the cruel defiance of our circumstances. But when our God saith, I will, it cannot be broken. Almighty Power doth wait to make that will fulfilled.
IV. In all the world there is BUT ONE THING THAT CAN HINDER GOD. It is not in the material upon which He works, nor is it in the conditions in which that material is placed. The only hindrance God can ever know is in my will. When the I will of God is met with the I will of my heart, then there is no power in heaven or hell that can thwart or hinder. (Mark Guy Pearse.)
On being a blessing
A young lady was preparing for the dance hall, and, standing before a large mirror, placed a light crown ornamented with silver stars upon her head. While thus standing, a little fair-haired sister climbed in a chair and put up her tiny fingers to examine this beautiful headdress, and was accosted thus: Sister, what are you doing? You should not touch that crown! Said the little one, I was looking at that, and thinking of something else. Pray, tell me what you are thinking about–you, a little child. I was remembering that my Sabbath school teachersaid, if we save sinners by our influence, we should win stars to our crown in heaven; and when I saw those two stars in your crown, I wished I could save some soul. The elder sister went to the dance, but in solemn meditation; the words of the innocent child found a lodgment in her heart, and she could not enjoy the association of her friends. At a seasonable hour she left the hall and returned to her home; and going to her chamber, where her dear little sister was sleeping, imprinted a kiss upon her soft cheek, and said: Precious sister, you have won one star for your crown; and kneeling at the bedside, offered a fervent prayer to God for mercy.
Joy of doing good
Well do I remember when I first knew the Lord how restless I felt till I could do something for others. I did not know that I could speak to an assembly, and I was very timid as to conversing upon religious subjects, and therefore I wrote little notes to different persons setting forth the way of salvation, and I dropped these written letters with printed tracts into the post, or slipped them under the doors of houses, or dropped them into areas, praying that those who read them might be aroused as to their sins, and moved to flee from the wrath to come. My hears would have burst if it could not have found some vent. (C. H.Spurgeon.)
The life of faith
Now of this character, with so many claims to fame, it is a very notable thing that the New Testament dwells only on one feature, and passes by all those of which we have spoken. One thing, and one thing only, is kept to the front in all the life of this hero: It is his faith. The Hebrew, treasuring as no other people did, and with greater reason than any other people had, the pride of their race, can record of their father Abraham nothing but his faith in God. This lives and shines, eclipses everything else. Faithful Abraham, this is his title; Abraham believed, this is his achievement; by faith Abraham, this is the secret of his triumph. Take that fact and dwell upon it. You will find in it the secret of the blessed life: that life is great, is true life, only as it is the outcome of our faith in God. We need to hear it until we believe it, that our fitness for service is not in the strength of intellect, not in the vastness of wealth, not in the genius, not in the greatness which the world counts great; Gods estimate of us–the only true estimate–is by the measure of our faith. Our worth lies in our faith. He who will set God ever before him, and then in Gods own strength, will go out and do the will of God, he, and he only, is the man who can come to be amongst Gods heroes. Only the man who is very intimate with the Most High will be entrusted with the secrets of God, and commissioned for active service. The blessed life is the life of faith. But does that greatly help us? It sounds all true enough, and we accept it as if its familiarity were the warrant of its orthodoxy. But what is the life of faith? Faith seems such a vague, indefinite, intangible something, a happy phrase by which we conceal our ignorance. Well, whatever it is, it is a gain certainly to have it embodied in real flesh and blood, to find a living man with a wife and a great many servants, some of them troublesome; and children, not always agreeing; and cattle and sheep, for whom it was hard to find food sometimes; and neighbours, who could be very disagreeable; and relations, who were sometimes very selfish; a man, too, who could make mistakes like other people. Certainly it is helpful to have the blessed life lived out in our own very nature, and in our commonplace world. (Mark Guy Pearse.)
Abrahams conversion
The birthplace of Abraham was Ur of the Chaldees, away to the Northeast of Palestine, beyond the river Euphrates. It is plain that the family of Abraham, like almost all the rest of the world at that time, was idolatrous, Joshua speaks of it: 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 Nahor; and they served other gods. A legend comes down to us of the story of Abrahams conversion which is very beautiful, and certainly may be true that as he lay upon the mountain height amidst his flock at night, there rose a star so brilliant and beautiful in the great arch of heaven that Abraham was filled with the glory of it, and said: This is my god; this will I worship. But, lo! as the still hours of the night passed by, the star sank down and was gone. And he said: Of what avail is it that I worship my god if it die out in the darkness and I see it no more? Then above the hills there rose the moon and flooded all the earth with silvery light, and quenched the stars. And Abraham hailed it, saying: Thou art fairer and greater than the star, thou art my god, for thou art worthier. But lo, it too hastened away and sank in darkness. And Abraham cried: If my gods forsake me, then am I as others that do err! Soon rose the sun, in radiant splendour. It scattered the darkness and his doubts. And he said: Thou, thou art my god, greater than moon and star. I will worship thee. But at even the sun sank, and like the moon and star, it too was gone. Then was Abraham alone; but as he gazed into heaven there came the thought of One behind the star, the moon, the sun–the Maker of them all. And Abraham cried: O my people, I am clear of these things, I turn my face to Him who hath made the heavens and the earth; He only is my God. (Mark Guy Pearse.)
Diffusers of happiness
Some men move through life as a band of music moves down the street, flinging out pleasures on every side through the air to everyone, far and near, who can listen. Some men fill the air with their presence and sweetness, as orchards, in October days, fill the air with the perfume of ripe fruit. Some women cling to their own houses like the honeysuckle over the door, yet, like it, fill all the region with the subtle fragrance of their goodness. How great a bounty and a blessing is it so to hold the royal gifts of the soul that they shall be music to some, and fragrance to others, and life to all! It would be no unworthy thing to live for, to make the power which we have within us the breath of other mens joy: to fill the atmosphere which they must stand in with a brightness which they cannot create for themselves. (H. W. Beecher.)
Family life
St. Paul finds the key to the constitution and the order of the human home in the spiritual sphere. Christian philosophy is inevitably transcendental–that is, it believes that earthly things are made after heavenly patterns, and that the things seen and temporal can only be fully understood by letting the light fall on them from the things which are not seen and eternal. It was the redemption of the home when Christs redeeming love to the world was made the pattern of its love. That home is the highest in which love reigns most perfectly.
I. THE HOME IS THE INSTRUMENT OF A DOUBLE EDUCATION, Its function is to develop the Divine image in parent and in child.
II. AS THE FIRST STEP TO THE FULFILMENT OF HIS PURPOSE IN RESTORING MAN TO HIS OWN IMAGE, GOD SET THE SOLITARY IN FAMILIES. He laid the foundation of the home as the fundamental human institution, the foundation of all true order, the spring of all true development in human society. Out of the home State and Church were to grow; by the home they were both to be established. And so God took the dual head of the first human home, the father and mother, and made them as gods to their children, and He sent them there to study the pain and the burden of the godhead as well as the power and the joy. This was the only way by which man could gain the knowledge of the mind and heart of God. (J. Baldwin Brown, B. A.)
The influence of Christianity on the purity and happiness of families
If it shall be seen that Christianity has done that for the world which no other system of philosophy or religion has ever effected–if its influence has been so mighty as, wherever it has comes to have civilized the savage–to have raised men in the scale of being, till they have become the first amongst nations; if in every instance, when it has had its proper influences it has exalted the individual above his race, transforming the most vicious into a model of virtue–then we have a new class of arguments in its favour, scarcely less conclusive than those more direct evidences which we first mentioned. An unprejudiced observer cannot deny that all this is true. It is a matter of too much notoriety to be controverted. The Christian nations have, at this moment, such a superiority over all others. I have to place before you, tonight, a single instance of the operation of this mighty agency, in its influence on the purity and happiness of families. I propose to show you in what manner Christianity prevents, or rectifies, the evils of domestic life, and contributes to the happiness of families. It does this in two ways.
I. By the influence of its laws on the community.
II. By the operation of its principles on the minds of individuals.
I. Let us view THE INFLUENCE OF CHRISTIAN LAWS ON A COMMUNITY.
1. The laws of all those nations which are called Christian are, to a considerable degree, founded on the Christian code.
2. The laws which regulate the marriage contract have an important influence on human happiness. There are three points which we shall notice as applicable to our subject.
(1) Marriage, according to the Christian religion, is a union between a single pair: the husband being permitted to have but one wife, and the wife but one husband.
(2) The Christian law makes marriage between two parties binding for life.
(3) But Christianity provides relief for the greatest injury which a husband or a wife can suffer by making adultery a dissolution of the marriage tie.
3. On the happiness of woman, Christianity has a most special influence. In temporal things she is more indebted to it than man. Her exact place in the social scale is defined in the Scriptures. Christianity, by investing her with equal religious privileges, has forbidden her husband to treat her as a being of an inferior order. There is neither male or female, but all are one in Christ Jesus.
II. I have to show you how it contributes to the happiness of families BY THE OPERATION OF ITS PRINCIPLES ON THE MINDS OF INDIVIDUALS.
1. The first moral principle of Christianity is love. He only is a real Christian in whom this is predominant. His religion teaches him that his love must be all-pervading and quenchless. His God is represented as love. His Saviour is love incarnate, the embodiment and manifestation of Divine love to our world. On this perfect model the Christians character must be formed. The whole system of Christian ethics is only a development of the same principles. The gospel, throughout, inculcates the most perfect courtesy and politeness: not that false and hollow code which consists of polished manners and a specious hypocrisy; but that real courtesy which seeks the happiness of others. That which the man of high life professes to be, the Christian really is. He is humble, and the servant of all. He esteems others more highly than himself. Self-denial is a duty which he has practised, as long as he has been a Christian.
2. The principles and precepts of Christianity are not merely general things which apply to the mass of mankind; but they are adapted to particular cases, and especially to domestic duties.
3. Now, such being the operation of Christianity on the character, the residence of one Christian person in a family must have an important influence on the happiness of the whole. The Christian religion qualifies alike for every station. To have learned the lesson of the gospel gives dignity and lustre to the humblest duties.
4. If such be the happy influence shed on a family by one Christian member, how much greater will it be when the head of the family is a Christian. The character and example of the master must have a great influence on the household. Besides, his will is the law by which all things are regulated and controlled. The character of the whole, will, to a considerable degree, reflect the colour of his.
5. How happy must that family be, all the members of which act on the principles of Christianity. In concluding this discourse, I would offer the following practical remarks for your consideration.
I. Recollect that what you have heard this evening is only a small and very subordinate part of the evidence in favour of the truth of Christianity. That evidence is large and conclusive, as I noticed at the commencement of this lecture. He who is in doubt should examine the whole with serious attention and candour, for his own sake: for it cannot be concealed that his everlasting happiness depends on the question.
II. Do not fall into the common mistake of misjudging Christianity by the conduct of Christians. Religion is not chargeable with the fault of its disciples. Whatever the actions of Christians may he, the rule which is given for the direction of their life is perfect. The question at issue is, not what men are, but what Christianity.
III. AS A MATTER OF DOMESTIC POLICY, YOU SHOULD ADOPT CHRISTIAN PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICES. Nothing is so conducive to the happiness of families: it is therefore a point of wisdom to introduce Christian regulations.
IV. If the beneficent influence of Christianity on domestic life tends to prove its Divine origin, THIS ARGUMENT SHOULD PERSUADE YOU TO RECEIVE IT AS A REVELATION FROM HEAVEN. If it be a revelation from heaven it is worthy of all acceptation. Not confined in its influence to the narrow circle of domestic life, nor to the present world, its sublime scheme extends beyond the visible universe, and grasps eternity. It interposes between man and God, and saves the sinner from hell. (S. Spink.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
CHAPTER XII
God calls Abram to leave Haran and go into Canaan, 1;
promises to bless him, and through him all the families of
the earth, 2, 3.
Abram, Sarai, Lot, and all their household, depart from Canaan, 4, 5;
pass through Sichem, 6.
God appears to him, and renews the promise, 7.
His journey described, 8, 9.
On account of a famine in the land he is obliged to go into Egypt, 10.
Fearing lest, on account of the beauty of his wife, the Egyptians
should kill him, he desires her not to acknowledge that she is his
wife, but only his sister, 11-13.
Sarai, because of her beauty, is taken into the palace of Pharaoh,
king of Egypt, who is very liberal to Abram on her account, 14-16.
God afflicts Pharaoh and his household with grievous plagues on
account of Sarai, 17.
Pharaoh, on finding that Sarai was Abram’s wife, restores her
honourably, and dismisses the patriarch with his family and their
property, 18-20.
NOTES ON CHAP. XII
Verse 1. Get thee out of thy country] There is great dissension between commentators concerning the call of Abram; some supposing he had two distinct calls, others that he had but one. At the conclusion of the preceding chapter, Ge 11:31, we find Terah and all his family leaving Ur of the Chaldees, in order to go to Canaan. This was, no doubt, in consequence of some Divine admonition. While resting at Haran, on their road to Canaan, Terah died, Ge 11:32; and then God repeats his call to Abram, and orders him to proceed to Canaan, Ge 12:1.
Dr. Hales, in his Chronology, contends for two calls: “The first,” says he, “is omitted in the Old Testament, but is particularly recorded in the New, Ac 7:2-4: The God of glory appeared to our father Abraham while he was (at Ur of the Chaldees) in Mesopotamia, BEFORE HE DWELT IN CHARRAN; and said unto him, Depart from thy land, and from thy kindred, and come into the land (, a land) which I will show thee. Hence it is evident that God had called Abram before he came to Haran or Charran.” The SECOND CALL is recorded only in this chapter: “The Lord said (not HAD said) unto Abram, Depart from thy land, and from thy kindred, and from thy father’s house, unto THE LAND, HA-arets, (Septuagint, ), which I will show thee.” “The difference of the two calls,” says Dr. Hales, “more carefully translated from the originals, is obvious: in the former the land is indefinite, which was designed only for a temporary residence; in the latter it is definite, intimating his abode. A third condition is also annexed to the latter, that Abram shall now separate himself from his father’s house, or leave his brother Nahor’s family behind at Charran. This call Abram obeyed, still not knowing whither he was going, but trusting implicitly to the Divine guidance.”
Thy kindred] Nahor and the different branches of the family of Terah, Abram and Lot excepted. That Nahor went with Terah and Abram as far as Padan-Aram, in Mesopotamia, and settled there, so that it was afterwards called Nahor’s city, is sufficiently evident from the ensuing history, see Ge 25:20; Ge 24:10; Ge 24:15; and that the same land was Haran, see Ge 28:2; Ge 28:10, and there were Abram’s kindred and country here spoken of, Ge 24:4.
Thy father’s house] Terah being now dead, it is very probable that the family were determined to go no farther, but to settle at Charran; and as Abram might have felt inclined to stop with them in this place, hence the ground and necessity of the second call recorded here, and which is introduced in a very remarkable manner; lech lecha, GO FOR THYSELF. If none of the family will accompany thee, yet go for thyself unto THAT LAND which I will show thee. God does not tell him what land it is, that he may still cause him to walk by faith and not by sight. This seems to be particularly alluded to by Isaiah, Isa 41:2: Who raised up the righteous man (Abram) from the east, and called him to his foot; that is, to follow implicitly the Divine direction. The apostle assures us that in all this Abram had spiritual views; he looked for a better country, and considered the land of promise only as typical of the heavenly inheritance.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
The Lord had said, to wit, in Ur of the Chaldees, by comparing Gen 11:31, with Act 7:2-4; or, did say, again, i.e. renewed the command in Haran, whilst Abram might possibly linger there, as afterwards Lot did in Sodom, longer than he should. But the former interpretation is more probable, because Moses speaks here of that command of God which came to Abram before he was gone from his
kindred and
father’s house, and therefore before he came to Haran. And this command was given to Abram either immediately, or by Shem, then the governor of God’s church.
From thy father’s house; from the family of Nachor, which was now become idolatrous, Gen 31:30; Jos 24:2; and consequently their society was dangerous and pernicious; and therefore God mercifully snatcheth him as a brand out of the fire.
A land that I will show thee; which as yet he nameth not, for the greater trial and exercise of Abram’s faith and patience: compare Isa 41:2; Heb 11:8.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
1. Now the Lord had said untoAbramIt pleased God, who has often been found of them whosought Him not, to reveal Himself to Abraham perhaps by a miracle;and the conversion of Abraham is one of the most remarkable in Biblehistory.
Get thee out of thycountryHis being brought to the knowledge and worship of thetrue God had probably been a considerable time before. This callincluded two promises: the first, showing the land of his futureposterity; and the second, that in his posterity all the earth was tobe blessed (Ge 12:2). Abrahamobeyed, and it is frequently mentioned in the New Testament as astriking instance of his faith (Heb11:8).
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Now the Lord had said unto Abram,…. In Ur of the Chaldees, before he came and dwelt in Charran, as seems from Ac 7:2 and so Aben Ezra interprets it; but Jarchi and others think, that what follows was said to him in Haran, and so the words may be more literally rendered u, “and the Lord said unto Abram”; after the death of Terah, who died in Haran; and indeed it is highly probable there were two appearances of God to Abram, and that the same words, or very near the same, were spoken to him at two several times, first in Ur of the Chaldees, and then in Haran:
get thee out of thy country; the land of Chaldea, and the city of Ur, which was in it, or out of Mesopotamia, in which, when taken in a large sense, were both Ur and Haran; and this country was now become idolatrous, for though it was first inhabited and peopled by the posterity of Shem in the time of Arphaxad, yet these, in process of time, degenerated from the true religion, and fell into idolatry. The same Maimonides w calls Zabaeans, in whose faith and religion, he says, Abram was brought up, and who asserted there was no other God but the sun, moon, and stars; and these Zabaeans, as he relates from their books and annals, say of Abram themselves, that he was educated in Cuthia, and dissented from the common people; and asserted, that besides the sun, there was another Creator; to whom they objected, and so disputes arose among them on this subject: now Abram being convinced of idolatry, is called out from those people, and to have no fellowship with them; it is literally in the Hebrew text x, “go to thee out of thy country”; for thy profit and good, as Jarchi interprets it; as it must be to quit all society with such an idolatrous and superstitious people:
and from thy kindred; as Nahor his brother, and his family, who are not mentioned, and seem to be left behind when Terah, Abram, Lot, and Sarai, came out of Ur of the Chaldees; though it looks as if afterwards Nahor did follow them to Haran or Padanaram, which are the same, and where he continued, and therefore is called his city; see Ge 24:10 so with great propriety Abram might be called a second time to leave his kindred as well as his country; and certain it is, Haran, or Padanaram, as well as Ur of the Chaldees, is called by himself his country, and Nahor and his family his kindred,
Ge 24:4
and from thy father’s house; or household, his family, which better agrees with the second call at Haran, than with the first at Ur; for, upon the first call, Terah and his family came along with Abram, and therefore this phrase is omitted by Stephen, who speaks of that call, Ac 7:3 but Terah dying at Haran, his house or family went no further, but continued there with Nahor; only Abram and Lot, upon this second call, went from thence, as the following history makes it appear; and so Abram left, as he was bid, his father’s house and family to go, as it follows:
unto a land that I will show thee; meaning the land of Canaan, though not mentioned, and seems to be omitted for the trial of Abram’s faith; hence the author of the epistle to the Hebrews, Heb 11:8 observes, that “he obeyed and went out, not knowing whither he went”; and yet it is said, that, when he and Terah came out of Ur of the Chaldees, “they went forth to go into the land of Canaan”,
Ge 11:31 and, when he and Lot went first from Haran, the same is said of them, Ge 12:5 it is probable the case was this; there was no mention made at first what land he was to go to, and when he prepared for his journey he knew not where he was to go, but afterwards it was revealed to him that Canaan was the land, and therefore set out in order to go thither; and still, though he might know the place by name where he was to go, he might neither know the way to it, nor what sort of country it was for quality or quantity; and therefore God promises to show him the way, and direct his course right unto it, and give him a view of it, that he might see what sort of a country, and how large it was, that he would give to his posterity. This call of Abram is an emblem of the call of men by the grace of God out of the world, and from among the men of it, and to renounce the things of it, and not be conformed unto it, and to forget their own people and their father’s house, and to cleave to the Lord, and follow him whithersoever he directs them.
u “et dixit”, Pagninus, Montanus, Cocceius. w More Nevochim, par. 3. c. 29. p. 421. x “vade tibi”, Pagninus, Montanus, Vatablus, Drusius, &c.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
The life of Abraham, from his call to his death, consists of four stages, the commencement of each of which is marked by a divine revelation of sufficient importance to constitute a distinct epoch. The first stage (Gen 12-14) commences with his call and removal to Canaan; the second (Gen 15-16), with the promise of a lineal heir and the conclusion of a covenant; the third (Gen 17-21), with the establishment of the covenant, accompanied by a change in his name, and the appointment of the covenant sign of circumcision; the fourth (Gen 22-25:11), with the temptation of Abraham to attest and perfect his life of faith. All the revelations made to him proceed from Jehovah; and the name Jehovah is employed throughout the whole life of the father of the faithful, Elohim being used only where Jehovah, from its meaning, would be either entirely inapplicable, or at any rate less appropriate.
(Note: The hypothesis, that the history is compounded of Jehovistic and Elohistic documents, can only be maintained by those who misunderstand that distinctive meaning of these two names, and arbitrarily set aside the Jehovah in Gen 27:1, on account of an erroneous determination of the relation in which stands to .)
Gen 12:1-3 The Call. – The word of Jehovah, by which Abram was called, contained a command and a promise. Abram was to leave all – his country, his kindred (see Gen 43:7), and his father’s house – and to follow the Lord into the land which He would show him. Thus he was to trust entirely to the guidance of God, and to follow wherever He might lead him. But as he went in consequence of this divine summons into the land of Canaan (Gen 12:5), we must assume that God gave him at the very first a distinct intimation, if not of the land itself, at least of the direction he was to take. That Canaan was to be his destination, was no doubt made known as a matter of certainty in the revelation which he received after his arrival there (Gen 12:7). – For thus renouncing and denying all natural ties, the Lord gave him the inconceivably great promise, “ I will make of thee a great nation; and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing.” The four members of this promise are not to be divided into two parallel members, in which case the athnach would stand in the wrong place; but are to be regarded as an ascending climax, expressing four elements of the salvation promised to Abram, the last of which is still further expanded in Gen 12:3. By placing the athnach under the fourth member is marked as a new and independent feature added to the other three. The four distinct elements are – 1. increase into a numerous people; 2. a blessing, that is to say, material and spiritual prosperity; 3. the exaltation of his name, i.e., the elevation of Abram to honour and glory; 4. his appointment to be the possessor and dispenser of the blessing. Abram was not only to receive blessing, but to be a blessing; not only to be blessed by God, but to become a blessing, or the medium of blessing, to others. The blessing, as the more minute definition of the expression “ be a blessing ” in Gen 12:3 clearly shows, was henceforth to keep pace as it were with Abram himself, so that (1) the blessing and cursing of men were to depend entirely upon their attitude towards him, and (2) all the families of the earth were to be blessed in him. , lit., to treat as light or little, to despise, denotes “blasphemous cursing on the part of a man;” “judicial cursing on the part of God.” It appears significant, however, “that the plural is used in relation to the blessing, and the singular only in relation to the cursing; grace expects that there will be many to bless, and that only an individual here and there will render not blessing for blessing, but curse for curse.” – In Gen 12:3 b, Abram, the one, is made a blessing for all. In the word the primary meaning of , in, is not to be given up, though the instrumental sense, through, is not to be excluded. Abram was not merely to become a mediator, but the source of blessing for all. The expression “ all the families of the ground ” points to the division of the one family into many (Gen 10:5, Gen 10:20, Gen 10:31), and the word to the curse pronounced upon the ground (Gen 3:17). The blessing of Abraham was once more to unite the divided families, and change the curse, pronounced upon the ground on account of sin, into a blessing for the whole human race. This concluding word comprehends all nations and times, and condenses, as Baumgarten has said, the whole fulness of the divine counsel for the salvation of men into the call of Abram. All further promises, therefore, not only to the patriarchs, but also to Israel, were merely expansions and closer definitions of the salvation held out to the whole human race in the first promise. Even the assurance, which Abram received after his entrance into Canaan (Gen 12:6), was implicitly contained in this first promise; since a great nation could not be conceived of, without a country of its own.
This promise was renewed to Abram on several occasions: first after his separation from Lot (Gen 13:14-16), on which occasion, however, the “blessing” was not mentioned, because not required by the connection, and the two elements only, viz., the numerous increase of his seed, and the possession of the land of Canaan, were assured to him and to his seed, and that “for ever;” secondly, in Gen 18:18 somewhat more casually, as a reason for the confidential manner in which Jehovah explained to him the secret of His government; and lastly, at the two principal turning points of his life, where the whole promise was confirmed with the greatest solemnity, viz., in Gen 17 at the commencement of the establishment of the covenant made with him, where “I will make of thee a great nation” was heightened into “I will make nations of thee, and kings shall come out of thee,” and his being a blessing was more fully defined as the establishment of a covenant, inasmuch as Jehovah would be God to him and to his posterity (Gen 11:3.), and in Gen 22 after the attestation of his faith and obedience, even to the sacrifice of his only son, where the innumerable increase of his seed and the blessing to pass from him to all nations were guaranteed by an oath. The same promise was afterwards renewed to Isaac, with a distinct allusion to the oath (Gen 26:3-4), and again to Jacob, both on his flight from Canaan for fear of Esau (Gen 28:13-14), and on his return thither (Gen 35:11-12). In the case of these renewals, it is only in Gen 28:14 that the last expression, “all the families of the Adamah,” is repeated verbatim, though with the additional clause “and in thy seed;” in the other passages “all the nations of the earth” are mentioned, the family connection being left out of sight, and the national character of the blessing being brought into especial prominence. In two instances also, instead of the Niphal we find the Hithpael . This change of conjugation by no means proves that the Niphal is to be taken in its original reflective sense. The Hithpael has no doubt the meaning “to wish one’s self blessed” (Deu 29:19), with of the person from whom the blessing is sought (Isa 65:16; Jer 4:2), or whose blessing is desired (Gen 48:20). But the Niphal has only the passive signification “to be blessed.” And the promise not only meant that all families of the earth would wish for the blessing which Abram possessed, but that they would really receive this blessing in Abram and his seed. By the explanation “wish themselves blessed” the point of the promise is broken off; and not only is its connection with the prophecy of Noah respecting Japhet’s dwelling in the tents of Shem overlooked, and the parallel between the blessing on all the families of the earth, and the curse pronounced upon the earth after the flood, destroyed, but the actual participation of all the nations of the earth in this blessing is rendered doubtful, and the application of this promise by Peter (Act 3:25) and Paul (Gal 3:8) to all nations, is left without any firm scriptural basis. At the same time, we must not attribute a passive signification on that account to the Hithpael in Gen 22:18 and Gen 24:4. In these passages prominence is given to the subjective attitude of the nations towards the blessing of Abraham-in other words, to the fact that the nations would desire the blessing promised to them in Abraham and his seed.
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
| The Call of Abram. | B. C. 1921. |
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 show thee: 2 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: 3 And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.
We have here the call by which Abram was removed out of the land of his nativity into the land of promise, which was designed both to try his faith and obedience and also to separate him and set him apart for God, and for special services and favours which were further designed. The circumstances of this call we may be somewhat helped to the knowledge of from Stephen’s speech, Acts vii. 2, where we are told, 1. That the God of glory appeared to him to give him this call, appeared in such displays of his glory as left Abram no room to doubt the divine authority of this call. God spoke to him afterwards in divers manners; but this first time, when the correspondence was to be settled, he appeared to him as the God of glory, and spoke to him. 2. That this call was given him in Mesopotamia, before he dwelt in Charran; therefore we rightly read it, The Lord had said unto Abram, namely, in Ur of the Chaldees; and, in obedience to this call, as Stephen further relates the story (Acts vii. 4), he came out of the land of the Chaldeans, and dwelt in Charran, or Haran, about five years, and thence, when his father was dead, by a fresh command, pursuant to the former, God removed him into the land of Canaan. Some think that Haran was in Chaldea, and so was still a part of Abram’s country, or that Abram, having staid there five years, began to call it his country, and to take root there, till God let him know this was not the place he was intended for. Note, If God loves us, and has mercy in store for us, he will not suffer us to take up our rest any where short of Canaan, but will graciously repeat his calls, till the good work begun be performed, and our souls repose in God only. In the call itself we have a precept and a promise.
I. A trying precept: Get thee out of thy country, v. 1. Now,
1. By this precept he was tried whether he loved his native soil and dearest friends, and whether he could willingly leave all, to go along with God. His country had become idolatrous, his kindred and his father’s house were a constant temptation to him, and he could not continue with them without danger of being infected by them; therefore Get thee out, lk-lk—Vade tibi, Get thee gone, with all speed, escape for thy life, look not behind thee, ch. xix. 17. Note, Those that are in a sinful state are concerned to make all possible haste out of it. Get out for thyself (so some read it), that is, for thy own good. Note, Those who leave their sins, and turn to God, will themselves be unspeakable gainers by the change, Prov. ix. 12. This command which God gave to Abram is much the same with the gospel call by which all the spiritual seed of faithful Abram are brought into covenant with God. For, (1.) Natural affection must give way to divine grace. Our country is dear to us, our kindred dearer, and our father’s house dearest of all; and yet they must all be hated (Luke xiv. 26), that is, we must love them less than Christ, hate them in comparison with him, and, whenever any of these come in competition with him, they must be postponed, and the preference given to the will and honour of the Lord Jesus. (2.) Sin, and all the occasions of it, must be forsaken, and particularly bad company; we must abandon all the idols of iniquity which have been set up in our hearts, and get out of the way of temptation, plucking out even a right eye that leads us to sin (Matt. v. 29), willingly parting with that which is dearest to us, when we cannot keep it without hazard of our integrity. Those that resolve to keep the commandments of God must quit the society of evil doers, Psa 119:115; Act 2:40. (3.) The world, and all our enjoyments in it, must be looked upon with a holy indifference and contempt; we must no longer look upon it as our country, or home, but as our inn, and must accordingly sit loose to it and live above it, get out of it in affection.
2. By this precept he was tried whether he could trust God further than he saw him; for he must leave his own country, to go to a land that God would show him. He does not say, “It is a land that I will give thee,” but merely, “a land that I will show thee.” Nor does he tell him what land it was, nor what kind of land; but he must follow God with an implicit faith, and take God’s word for it, in the general, though he had no particular securities given him that he should be no loser by leaving his country, to follow God. Note, Those that will deal with God must deal upon trust; we must quit the things that are seen for things that are not seen, and submit to the sufferings of this present time in hopes of a glory that is yet to be revealed (Rom. viii. 18); for it doth not yet appear what we shall be (1 John iii. 2), any more than it did to Abram, when God called him to a land he would show him, so teaching him to live in a continual dependence upon his direction, and with his eye ever towards him.
II. Here is an encouraging promise, nay, it is a complication of promises, many, and exceedingly great and precious. Note, All God’s precepts are attended with promises to the obedient. When he makes himself known also as a rewarder: if we obey the command, God will not fail to perform the promise. Here are six promises:–
1. I will make of thee a great nation. When God took him from his own people, he promised to make him the head of another; he cut him off from being the branch of a wild olive, to make him the root of a good olive. This promise was, (1.) A great relief to Abram’s burden; for he had now no child. Note, God knows how to suit his favours to the wants and necessities of his children. He that has a plaster for every sore will provide one for that first which is most painful. (2.) A great trial to Abram’s faith; for his wife had been long barren, so that, if he believe, it must be against hope, and his faith must build purely upon that power which can out of stones raise up children unto Abraham, and make them a great nation. Note, [1.] God makes nations: by him they are born at once (Isa. lxvi. 8), and he speaks, to build and plant them, Jer. xviii. 9. And, [2.] If a nation be made great in wealth and power, it is God that makes it great. [3.] God can raise great nations out of dry ground, and can make a little one to be a thousand.
2. I will bless thee, either particularly with the blessing of fruitfulness and increase, as he had blessed Adam and Noah, or, in general, “I will bless thee with all manner of blessings, both of the upper and the nether springs. Leave thy father’s house, and I will give thee a father’s blessing, better than that of they progenitors.” Note, Obedient believers will be sure to inherit the blessing.
3. I will make thy name great. By deserting his country, he lost his name there. “Care not for that,” says God, “but trust me, and I will make thee a greater name than ever thou couldst have had there.” Having no child, he feared he should have no name; but God will make him a great nation, and so make him a great name. Note, (1.) God is the fountain of honour, and from him promotion comes, 1 Sam. ii. 8. (2.) The name of obedient believers shall certainly be celebrated and made great. The best report is that which the elders obtained by faith, Heb. xi. 2.
4. Thou shalt be a blessing; that is, (1.) “Thy happiness shall be a sample of happiness, so that those who would bless their friends shall only pray that God would make them like Abram;” as Ruth iv. 11. Note, God’s dealings with obedient believers are so kind and gracious that we need not desire for ourselves or our friends to be any better dealt with: to have God for our friend is blessedness enough. (2.) “Thy life shall be a blessing to the places where thou shalt sojourn.” Note, Good men are the blessings of their country, and it is their unspeakable honour and happiness to be made so.
5. I will bless those that bless thee and curse him that curseth thee. This made it a kind of a league, offensive and defensive, between God and Abram. Abram heartily espoused God’s cause, and here God promises to interest himself in his. (1.) He promises to be a friend to his friends, to take kindnesses shown to him as done to himself, and to recompense them accordingly. God will take care that none be losers, in the long run, by any service done for his people; even a cup of cold water shall be rewarded. (2.) He promises to appear against his enemies. There were those that hated and cursed even Abram himself; but, while their causeless curses could not hurt Abram, God’s righteous curse would certainly overtake and ruin them, Num. xxiv. 9. This is a good reason why we should bless those that curse us, because it is enough that God will curse them, Ps. xxxviii. 13-15.
6. In thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed. This was the promise that crowned all the rest; for it points at the Messiah, in whom all the promises are yea and amen. Note, (1.) Jesus Christ is the great blessing of the world, the greatest that ever the world was blessed with. He is a family blessing, by him salvation is brought to the house (Luke xix. 9); when we reckon up our family blessings, let us put Christ in the imprimis–the first place, as the blessing of blessings. But how are all the families of the earth blessed in Christ, when so many are strangers to him? Answer, [1.] All that are blessed are blessed in him, Acts iv. 12. [2.] All that believe, of what family soever they shall be, shall be blessed in him. [3.] Some of all the families of the earth are blessed in him. [4.] There are some blessings which all the families of the earth are blessed with in Christ; for the gospel salvation is a common salvation, Jude 3. (2.) It is a great honour to be related to Christ; this made Abram’s name great, that the Messiah was to descend from his loins, much more than that he should be the father of many nations. It was Abram’s honour to be his father by nature; it will be ours to be his brethren by grace, Matt. xii. 50.
Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary
GENESIS – CHAPTER TWELVE
Verses 1-5:
The Sacred Record now turns to that Semite known as the “Father of the Faithful” (Ro 4:16, 17); Abram (Abraham). God selected this son of Terah to be the founder of a new lineage or nation, to be the repository and guardian of Truth until the “fulness of time” (Ga 4:4), and through whom the promised Seed would be born.
Jehovah appeared to Abram while he lived in Ur of Chaldea, see Ac 7:1-4; Heb 11:8. Although reared in idolatry, Abram rejected the religion of his father (Jos 24:2), and trusted in God. At the point of faith, God imputed righteousness to Abram, Ge 15:6; Ro 4:4; Ga 3:6. Abram’s faith was more than an intellectual assent. It was a spiritual conviction which led him to act, Jas 2:23; Heb 11:8-10. The first step of action was to leave Ur of Chaldea. The fact that Abram’s father, brother, and nephew accompanied him on his odyssey implies that they came to share his faith in Jehovah and forsake their idolatry. Jehovah did not at first reveal the destination to which He would lead Abram. It was enough for Abram that Jehovah promised to “show him” this land at the proper time.
The first stop out of Ur was Haran. How long Abram remained there is not known. During that stay, Terah died and was buried. Following this, Abram resumed his journey. He was seventy-five years of age at this time.
Jehovah made a covenant with Abram, in response to Abram’s faith. The initial covenant included three basic provisions: (1) a land; (2) a great nation; and (3) a blessing. Jehovah later provided additional details regarding each of these three.
1. A Land: the extent of this territory is outlined in chapter 15.
2. A Great Nation: to be realized through the child who would be born to Abram and Sarai, and whose offspring would multiply as the “sand of the sea.”
3. A Blessing: one that would affect all nations, primarily through the promised Seed, the Christ, see Ga 3:16. The “blessing” is primarily spiritual in nature, in which all people can reap the benefits of the Abrahamic Covenant through Christ. But it includes blessings that are social, educational, artistic, political, scientific in nature as well. A roster of the leading scientists and doctors and authors and artists throughout history includes a vast number of the descendants of Abraham.
“Fringe benefits” of the promised blessing includes the provision of God’s blessings upon any nation which would “bless” or show kindness toward Abram’s descendants. On the negative side, God’s curse lies heavily upon any nation or people that persecutes or harms them. History confirms the validity of this provision.
Abram was a wealthy man. Wherever he went, his wealth increased. This was true of his stay in Haran. After the death of Terah, Abram and his wife, accompanied by Lot, set out on their westward trek to the Land God had promised him. This was a journey of some 300 miles, likely across the Euphrates and over the Syrian desert, through Lebanon and to Damascus. Josephus (“Antiquities” Vol. 1, 7) says that Abram remained in Damascus a considerable time, as a ruler of that territory. Ge 15:2 lends credence to this. From Damascus, Abram continued westward into the territory occupied by tribes descended from Canaan, Ham’s son.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
1. Now the Lord had said unto Abram. That an absurd division of these chapters may not trouble the readers, let them connect this sentence with the last two verses of the previous chapter. Moses had before said, that Terah and Abram had departed from their country to dwell in the land of Canaan. He now explains that they had not been impelled by levity as rash and fickle men are wont to be; nor had been drawn to other regions by disgust with their own country, as morose persons frequently are; nor were fugitives on account of crime; nor were led away by any foolish hope, or by any allurements, as many are hurried hither and thither by their own desires; but that Abram had been divinely commanded to go forth and had not moved a foot but as he was guided by the word of God. They who explain the passage to mean, that God spoke to Abram after the death of his father, are easily refuted by the very words of Moses: for if Abram was already without a country, and was sojourning as a stranger elsewhere, the command of God would have been superfluous, ‘Depart from thy land, from thy country, and from thy father’s house.’ The authority of Stephen is also added, who certainly deserves to be accounted a suitable interpreter of this passage: now he plainly testifies, that God appeared to Abraham when he was in Mesopotamia, before he dwelt in Charran; he then recites this oracle which we are now explaining; and at length concludes, that, for this reason, Abraham migrated from Chaldea. Nor is that to be overlooked which God afterwards repeats, (Gen 15:7,) ‘I am the Lord that brought thee out of Ur of the Chaldees;’ for we thence infer, that the Divine Hand was not for the first time stretched out to him after he had dwelt in Charran, but while he yet remained at home in Chaldea. (339) Truly this command of Gods respecting which doubts are foolishly entertained, ought to be deemed by us sufficient to disprove the contrary error. For God could not have spoken thus, except to a man who had been, up to that time, settled in his nest, having his affairs underanged, and living quietly and tranquilly among his relatives, without any change in his mode of life; otherwise, the answer would have been readily given ‘I have left my country, I am far removed from my kindred.’ In short, Moses records this oracle, in order that we may know that this long journey was undertaken by Abram, and his father Terah, at the command of God. Whence it also appears, that Terah was not so far deluded by superstitions as to be destitute of the fear of God. It was difficult for the old man, already broken and failing in health, to tear himself away from his own country. Some true religion, therefore, although smothered, still remained in his mind. Therefore, when he knew that the place, from which his son was commanded to depart, was accursed, it was his wish not to perish there; but he joined himself as an associate with him whom the Lord was about to deliver. What a witness, I demand, will he prove, in the last day, to condemn our indolence! Easy and plausible was the excuse which he might have alleged; namely that he would remain quietly at home, because he had received no command. But he, though blind in the darkness of unbelief, yet opened his eyes to the beam of light which shot across his path; while we remain unmoved when the Divine vocation directly shines upon us. Moreover, this calling of Abram is a signal instance of the gratuitous mercy of God. Had Abram been beforehand with God by any merit of works? Had Abram come to him, or conciliated his favor? Nay, we must ever recall to mind, (what I have before adduced from the passage in Joshua,) that he was plunged in the filth of idolatry; and now God freely stretches forth his hand to bring back the wanderer. He deigns to open his sacred mouth, that he may show to one, deceived by Satan’s wiles, the way of salvation. And it is wonderful, that a man, miserable and lost, should have the preference given him, over so many holy worshippers of God; that the covenant of life should be placed in his possession; that the Church should be revived in him, and he himself constituted the father of all the faithful. But this is done designedly, in order that the manifestation of the grace of God might become the more conspicuous in his person. For he is an example of the vocation of us all; for in him we perceive, that, by the mere mercy of God, those things which are not are raised from nothing, in order that they may begin to be something.
Get thee out of thy country. This accumulation of words may seem to be superfluous. To which also may be added, that Moses, in other places so concise, here expresses a plain and easy matter in three different forms of speech. But the case is quite otherwise. For since exile is in itself sorrowful, and the sweetness of their native soil holds nearly all men bound to itself, God strenuously persists in his command to leave the country, for the purpose of thoroughly penetrating the mind of Abram. If he had said in a single word, Leave thy country, this indeed would not lightly have pained his mind; but Abram is still more deeply affected, when he hears that he must renounce his kindred and his father’s house. Yet it is not to be supposed, that God takes a cruel pleasure in the trouble of his servants; but he thus tries all their affections, that he may not leave any lurking-places undiscovered in their hearts. We see many persons zealous for a short time, who afterwards become frozen; whence is this, but because they build without a foundation? Therefore God determined, thoroughly to rouse all the senses of Abram, that he might undertake nothing rashly or inconsiderately; lest, repenting soon afterwards, he should veer with the wind, and return. Wherefore, if we desire to follow God with constancy, it behaves us carefully to meditate on all the inconveniences, all the difficulties, all the dangers which await us; that not only a hasty zeal may produce fading flowers, but that from a deep and well-fixed root of piety, we may bring forth fruit in our whole life.
Unto a land that I will show thee. This is another test to prove the faith of Abram. For why does not God immediately point out the land, except for the purpose of keeping his servant in suspense, that he may the better try the truth of his attachment to the word of God? As if he would say, ‘I command thee to go forth with closed eyes, and forbid thee to inquire whither I am about to lead thee, until, having renounced thy country, thou shalt have given thyself wholly to me.’ And this is the true proof of our obedience, when we are not wise in our own eyes, but commit ourselves entirely unto the Lord. Whensoever, therefore, he requires anything of us, we must not be so solicitous about success, as to allow fear and anxiety to retard our course. For it is better, with closed eyes, to follow God as our guide, than, by relying on our own prudence, to wander through those circuitous paths which it devises for us. Should any one object, that this statement is at variance with the former sentence, in which Moses declared that Terah and Abram departed from their own country, that they might come into the land of Canaan: the solution is easy, if we admit a prolepsis (340) (that is, an anticipation on something still future) in the expression of Moses; such as follows in this very chapter, in the use of the name Bethel; and such as frequently occurs in the Scriptures. They knew not whither they were going; but because they had resolved to go whithersoever God might call them, Moses, speaking in his own person, mentions the land, which, though hitherto unknown to them both, was afterwards revealed to Abram alone. It is therefore true, that they departed with the design of coming to the land of Canaan; because, having received the promise concerning a land which was to be shown them, they suffered themselves to be governed by God, until he should actually bestow what he had promised. Nevertheless it may be, that God, having proved the devotedness of Abram, soon afterwards removed all doubt from his mind. For we do not know at what precise moment of time, God would intimate to him what it was his will to conceal only for a season. It is enough that Abram declared himself to be truly obedient to God, when, having cast all his care on God’s providence, and having discharged, as it were, into His bosom, whatever might have impeded him, he did not hesitate to leave his own country, uncertain where, at length, he might plant his foot; for, by this method, the wisdom of the flesh was reduced to order, and all his affections, at the same time, were subdued. Yet it may be asked, why God sent his servant into the land of Canaan rather than into the East, where he could have lived with some other of the holy fathers? Some (in order that the change may not seem to have been made for the worse) will have it, that he was led thither, for the purpose of dwelling with his ancestor Shem, whom they imagine to have been Melchizedek. But if such were the counsel of God, it is strange that Abram bent his steps in a different direction; nay, we do not read that he met with Melchizedek, till he was returning from the battle in the plain of Sodom. But, in its proper place, we shall see how frivolous is the imagination, that Melchizedek was Shem. As it concerns the subject now in hand, we infer, from the result which at length followed, that God’s design was very different from what these men suppose. The nations of Canaan, on account of their deplorable wickedness, were devoted to destruction. God required his servant to sojourn among them for a time, that, by faith, he might perceive himself to be the heir of that land, the actual possession of which was reserved for his posterity to a long period after his own death. Wherefore he was commanded to cross over into that country, for this sole reason, that it was to be evacuated by its inhabitants, for the purpose of being given to his seed for a possession. And it was of great importance, that Abram, Isaac, and Jacob, should be strangers in that land, and should by faith embrace the dominion over it, which had been divinely promised them, in order that their posterity might, with the greater courage, gird themselves to take possession of it.
(339) Many learned commentators, Dr A. Clarke among the number, suppose this to have been a second call from God, and to have taken place when he was at Charran. But the objections adduced by Calvin against such an interpretation are of great weight, and cannot be easily set aside. — Ed.
(340) Prolepsis is the figure which anticipates in the discourse something still future; as when the word Bethel is used to designate the place which at the time was called Luz, and which did not receive this name till it was given by Jacob. — Ed.
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.
Now the Lord had said] More literally this may read, The Lord said, and may refer to a call to leave Haran, and not to that which Abram received in Ur, of which Stephen speaks in Act. 7:2, and which was a short time previous (Jacobus).Abram] Heb. High fathera distinguished progenitor of a race.Get thee out] Heb. Go for thyself. The command was pre-eminently to him and for his advantage; though others were not excluded, as the history shows.Of thy country] The fatherland, the land of Mesopotamia, as it embraced both Ur of the Chaldees and Haran (Lange).And from thy kindred] Alford renders the place of thy birth, such being the general meaning of this word. Still, in other places, it plainly signifies kindred (Gen. 43:7; Est. 8:6), and this is the probable meaning here. Abrams kindred would be the Chaldaic descendants of Shem.From thy fathers house] Terah and his family (Gen. 11:31-32).
Gen. 12:2. And thou shalt be a blessing] Heb. Be thou a blessing. He is to be not merely a subject of blessing, but a medium of blessing to others. It is more blessed to give than to receive. And the Lord here confers on Abram the delightful prerogative of dispensing good to others (Murphy).
Gen. 12:3. And curse him that curseth thee] Heb. Those that make light of thee will I curse. The verb signifies to treat as vile, worthless, or contemptible. This is included in cursing, which is the imprecation of evil.In thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed]. These words have given occasion for much contention on the part of rationalist interpreters. Knobel, who is the best example of them, would understand them, that all the families of the earth should bless with (or, in) thee, i.e. wish themselves blessed inby the example ofAbraham; wish for themselves blessedness like his. This rendering he defends by chapter Gen. 48:20, In thee shall Israel bless, saying, God make thee as Ephraim and Manasseh. The objection to this is that the verb is in the passive voice, not bless, but be blessed. On such a matter we may further remark that we may well leave the New Testament writers, to whom Hebrew was familiar, to decide for us which of the senses should prevail. And this has been plainly and emphatically done. See Act. 3:25; Gal. 3:8; Gal. 3:14. Notice that literally the expression is, all the families of the ground, so that the blessing is an echo of the primal curse (Alford).
MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.Gen. 12:1-3
THE CALL OF ABRAHAM
The last chapter dealt with the human race as a whole, and thus furnished the elements of a universal history. In this chapter that history is contracted and becomes national. It is not the design of Scripture to record the famous deeds of all men everywhere, to trace the development of the kingdoms of this world, but rather to unfold the spiritual dealings of God with the race. The sacred historian, therefore, after marking the downward tendency of mankind, now calls attention to a man on whom Gods light had shined, who was to be the only hope of a world which had well nigh perished in the ruins of its corruption. God chooses Abraham that He might make him a worthy ancestor of the children of faith, and the founder of a nation by means of which he was to illustrate the ways of His Providence and grace. The knowledge of God had well nigh perished from the world, and the call of Abraham was a spiritual revivala fresh starting place in the religious history of mankind. In the call of Abraham, we may observe
Gen. 12:1. That it was manifestly Divine. The patriarch did not by study and meditation discover the course of duty which he afterwards obeyed. The idea did not arise in his own mind, but was suggested to him from a source purely Divine. St. Stephen says that The God of glory appeared unto our father Abraham. There was some visible manifestation of the Divine glory, and an authentic voice was heard. Since the last recorded communication from heaven, 422 years had passed away, and now God speaks again to Abraham. This call could not have been an illusion, for
1. To obey it, he gave up all that was dear and precious to him in the world. He gave up country, home, friends, and entered upon an untried path, committing himself to unknown chances. He could not have made such a sacrifice without a sufficient reason. The early Christians submitted to persecution, even unto death, because they knew that the alleged facts of their religion were true. The conduct of Abraham can only be explained by the fact that he acted upon a real communication from God, and not from an impression.
2. The course of conduct he followed could not be of human suggestion. Abraham was not driven from his country by adverse circumstances, or attracted by the promise of plenty elsewhere. He might have followed the usual policy of the world, and made the best of things as they are. But he left a condition which would then be considered as prosperous, and cheerfully accepted whatever trials might await him. The whole of his character and destiny were changed. Natural causes cannot account for so sudden and marked a change. The word of God alone has power like this. An ignorant idolator cannot be turned to the ways of true religion, and a life of faith, without the operation of a Divine power. Flesh and blood could not have revealed this to Abraham.
3. The history of the Church confirms the fact that the call was Divine. The Christian Church was but a continuation of the Jewish, with added light, and fresh blessings. That Church must have had an origin in the dim past, sufficient to account for the fact of its existence. If the world had lapsed into idolatry this new spiritual nation could not have arisen, unless God had raised up a founder for ita new centre around which He could gather a chosen people. The Church can be traced back to the grey morning of history in which one great figure appears, which shines through all the succeeding ages, and still will shine until the course of man on earth is run. The blessings which the Church has enjoyed, and still shall enjoy, throughout all time, are the blessings which God promised to Abraham. The Church of God is a fact, and something strange and unusual must have happened in the past history of the world to account for it. The name of Abraham is so closely connected with the doctrines of the Gospel, as delivered in the New Testament, that to throw doubt upon the reality of his history would go very far towards destroying the foundations of the Christian religion. Christian believers now do but repeat the history of this patriarch, for they are all called of God, as was Abraham.
II. It demanded great sacrifices. Upon the Divine call, Abraham was not immediately rewarded with temporal blessings. Appearances were altogether against his deriving any advantages from obedience. He was called upon to make great sacrifices, with no human prospect of compensation.
1. He had to sever the ties of country. It is natural for a man to love his native land, the scenes of his earliest years and first impressions. A mans country becomes hallowed in the course of years by many tender associations. The youth may leave his native land with little regret, but to the old man it is like tearing some firm attachment from his heart. To have been suddenly called to leave his country must have been no small trial to Abraham.
2. He had to sever the ties of kindred. Natural relationships form a strong bond of unity, and awaken a peculiar love. A man must have a stronger affection for his own flesh and blood than for the rest of the human race. He clings with a fond attachment to those who were the guardians of his early life. These are the most sacred of natural ties, and to sever them touches the deepest fountains of human emotion. Abraham was called upon to make this sacrifice at a time when he could feel it most.
3. He had to sever the ties of home. This is narrower than kindred and signifies all the dear and precious things that form our domestic circle, or lie nearest our heart. Man has a kind of instinctive belief in a home, some sacred spot where he can find rest and comfort and be secure from invasion. There he has sanctuary. To sever the ties of home with the prospect of some sufficient advantage elsewhere may be justified as a call of duty, or devotion to some high principle; still the act itself is a real sacrifice. Abraham had reasons for leaving his home; yet in making up his mind to this he must needs have felt the pangs which nature gives.
III. It was an example of faith. The promise was made in general terms, and the good things to come, as far as Abraham was personally concerned, placed at an inaccessible distance. God did not tell him that He would give him the land, but merely show it to him. And as a fact of history he did not possess the good land. To act upon a promise like this required strong faith.
1. Faith is required to brave the terrors of the unknown. Abraham went forth upon his untried journey without any clear idea as to where he was going, or what might await him along his course. The unknown is ever the terrible, and we can only enter it with any confidence or hope when supported by the mysterious power of faith. Spiritual men derive the whole force and energy of their superior life from the influence of the distant and unknown. Faith is the power which links these to the present, and makes them a reality to the soul.
2. Faith trusts in God. Abraham did not know where he was going, but, like St. Paul, he knew whom he had believed. That faith which merely believes the truth concerning God is dead, but that faith which believes in God is powerful and energetic. Such faith is not an attachment to some system of truth which the mind may languidly receive; it is trust in a person. Abraham believed God. By the adoption of certain forms, and assents to creeds, we may have corporate religion, but personal religion can only arise from the souls direct dealings with its God. God did not explain all the reasons of His strange commands and dealings to Abraham, yet Abraham trusted Him.
3. In religious faith there is an element of reason. Religion does not require us to exercise a blind faith. We have to venture something, but still we have sufficient reason to justify us in the step. The called of God may demand of us that we should go beyond what reason could point out, but never that we should act contrary to reason. The children of the truth recognise the voice of truth as soon as they hear it. There is something in the nature of their souls to which the truth is agreeable. There is a purer instinct in man, which to follow is the highest reason. Abraham was one of those to whom God appeared, and he felt that it was reasonable to obey the high command. It was enough for him to know that it was God who spoke, and God could only have a high and worthy purpose in view in all His commands to the children of men. To follow the promptings of faith is the noblest act of human reason.
IV. It was accompanied by promise. Though God does not explain all the reasons of His dealings to believers, and show them every step of the way in which they shall be led, yet He gives them sufficient encouragement by promises of future good. Abraham was assured that the advantages of obedience would be great. To employ an expression of Matthew Henrys, he might be a loser for God, but not a loser by Him. The promises made to Abraham may be considered in a twofold light.
1. As they concerned himself, personally. He would have compensation for all the worldly loss he would have to endure. The nature of the affections of the soul cannot endure that they should remain without a proper object. If one hope is taken away from a man, he must have another. If he is forbidden to love some object unworthy of his affection, some other must be provided for him. Abraham had to lose much, and it was necessary that he should have reason for believing that God would be able to give him much more than this. There is a better and an enduring substance which more than compensates for all the sacrifices which faith demands. The several promises made to Abraham corresponded, in each case, to the sacrifices he was called upon to make.
(1) For the loss of country, God promised that He would make him a great nation. His own nation was fast sinking into idolatry, and had he remained in it he must have caught the contagion of the times, and continued ignorant of the true religion. It was a double blessing to be delivered from such a nation, and to be made the head of another for which such an illustrious history was preparing.
(2) For the loss of his place of birth, God promised to bless him with a higher prosperity. Abraham had much to leave behindall his prospects of wealth and comfort, but God said, I will bless thee. That blessing included all prosperity; as much as was needful, and sufficient for this life, and in the world to come life everlasting.
(3) For the loss of family distinction, God promised to make his name great. Abraham had to leave his fathers house, but he was destined in the Providence of God to build up a more famous and lasting house. These promises may be considered
2. In his relation to humanity. God said, Thou shalt be a blessing. This promise implied something grander and nobler than any personal benefits which Abraham could inherit. It was the higher blessingthe larger benefit. Religion means something more than the selfish enjoyment of spiritual good, and he who only considers the interests of his own soul has failed to catch the true spirit of it. Man approaches the nature of God when he becomes a source of blessing to others. It is more blessed to give than to receive. Abraham was to be a blessing to mankind in the highest sense. Along his line were to flow all the benefits of salvation, and all the precious gifts of the covenant of grace. Other men have blessed the world with useful works and inventions, and with the gifts of literature and science, but he who is chosen by God to be an instrument in the worlds salvation is the greatest benefactor to the race. As a further expansion of this blessing promised to Abraham
(1.) His cause was henceforth to be identified with the cause of God. I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee (Gen. 12:3). God promised further, so to take sides with Abraham in the world, as to make common cause with himshare his friendships, and treat his enemies as His own. This is the highest possible pledge. This threatening against hostile people was signally fulfilled in the case of the Egyptians, Edomites, Amalekites, Moabites, Ammonites, and the greater nationsAssyrian, Chaldean, Persian, Greek, and Roman, which have fallen under the curse of God as here denounced against the enemies of the Church and kingdom of Christ. The Church is Gods. Her enemies are His. Her friends are His also, and no weapon that is formed against her shall prosper, for He who has all power given unto Him shall be with her faithful servants, even to the end of the world (Jacobus).
3. He was to be the source of the highest blessing to mankind. In thee shall all families of the earth be blessed. Heb. Of the ground. The ground was cursed in Adam, now it was to be blessed in Abraham. The world was to be blessed in families, for the family is the first of all relationships, the most lasting of all institutions, and the best representative of the love of God, who is the Father of all mankind. By virtue of the Sonship of Christ Jesus we are made members of the household of God. It is Gods design to bless the world by means of a family, hence in the fulness of time His own Son took flesh and blood of the children of Abraham, entered into our human relationships that He might bless all the families of the earth. In all this, there are three great principles involved.
(1) That it is Gods plan to help man by means of man. The system of mediators prevails throughout all human affairs. Nature ministers to us, and we have to minister one to the other. God brought spiritual succour to the human race, not directly but by means of the family of Abraham.
(2) That it is Gods plan to help man by means of the human in conjunction with the divine. No one of the human race, however illustrious, could redeem mankind. All were tainted by sin, stricken by the same disease, equally weak and impotent to save. It was necessary, therefore, for God to take hold on human nature in order to procure the salvation of mankind. Hence St. Paul teaches that by the seed of Abraham, by which the world was to be blessed, was meant Jesus Christ. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many, but as of one, and to thy seed, which is Christ (Gal. 3:16). The promise made to Abraham does not distinctly mention the God-man, yet in the progress of revelation it gradually narrows to this. Abraham rejoiced to see the day of Christ, and though dimly, yet still with a real perception, of which this is the account.
(3) That the catholic spirit belongs to all stages of inspiration. The Old Testament is not narrow, exclusive, and confined, for it speaks here of blessings to come to all families of the earth. The New Testament can have no wider aim, and merely speaks of this gracious purpose as being accomplished. Gods design to construct a family of saints built upon the Sonship of Christ was revealed to Abraham, and therefore St. Paul declares that in this promise the Gospel was preached to him beforehand. (Gal. 3:8-16.)
SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS ON THE VERSES
Gen. 12:1. Gods speaking to man
(1) Should inspire reverence and worship;
(2) should put an end to doubt;
(3) should be a sufficient basis for faith;
(4) should command obedience.
Revelation consists of communications made by God to men, who, to say the least, were above the average of mankind in purity and nobility of character.
The call of Abraham
(1) A manifestation of the grace of God. Others may have been as worthy, or, if not, they might have been fitted for such a purpose, but the Divine choice rested upon him. Here was grace, by which God takes the lead in human salvation, and in calling men to special services in the Church. Abraham did not choose the Lord, but the Lord him.
2. Peremptory. There was no room for debate. Abraham must obey at once, for the danger was great. The world was fast sinking into idolatry, and provoking the judgment of God. The faith must be saved in a man of heavens choice.
3. Authoritative. There was a clear revelation from God. The authority could not be questioned. A man must not contend with his Maker.
4. Painful. Obedience to it was hard for flesh and blood.
5. It required faith. The voice that called was authoritative and commanding, yet since the believer cannot know all the journey, or through what untried things he shall have to pass, he must exercise faith. Gods promise to Abraham was such as he could not immediately realise, and to the end of his life he would have to exercise faith. Yea, he died in faith.
A similar command is virtually given to us. We are not, indeed, called to leave our country and connections, but to withdraw our affections from earthly things, and fix them upon things above, we are called. The world around us lies in wickedness; we are not to love it or the things that are in it; we are rather to come out from it, and to be crucified to it; we are to regard it as a wilderness through which we are passing to our Fathers house, and in our passage through it to consider ourselves as strangers and pilgrims. If we meet with good accommodation and kind treatment, we are to be thankful; if we meet with briars and thorns in our way, we must console ourselves with the thought that it is the appointed way, and that every step still brings us nearer home. We are to be looking forward to our journeys end, and to be proceeding towards it, whatever be the weather, or whatever the road. Thus we are to fulfil our pilgrimage to the heavenly Canaan in the same spirit as did Abraham to the earthly.(Bush.)
When God chose Abraham (Neh. 9:7) it was an act of free and sovereign grace. He did not, on this occasion, make choice of Melchizedek, who was already in the Holy Land, and was faithfully sustaining there the offices of a king of righteousness and peace, and a priest of the Most High God. The Lord is found of those who seek Him not. He comes to Abraham dwelling afar off, and if not hostile, at least indifferent, to the truth; to him He reveals Himselfhim He chooseshim He calls. To Abraham, while yet ungodly, God, intending to justify the heathen through faith, preaches the Gospel, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed (Gal. 3:8).(Candlish.)
The call of Abraham was the first act of God towards the formation of a Church. It was the design of God that faith should proceed from one believer to all, in like manner as from one Saviour redemption should flow to all.
It is common to find that a nation imbibes the spirit of its founder. Nimrod, the founder of the Assyrian monarchy, was a conqueror, and the Assyrians were pre-eminently a conquering nation. But in the founder of the Jewish nation we find, not a conqueror, nor a law-giver, but a saint, remarkable only for this, that he lived with God; and therefore we may expect to meet with what is really the case, not a profane history, but the history of piety.(Robertson.)
Gen. 12:2. The promise, I will make of thee a great nation, required faith in a most eminent degree.
1. There was the barrier of a natural improbability. Sarai was barren, which was a difficulty in the way of his faith, hard to be overcome. Abraham felt that afterwards, and lent himself to a device for bringing about the promise by means which God had not appointed.
2. The promise could not receive sufficient fulfilment until after his death. A great nation can only be built up in the course of long centuries.
3. Abraham had not the encouragement of example. There was no nation then existing that could be called truly great. A believer has great encouragement when he can look back upon what God has done for His saints in the past, when he hears of the noble works that God did in their days; but Abraham had not this. He had to face things altogether new and untried.
A nation which God makes, though it may not actually fulfil the Divine ideal, must possess some elements of spiritual work not enjoyed by any other. Abraham was the father of a nation which preserved pure the revelation of God, and out of which the true monarch of human souls was to arise.
The promise had reference to things which could be but of small account to an eye of sense; but faith would find enough in it to satisfy the most enlarged desires. The objects, though distant, were worth waiting for. He should be the father of a great nation, and what was of greater account, and which was doubtless understood, that nation should be the Lords. God Himself would bless him; and this would be more than the whole world without it. He would also make his name great; not in the records of worldly fame, but in the history of the Church; and being himself full of the blessing of the Lord, it should be his to impart blessedness to the world. I will bless thee, and thou shalt be a blessing. This promise has been fulfilling ever since. All the true blessedness which the world is now, or shall hereafter be possessed of, is owing to Abraham and his posterity. Through them we have a Bible, a Saviour, and a Gospel. They are the stock on which the Christian Church is grafted. Their very dispersions and punishments have proved the riches of the world. What then shall be their recovery but life from the dead! It would seem that the conversion of the Jews, whenever it shall take place, will be a kind of resurrection to mankind. Such was the hope of this calling. And what could the friends of God or man desire more?(Fuller.)
What constitutes a great nation?
1. A nation where righteousness dwells is great. Abraham was accounted righteous before God, being justified by faith. He stamped his own spirit and character upon his nation, whose history has furnished long lines of remarkable saints.
2. A nation on which Gods blessing descends is great. No nation can be truly great that does not keep and cherish the revelation of God. There must be the possession of spiritual truth before the highest blessing can be enjoyed. It was this that made the Jews superior to other nations in the chief things which concern man.
(1) They had the most noble conceptions of God. Among the heathen nations the idea of God was debased by the most degrading conceptions. A few superior minds could reach to better and purer thoughts of the Divinity, yet how cold are their abstractions when compared with the majesty of the idea furnished by the Hebrew Scriptures! It was only in Judah that God was truly known, and in Israel that His name was truly great.
(2) They had the purest morality. What a contrast between the moral law of the Jews and that of the nations around them throughout the whole course of their history! Gods blessing conveys the inheritance of the highest moral principles.
(3) They felt that they were the subjects of Divine government. The religion of the Jews taught them that they were not under the rule of fate or chance, but of Providence. They learned to trace all their disasters to disobedience to God. What nation was ever taught as they, by so severe a discipline, that a people can only fail through lack of righteousness!
3. That nation is great which is a source of blessing to others. The Jewish nation gave the world the Scriptures and a Redeemer. No nation can be truly great from which the Word of God and the blessings of the Gospel do not go forth to others. To be the centre of spiritual life and light is the highest distinction.
His believing this so unhesitatingly and so manifestly with all his hearthis taking God simply at His word, asking no questions and raising no difficultiesis itself a wonder. He might have started many objections, and made many anxious inquiries. How can these things be? How can he, whose wife is barren, be the father of a great nation? How can he, who is a man of unclean lips, be at once so graciously received into favour, when his eyes have seen the King, the Lord of Hosts? And how is he to become so awful a sign of trial, and so fruitful a source of good, to his brethren, and to all men? But Abram stands not upon any such scruples. He takes the plain testimony of the God of gloryI will bless thee; I, who alone can bless, and whose high prerogative and right to bless none may questionI will bless thee; and if I justify, who is he that condemneth? It is enough. Abraham believesBe it unto me, Lord, according to thy wordand he is blessed in believing; blessed, as having his iniquity forgiven, his transgressions covered, his sin imputed no more, and his spirit freed from guile (Psa. 32:1-2; Rom. 4:6-8), even as the spirit of a little child is free from guile when he is found trusting at once, implicitly and for ever, his parents eye, word, and heart. But have we not in all this something more than an exercise of belief competent to the natural man? Have we not that faith which is the gift of God? (Eph. 2:8.)(Candlish.)
I will magnify, or make thy name great. This concerns his repute, because, being called from his own, he might justly fear disrespect among strangers. God encourageth him by this that He will make his name famous, that is for piety, virtue, goodness, and power. It contains
1. A greatening of all good, which is the ground of true honour and respect among the best.
2. A greatening of the fame and report of all this in the ears of the inhabitants of the earth. Now this was effected both in Abrams person and in his seed. And such a good and great name is a precious ointment, a sweet blessing.(Hughes).
Gen. 12:3. Such an assurance is the highest pledge of friendship and favour that can be given, and sets forth the privileges of the Lords chosen in the most impressive light. The strictest leagues and covenants of kings and princes contain no stronger bond of alliance than the engagement to regard each others friends and enemies as common friends and enemies.(Bush).
God considers as done to Himself the wrongs and insults done to His people.
God deals with nations according to their treatment of His people. The Church is a serious factor in the political history of the world.
God is in league for the offensive part, to be an enemy also unto his enemies. Two words are here used
1. That upon the part of the enemy signifieth to set light by, and so to vilify or reproach, which God takes notice of to Judges
2. The word upon Gods part is to curse unto perdition; so much is God incensed against the enemies of His covenanted ones.(Hughes).
In Abram is this blessing laid up as a treasure hid in a field to be realised in due time. All the families of mankind shall ultimately enter into the enjoyment of this unbounded blessing. Thus, when the Lord saw fit to select a man to preserve vital piety on the earth and to be the head of a race fitted to be the depository of a revelation of mercy, He at the same time designed that this step should be the means of effectually recalling the sin-enthralled world to the knowledge and love of Himself. The race was twice already since the fall put upon its probationonce under the promise of victory to the seed of the woman, and again under the covenant with Noah. In each of these cases, notwithstanding the growing light of revelation and accumulating evidence of the Divine forbearance, the race had apostatised from the God of mercy with lamentably few known exceptions. Yet undeterred by the gathering tokens of this second apostasy, and after reiterated practical demonstration to all men of the debasing, demoralising effects of sin, the Lord, with calm determination of purpose, sets about another step in the great process of removing the curse of sin, dispensing the blessing of pardon, and eventually drawing all the nations to accept His mercy. The special call of Abram contemplates the calling of the Gentiles as its final issue, and is therefore to be regarded as one link in a series of wonderful events, by which the legal obstacles of the Divine mercy are to be taken out of the way, and the spirit of the Lord is to prevail with still more and more of men to return to God.Murphy.
The passage contains a clear intimation of what God Himself, whose judgment is according to truth, regards as the source of the truest and richest blessings to the children of men. It is not wealth, fame, power, sensual pleasure, or mental endowments, but the gift of His own Son as a Saviour, the bestowment of the Holy Spirit, the pardon of sin, peace of conscience, and the high and purifying hopes connected with eternal life. This is the inheritance that makes us truly rich; and utterly vain, foolish, and fatal it is to seek it from any other source.(Bush).
The first promise of a Messiah was victory through the seed of the woman. The second promise was blessing for all mankind. Thus God gradually reveals His gracious purpose with ever-enlarging ground of encouragement and hope.
ILLUSTRATIONS
BY THE
REV. WM. ADAMSON
Abram and History! Gen. 12:1-20.
(1) The unchanged habits of the East, says Stanley, render it a kind of living Pompeii. The outward appearances, which, in the case of the Greeks and Romans, we knew only through art and writingthrough marble, fresco, and parchmentin the case of Jewish history we know through the forms of actual men living and moving before us, wearing the same garb, speaking almost the same language as Abram and the patriarchs.
(2) From Ur of the Chaldees, remarks Landels, comes forth, in one sense, the germ of all that is good throughout succeeding generations. His appearance, like that of some great luminary in the heavens, marks an epoch in the worlds history. A stream of influence flows from himnot self-originated, but deriving its existence from those heaven-clouds of Divine dew of blessing resting upon this lofty summit of his soul.
(3) Widening as it flows, and promoting, in spite of the occasional checks and hindrances it meets with, spiritual life and health, that stream is vastly more deserving of exploration and research than the streams of the Lualaba and Niger, or the sources of the Nile and Zambesi. Such exploration and research will be productive of incalculable benefit to those who engage therein with right motives and aspirations.
Truth springs like harvest from the well-ploughed field,
And the soul feels it has not searched in vain.Bonar.
Father of Faithful! Gen. 12:1-9. Here we have
1. The Call (Gen. 12:1);
2. The Command (Gen. 12:1);
3. The Covenant (Gen. 12:2);
4. The Conditions (Gen. 12:3);
5. The Compliance (Gen. 12:4);
6. The Conversion (Gen. 12:7); and
7. The Considerations.The call was from God. The command was to leave his native land. The covenant was protection and preservation, etc. The condition was that of simple trust and confidence. The compliance was that Abraham journeyed first to Haran, thence to Canaan. The conversion of Abraham was evidently the erection of the altar, erected wherever he pitched his tent. And the considerations are
(1) That God calls and commands each of the sons of men to come out from a world lying in wickedness, and make life a pilgrimage to heaven.
(2) That God covenants and conditions with each of the sons of men obeying this call to crown their lives with loving-kindness and tender mercies.
(3) That God counts and compensates for all sacrifices and sufferings endured in complying with His call with the Crown of Life that fadeth not away.
One of the chivalry of Christ! He tells us how to stand
With rootage like the palm, amid the maddest whirl of sand.Massey.
Darkness and Light! Gen. 12:1.
(1) In the early Genesis of Creation we have the material chaos and darkness, succeeded by the introduction of light. Here we have God saying in the moral world, as He had uttered before in the natural, Let there be light. As Stanley Leathes says: The light was making itself manifest after the Babel chaos and gloom. And that which made manifest was light. The proof that it was light was in the light which it diffused; just as when, with closed eyes, I am told that a light has been brought into the midnight room of darkness, I open them to have proof that there is light. Abraham could have no higher proof.
(2) Other gods had not cared for himhad held no communication with himhad not made themselves known to him as living beings; but this Being had. He had come out of the darkness and made light all about Him. He had come out of the silence and spoken with the voice of the Word of God. He had convinced Abram that He lived, and that from Him all living creatures enjoyed life. Abram believed God; and obedience quickly followed.
(3) When Richard I. returned in disguise to England, after his escape from the Austrian dungeons, the peasants required evidence that he was indeed the king. Richard appeared amongst them; he spoke to them; he performed such feats of strength as Richard only was known to achieve; he showed them his signet-ring. They were satisfied. Believing that Richard was himself again, they immediately tendered him their allegiance, and complied with his royal requirements to proceed with him. Faith, i.e. true faith, cannot be separated one from the other,they are more intimately joined than the Siamese twins.
Therefore look and believe, for works will follow spontaneous,
Even as the day the sun; for Christian works are no more than
Animate faith and love, as flowers are the animate springtide.Longfellow.
Demand and Supply! Gen. 12:1.
(1) That God called Abram is the Mosaic utterance under Divine Inspiration. But had there been no craving in Abrams mind and heart, no yearning after the Infinite, no aspirations after a knowledge of the true God, O that I knew where I might find Him? Was there no demand answering to the supply? Was there no craving to be met by the gratification? Surely. It is only reasonable to suppose that Jehovah responded to the heart-hunger of Abram. To him the bread of idol-knowledge and of creature-worship was as bone-dust or fruit of Sodom. The hunger was appeased only at the cost of moral dyspepsiaof spiritual leanness. The aspiration became intenser.
(2) The law of growth through craving is, as Ladd remarks, fundamental; it is capable of illustration from every form of animal life. Put life into matter, and you get as one of its earliest exhibitions the same phenomenon, which remains with the life until its extinction; you get craving, which, being met by supply, becomes the minister of higher life and growth. In the souls of men this instinctive craving under various forms acts as the spur of the rider to drive men towards the Divine, in which alone they can find satisfaction and rest.
Every inmost aspiration is Gods angel undefiled;
And in every O my Father! slumbers deep Here, My child.Dscheladeddin.
Abrams Aspiration! Gen. 12:2.
(1) No more beautiful description of the methods of intellectual and spiritual vitality can anywhere be found than is given us in the Duke of Argylls Reign of Law. He unfolds the relations of the external force of the earth to the internal force which moves the birds wing.
(2) What God does for nature He does not deny to man. He puts a force in the soul. That soul can float beside the albatross, at rest, where there is nothing else at rest in the tremendous turmoil of its own stormy seas, which has received the Divine Force.
(3) Under Divine tuition Abram was trained to beat down resistance from without by force that answered from within. Shall we say that God enabled Abram to useas the bird uses the breezes of airhis souls yearning after Himself?
God found one worthy to be drawn
From out the deepening social night,
And set him as a star of dawn,
And herald of the greater Light.
Abrams Separation! Gen. 12:3. We may apply, says Gibson, the same term to Abram, which the Apostle Paul applies to himself, when he says, Separated unto the Gospel of God. As a skilful schoolmaster trains his pupil by a regular graduated series of lessons, so God trained Abram by a series of separations. His first lesson, and one in the acquiring of which the patriarch proved an apt scholar, was when he separated from Ur of the Chaldees by Divine command (Gen. 12:1). Then another lesson had to be acquired when he was again summoned to leave Charran behind. Having graduated in this standard, he underwent separation from Canaan itself (Gen. 12:6), when he erected his tent as a pilgrim and stranger in the land, and his altar as a mountain, from whose lofty summit faiths eye might descry the heavenly home on high. Again, we find him at school in Egypt, learning the lesson of separation from the world more and more. And this repeated separation was not for his sake only, or that of his descendants by birth, but for the worlds sake. In thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed. As a good man has wide sympathies and aims in the education of his child, so with God. If the Christian father educates his son for the sake of his fellow-creatures as well as for his own, surely much more would the Divine Father be educating Abraham for the sake of all the families of the world.
At Gods commandment self-exiled,
Alone he left his native clan,
Led forth by faith, like a blind man
Led by a simple-hearted child.
Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell
PART TWENTY-SIX
THE STORY OF ABRAHAM: THE PILGRIMAGE OF FAITH
(Genesis, ch. 12; cf. Heb. 11:8-19)
1. The Biblical Account
1 Now Jehovah said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy fathers house, unto the land that I will show thee: 2 and I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and be thou a blessing: 3 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, 5. So Abram went, as Jehovah had spoken unto him; and Lot went with him: and Abram was seventy and five years old when he departed out of Haran. 5 And Abram took Sarai his wife, and Lot his brothers son, and all their substance that they had gathered, and the souls that they had gotten in Haran; and they went forth to go into the land of Canaan; and into the land of Canaan they came. 6 And Abram passed through the land unto the place of Shechem, unto the oak of Moreh. And the Canaanite was then in the land. 7 And Jehovah appeared unto Abram, and said, Unto thy seed will I give this land: and there builded he an altar unto Jehovah, who appeared unto him. 8 And he removed from thence unto the mountain on the east of Beth-el, and pitched his tent, having Beth-el on the west, and Ai on the east: and there he builded an altar unto Jehovah, and called upon the name of Jehovah. 9 And Abram journeyed, going on still toward the South.
10 And there was a famine in the land: and Abram went down into Egypt to sojourn there; for the famine was sore in the land. 11 And it came to pass, when he was come near to enter into Egypt, that he said unto Sarai his wife, Behold now, I know that thou art a fair woman to look upon: 12 and it will come to pass, when the Egyptians shall see thee, that they will say, This is his wife: and they will kill me, but they will save thee alive. 13 Say, I pray thee, thou art my sister; that it may be well with me for thy sake, and that my soul may live became of thee. 14 And it came to pass, that, when Abram was come into Egypt, the Egyptians beheld the woman that she was very fair. 15 And the princes of Pharaoh saw her, and praised her to Pharaoh: and the woman was taken into Pharaohs house. 16 And he dealt well with Abram for her sake: and he had sheep, and oxen, and he-asses, and men-servants, and maid-servants, and she-asses, and camels. 17 And Jehovah plagued Pharaoh and his house with great plagues because of Sarai, Abrams wife. 18 And Pharaoh called Abram, and said, What is this that thou hast done unto me? why didst thou not tell me that she was thy wife? 19 why saidst thou, She is my sister, so that I took her to be my wife? now therefore behold thy wife, take her, and go thy way. 20 And Pharaoh gave men charge concerning him: and they brought him on the way, and his wife, and all that he had.
2. Ur of the Chaldees
It should be noted that the earliest civilizationsthose with which the actual history of man beginsflourished, as a rule, in relation geographically to the great river systems. This location was due to the fact that the various peoples learned to provide for a more abundant (temporal) life by the development of irrigation to enhance the fertility of the soil. Moreover, with the early invention of the sailboat water became the chief means of transportation. Most of the big cities of the ancient world were built on these waterways, e.g., the Nile, the Tigris-Euphrates, the Indus, and (probably) the Hwang-Ho and Wei, Those which were established later on large bodies of water (gulfs and seas) were, according to Thucydides, the Greek historian, built some thirty to fifty miles inland for protection against pirates. Each of these inland cities, therefore, had its harbor port, e.g., Rome and Ostia, Athens and the Piraeus, and Miletus, which served as a harbor port for several inland cities (cf. Act. 20:17).
Early in the history of the Near East the Tigris-Euphrates valley was made a very fertile area by irrigation. This area is commonly known in history by the name of Mesopotamia, a word meaning between the rivers. In Egypt, of course, the annual inundations of the Nile provided the necessary ingredients for fertilization on both sides of the river.
When the curtain first goes up on the stage of human history we find wave after wave of nomadic peoples pouring into the Near East both from the western desert and from the northern area around the Caspian Sea. As far back as the fourth millennium before Christ the central area of Mesopotamia was known as Akkad or Accad (cf. Gen. 10:10, the land of Shinar; Isa. 11:11, Dan. 1:2), and the southern part, just above the Persian Gulf, as Sumer: hence the Accadians and Sumerians. From the first the peoples who occupied the territory now known generally as the Near East were of Semitic origin. Beyond the Mesopotamian area, that is, to the east of it, Indo-European (Aryan) peoples began to take over; among these were the Medes and the Elamites, some of whom evidently pushed into the Indus Valley; these were followed later by the Kassites. The earliest prevailing language among these peoples was the Sanskrit.
Inscriptions indicate that an early Semitic dynasty flourished, founded by Sargon, who built a new capital, Akade, the exact location of which is unknown today, Sargon established his hegemony over Akkad, Sumer, Elam, Syria and Anatolia (the early name for what is known today as Asia Minor). After an interval of some twenty-five years, Sargons grandson, Naramsin, succeeded to the hegemony and proved himself to be another very strong ruler. This Empire came to be known as the Akkadian Empire and survived for about two centuries (c. 23502150 B.C.).
Later, when Babylon rose to pre-eminence in the area, the name Akkad came to be used to designate the whole of northern Babylonia. Prior to the Early Dynastic Period initiated by Sargons conquests, Lower Mesopotamia had been only a cluster of city-states constantly at war among themselvesUr, Eridu, Babylon (Babel), Larsa, Erech, Kish, Lagash, Nippur, etc. (cf. again Gen. 10:10). Later, toward the end of the third millenium, the Amurr (westerners)the Biblical Amorites, Gen. 15:16; Gen. 48:22; Deu. 20:17, etc.a new wave of Semites began pouring into Mesopotamia from the West. Included in this folk movement, apparently of several closely related ethnic groups, must have been the early Arameans. It seems evident that these western Semites also occupied Palestine about the beginning of the second millennium. Some of these peoples who occupied the Palestinian area took over northern Canaan (note archaeological discoveries at Ugarit) and Syria as far, as its southern coast. These people entrenched themselves at Mari on the Euphrates in Upper Mesopotamia (see archaeological discoveries there also). The zenith of Amorite political power was reached in the First Dynasty of Babylon in the days of the great king and. lawgiver, Hammurabi (c. 17281686 B.C.). (It is intriguing to note that various records at Mari and elsewhere in Mesopotamia, mention another troublesome group, the Apiru or Habirua name that is thought by many scholars to be equivalent to the name Hebrews.)
Following the strong Semitic Dynasty of Agade (23502150 B.C.), the Second Dynasty Ur (of which little seems to be known), and a subsequent cultural eclipse under the Gutians (21502070), the Third Dynasty of Ur (20701960) was ushered in, in which a succession of strong rulers led in a Sumerian renaissance. The population of Ur is estimated to have been more than half a million souls during this period. The mightiest building project of the time was the great ziggurat erected by Ur-Nammu and his son, Shulgi. This powerful Dynasty came to an end when the Amorites of Mari and the Elamites from the east took over southern Mesopotamia. The city was later brought under the control of Hammurabi and was destroyed by his son, when it rebelled against Amorite power. The whole area was further ravished by the barbarian Kassites, and the city of Ur went into total eclipse until the rebuilding of it was undertaken by the Chaldeans Nebuchadnezzar II and Nabonidus. Further improvements were made later by the Persians under Cyrus.
Folk movements became more numerous in the early part of the second millennium before Christ. Other ethnic peoples came into the picture. Among these were the Hittites of Asia Minor, the partially Semitic Hyksos who had imposed their rule on Egypt from about 1700 to 1570 B.C., and the most puzzling of all, the Hurrians.
The Hurrians (Biblical Horites: cf. Gen. 14:6; Gen. 36:30; Deu. 2:12) poured into the Fertile Crescent in a steady stream: as Cornfeld puts it, and into the political vacuum created by the downfall of the Sumerian (Third) Dynasty of Ur. They evidently originated from the Caucasian and Armenian mountains and infiltrated the whole Tigris-Euphrates area. They were not strictly a warlike people: hence they penetrated every section of Western Asia, including Syria and Palestine. They seem to have been under the leadership of an Aryan upper class. They gave much attention to horse-breeding, and in battle they used the horse and the chariot. They attained their greatest prominence in the kingdom of the Mitanni (14701350) which extended from east of the upper Tigris valley to the north Syrian coast. One of the best known Hurrian sites is Nuzi (or Nuzu), where thousands of documents were discovered by a Harvard University expedition from 1925 to 1931 under the direction of Edward Chiera. More than 20,000 cuneiform tablets from the second millenium, brought to light at Nuzi, constitute a primary source of information concerning life in northern Mesopotamia, the district (Haran) where the Biblical patriarchs lived for a time and to which they sent to find suitable wives for their sons.
By 2000 B.C. various groups of Indo-European origin had infiltrated Asia Minor. These were organized into a complex of city-states. The most influential of these groups became known as the Hittites. The capital of the ancient Hittite Empire was Hattusas (modern Boghazkoy), ninety miles east of modern Ankara, on the great bend of the Halys River. Excavations began at this site in 1906, and have brought to light the story of a once powerful empire, as evidenced by the fact that one of their kings, Mursilis, captured Aleppo in 1530, then thrust across Hurrian territories, raided northern Mesopotamia, and sacked Babylon. A peace treaty between the Hittite king, Hattusilis III (c. 12751250), and the Egyptian Pharaoh Rameses II is the oldest such treaty known to students of ancient history, and indicates that the Hittites were powerful enough to stop the Egyptian army in its tracks in a battle at Kadesh (c. 1296 B.C.) Beleaguered, however, by Hurrian aggressiveness and inner political conflicts, the Hittites finally withdrew into Asia Minor where their influences are felt even down to our own time. The Hittite kingdom came to an end when overrun by the so-called Sea peoples from the eastern Mediterranean, many of whom seem to have been of Cretan origin (e.g., the Philistines). The Hittites flourished at about the dawn of the Iron Age. (Iron was discovered about 1500 B.C. somewhere, in the area around the Black Sea.) The Hittite monopoly on iron gave them formidable power for a time, but this power declined as other peoples began to make use of iron weapons. Outposts of Hittite culture survived in northern Syria: these Hittite principalities were those to which the Old Testament continued to refer for several centuries. (Cf. Gen. 15:20, Num. 13:29, Jos. 3:10, 1Ki. 11:1, 2Ki. 7:6, 2Ch. 1:17).
The Hyksos have been described as a motley horde bent solely on conquest and looting. They invaded Egypt about 1800 (or 1700?) B.C. and kept control of the country until about 1570 B.C., when they were driven out and chased into Palestine by the Pharaohs of the 18 th Dynasty. Several of the Palestinian cities were destroyed during the sixteenth century, and the Hyksos type of fortifications which have been excavated at Megiddo, Shechem, and Lachish, furnish evidence of the savage intensity of these campaigns.
The last great empires of the Fertile Crescent were, of course, those which followed the migrations described in the foreging paragraphs; hence, their history does not have too much relevance to that of the Patriarchal Age. These were, in the order named, the Assyrian, Chaldean (late Babylonian), Persian, and Macedonian (the shortlived empire of Alexander the Great). The Roman Empire was the last and most extensive and most powerful, having extended its rule over the entire Fertile Crescent, including North Africa, Egypt, and the whole of the Near East and Mesopotamia.
The departure of Abram from Ur is correlated in time with the Third Dynasty (the most powerful) of that city. The exact location of the original site has long been a matter of debate. The Moslems traditionally have identified it with Urfa, a city in Upper Mesopotamia near Haran (the Greeks called it Edessa). The location which commonly has been identified with Abrams Ur is in Southern Mesopotamia some 160 miles from the present head of the Persian Gulf. This identification originated in the late nineteenth century when so many references to Ur were found in the inscriptions which were numerous and widespread throughout the Mesopotamian area. The discoveries made by the joint expedition of the British Museum and the Museum of the University of Pennsylvania, under Charles Leonard Woolley (19221934), set forth voluminously in official reports, seem to verify the Southern Mesopotamian identification. However, the debate has been revived in recent years by C. H. Gordon and other archaeologists who conclude that the original Ur was not Urffa, but Ura, another town near Haran, which was under the control of the Hittites. DBA, 602: Gordon treats Abraham as a merchant-prince or Tamkarum from the realm of the Hittites. His three main arguments are: (1) There is strong tradition connecting Ur of the Chaldees with Northern Mesopotamia. (2) The picture of the patriarchs as city-merchants fits known facts. (3) The term Chaldees can be adequately applied to Northern Mesopotamia. The consensus of archeblogical scholarship, however, still runs preponderantly in favor of the traditional Sumerian Ur as Abrams point of departure on his pilgrimage to the Land of Promise.
Excavations at Sumerian Ur indicate that a highly advanced culture flourished there at a very early age. It is the Ur of Abrams time, however, in which we are particularly interested here. Like all these cities of Mesopotamia, Ur had its sacred enclosure with its complex of temples and shrines. The ruins of the great temple-tower (ziggurat, which, we are told, once rose from the plain along the Euphrates to a height of seventy feet), built by Ur-Nammu, founder of the prosperous and powerful Third Dynasty, still dominate the site. Throughout the history of Babylonia down to the middle of the first millenium B.C., this sacred area with its ziggurat was the most important temple area in Mesopotamia: indeed, it was the place to which the devout made pilgrimages and which they sought for a place of burial. Openings in the outer city walls which were oval in shape allowed boats to enter the city itself. It could be said of the people of Ur, as said later by the Apostle on the Hill of Ares, of the Athenian people and their philosophers, that they were indeed very religious (or superstitious, Act. 17:22). The ruling deity at Ur was Nanna (known among the Semites as Sin). The city abounded in many other temples and shrines dedicated to other gods. There were also many public chapels, wayside shrines, household chapels, and other evidences that idolatry flourished throughout the city, including terra cotta figurines indicative of the Cult of the Earth-Mother, which was often the most debased form of pagan religious ritual. The following note (HSB, 21) is important: Abraham has often been conceived of as an ignorant nomad, an illiterate and uneducated ancient. This is not so. Archaeological discoveries have shown that Ur of the Chaldees was a center of advanced culture. There were libraries in the schools and temples. The people used grammars, dictionaries, encyclopedias, and reference works along with textbooks on mathematics, religion, and politics. What was true for Babylonia was also true for Egypt where more than a thousand years before Abrahams time, writing was well established. It is quite possible, therefore, that Abraham left written records which were incorporated in the Pentateuch. (For a study of the archeological discoveries relevant to the Patriarchal Age, at Ugarit, Hattusas, Mari, Nuzi, Larsa, Nippur, Lagash, Uruk (Erech), etc., The Biblical World, edited by Pfeiffer, published by Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, is highly recommended.)
3. The Call of Abram (Gen. 12:1-3)
(CECG, 129) in re Gen. 12:1-5, as follows: An attentive consideration will suffice to show, from the close resemblance of the phraseology in this passage and in Act. 7:2-3, that Moses refers to one and the same call with Stephen; and that he now only resumes, in his characteristic manner, the subject of Abrams departure from his native land, which had been briefly related in ch. Gen. 11:31, in order to furnish some important details. In fact the narrative in the first five verses of this chapter is merely an expansion of the short notice in the preceding one; and therefore our translators have properly rendered the verb in the Pluperfect tense, had said. This revelation is not to be accounted for by representing it, as one writer has recently done, to be only the newly increased light of his inner consciousness, or by saying, with another, that the Lord of Abram was as much a creature of human imagination as a Jupiter or an Apollo. In whatever way it was made to himwhether in a dream, by a vision, or by a visible manifestation (the language of Stephen, Act. 7:2, implies that it was some glorious theophany, perhaps like the supernatural light and words that suddenly converted Paula miracle well adapted to the conceptions of a Zabian idolater)Abram was thoroughly persuaded that it was a divine communication; and it was probably accompanied by such special instructions as to the being and character of the Most High God, the possessor of heaven and earth, as carried conviction to his understanding and heart. (It is impossible for me to accept the view that Abram had drifted away from the knowledge of the true God so far as to share the idolatry of some of the members of his family: the Scripture story does not intimate such a notion, and surely Abrams subsequent walk of faith invalidates it. C.C.).
Whitelaw (PCG, 117) writes: Designed to trace the outward development of Gods kingdom on the earth, the narrative now concentrates its attention on one of the foregoing Terachites, whose remarkable career it sketches with considerable minuteness of detail, from the period of his emigration from Chaldea to his death at Hebron in the land of Canaan. Distinguished as a man of undoubted superiority both of character and mind, the head at least of two powerful and important races, and standing, as one might say, on the threshold of the historical era, it is yet chiefly as his life and fortunes connect with the Divine purpose of salvation that they find a place in the inspired record. The progress of infidelity during the four centuries that had elapsed since the Flood, the almost universal corruption of even the Shemite portion of the human family, had conclusively demonstrated the necessity of a second Divine interposition, if the knowledge of salvation were not to be completely banished from the earth. Accordingly, the son of Terah was selected to be the founder of a new nation, in which the light of gospel truth might be deposited for preservation until the fulness of the times, and through which the promise of the Gospel might be conducted forward to its ultimate realization in the manifestation of the womans seed. Partly to prepare him for the high destiny of being the progenitor of the chosen nation, and partly to illustrate the character of that gospel with which he was to be entrusted, he was summoned to renounce his native country and kinsmen in Chaldea, and venture forth upon an untried journey in obedience to the call of heaven, to a land which he should afterward receive for an inheritance. In a series of successive theophanies or Divine manifestations, around which the various incidents of his life are groupedin Ur of the Chaldees (Act. 7:2), at Moreh in Canaan (Gen. 12:7), near Bethel (ibid. 13), at Mamre (ibid. 15, 17); and on Moriah (ibid. 22)he is distinctly promised three thingsa land, a seed, and a blessingas the reward of his compliance with the heavenly invitation; and the confident persuasion both of the reality of these gracious promises and of the Divine ability and willingness to fulfill them forms the animating spirit and guiding principle of his being, in every situation of life, whether of trial or of difficulty, in which he is subsequently placed.
Murphy (MG, 261) writes to the point, in these statements: The narrative now takes leave of the rest of the Shemites, as well as the other branches of the human family, and confines itself to Abram. It is no part of the design of Scripture to trace the development of worldiness. It marks its source, and indicates the law of its downward tendency; but then it turns away from the dark detail, to devote its attention to the way by which light from heaven may again pierce the gloom of the fallen heart. Here, then, we have the starting of a new spring of spiritual life in the human race.
Note the following also (SIBG, 230): V. 1. While Abram was in Ur of the Chaldees, God appeared to him, probably in human shape, Act. 7:2, as He did at least eight times afterward (Gen. 12:6-7; Gen. 13:3-4; Gen. 15:1; Gen. 17:1; Gen. 18:1; Gen. 21:12; Gen. 22:1; Gen. 22:15), and called him to leave his country and his fathers house, which, for some time past, had been infected with idolatry (Jos. 24:2, 2Co. 6:17, Rev. 18:4, Isa. 41:2, Neh. 9:7). He, readily surrendering all for the sake of Christ, (Psa. 45:10-11, Luk. 14:26), in obedience to the divine command, and relying on His direction and protection, went forth, not knowing whither the Lord intended to lead him (Heb. 11:8). But as they had stopped too long in Haran, I suppose the call here mentioned was one which he received anew after the death of his father. (This last view, of course, has always been a matter of controversy.) Payne (OHH, 36): Abraham grew up in Ur just before the rise of Dyn. III and the Sumerian renaissance. Here, in a center for the worship of the moon god Sin, God called Abraham to a life of pilgrimage to the celestial city (Heb. 11:13-16). Gen. 15:7 (cf. Neh. 9:7) notes that God was responsible for Abrams movement from Ur; but there is no information in the O.T. on the precise form of the call. Act. 7:2-4 reveals, however, that God appeared to him there and told him to move out. It was by faith (Heb. 11:8), the destination not yet given. (This verse must apply to the call in Ur, for by Haran he knew where he was going, Gen. 12:5); and Abram obeyed. He seems to have persuaded his father, for Terah led the party (Gen. 11:31), which included Terah, Abram, Sarai, and Lot; Nahors family stayed but followed to Haran later (Gen. 24:10, Gen. 27:43).
Note the Call and the Fulfillment. Gen. 12:2Abraham was made a great nation. His posterity by Ishmael, by the sons of Keturah, and by Esau, were exceedingly numerous (Gen. 16:10, Gen. 17:20, Gen. 21:13, Gen. 25:1-18; ch. 36; Num., ch. 31; Judg., chs. 6, 7). His seed of promise, by Jacob, were as the stars of heaven and the dust of the earth in multitude (Gen. 13:16, Gen. 15:5, Gen. 22:17, Gen. 28:3; Gen. 28:14; Gen. 32:12; Num., ch. 1, also Gen. 23:10; Heb. 11:12; 1 Chron., ch. 21; 1Ki. 4:20; 2 Chron., ch. 17; Jer. 33:22). His spiritual seed, followers of his faith and obedience, are still more numerous, a multitude which no man can number (Psa. 2:8-9; Psa. 22:27-30; also Psalms 62, 88; Isa., chs. 52, 59, 60; Rev. 7:4-9; Rev. 11:15). All the spiritual children of Jesus, his eminent seed, are included herein (Isa. 53:10-12, Gal. 3:26-29). God blessed Abram (1) with the numerous seed mentioned, (2) with Canaan, as the future property of part of them, (3) with Christ, as his eminent seed (Gal. 3:16), with all spiritual blessings in Christ (Gal. 3:14, Eph. 1:3). Abram was a blessing (1) to his friends and servants, who were instructed by him (Gen. 14:14; Gen. 18:19), (2) to his posterity, who were blessed for his sake (Exo. 3:6-8, Lev. 26:42, Gen. 17:20), (3) to the world, as an eminent pattern of faith and holiness (Rom., ch. 4), and as the progenitor of Christ the Savior (Gal. 3:13; Gal. 3:16). God did and will remarkably befriend and prosper the friends of Abram and his natural seed, but especially of Jesus Christ and his spiritual seed; and did and will remarkably punish their enemies (Jos. 2:9, Gen. 15:13-14, Exo. 17:8-16; Mat. 10:42; Mat. 25:41-46). All the families of the earth are blessed in Abram. He was of great service to the Canaanites, in imparting revelation to some of them, or in setting before them all an engaging example of virtue. His seed of promise, and especially his spiritual seed, are useful on that account, and have been and are still the means of the prosperity or protection of nations (Isa. 6:13; Isa. 10:24-25, Mat. 24:22). But it is properly in his seed (Christ) that men are blessed. Multitudes of nations receive much outward happiness, and the dispensation of gospel ordinances, in consequence of his undertaking for his people (Mat. 24:24, Isa., chs. 35, 49, 50, also Gen. 6:13). And believers, gathered out of all nations, are blessed in him with temporal, spiritual and eternal blessings (Gal. 3:16, Act. 3:25-26, Eph. 1:3, Psa. 72:17-19, Isa. 45:17-25). It is easy to see, that the subsequent promises and threatenings, nay, the doctrines and laws, mentioned in Scripture, are but an enlarged exposition of these two verses; and the whole fate of the Jewish and gospel church, nay, of the saints in heaven and the lost in hell, are but one continued fulfillment thereof. Gen. 12:3The command given to Abraham involved great personal sacrificescountry, kindred, and home; and also great faithhe knew not where he was going. But the blessing promised was most cheering and comprehensive. It embraced himself, all who favored and honored him, the whole nation that was to spring from him, and all the families of the earth. Abraham by faith saw in this last promise the most glorious and blessed of all truthsthe atoning work of the Messiah (Act. 3:25, Gal. 3:8). (See SIBG, p. 230). Note that in calling the fleshly seed of Abram, God did not abandon the other families of the earth, but was in fact making provision for their future spiritual welfare also.
Murphy (MG, 263): In all Gods teachings the near and the sensible come before the far and the conceivable, the present and the earthly before the eternal and the heavenly. Thus Abrams immediate acts of self-denial are his leaving his country, his birthplace, his home. The promise to him is to be made a great nation, be blessed, and have a great name in the new land which the Lord would show him. This is unspeakably enhanced by his being made a blessing to all nations. God pursues this mode of teaching for several important reasons. First, the sensible and the present are intelligible to those who are taught. The Great Teacher begins with the known, and leads the mind forward to the unknown. If he had begun with things too high, too deep, or too far from the range of Abrams mental vision, he would not have come into relation with Abrams mind. It is superfluous to say that he might have enlarged Abrams view in proportion to the grandeur of the conceptions to be revealed. On the same principle he might have made Abram cognizant of all present and all developed truth. On the same principle he might have developed all things in an instant of time, and so have had done with creation and providence at once. Secondly, the present and the sensible are the types of the future and the conceivable; the land is the type of the better land; the nation of the spiritual nation; the temporal blessing of the eternal blessing; the earthly greatness of the name of the heavenly. And let us not suppose that we are arrived at the end of all knowledge. We pique ourselves on our advance in spiritual knowledge beyond the age of Abram. But even we may be in the very infancy of mental development. There may be a land, a nation, a blessing, a great name, of which our present realizations or conceptions are but the types. Any other supposition would be a large abatement from the sweetness of hopes overflowing cup. Thirdly, those things which God now promises are the immediate form of his bounty, the very gifts he begins at the moment to bestow. God has his gift to Abram ready in his hand in a tangible form. He points to it and says, This is what thou presently needest; this I give thee, with my blessing and favor. But, fourthly, these are the earnest and the germ of all temporal and eternal blessing. Man is a growing thing, whether as an individual or a race. God graduates his benefits according to the condition and capacity of the recipients. In the first boon of his good-will is the earnest of what he will continue to bestow on those who continue to walk in his ways. And as the present is the womb of the future, so is the external the symbol of the internal, the material the shadow of the spiritual, in the order of the divine blessing. And as events unfold themselves in the history of man and conceptions in his soul within, so are doctrines gradually opened up in the Word of God, and progressively revealed to the soul by the Spirit of God. (Cf. Isa. 28:9-10, Mar. 4:28, 1Co. 15:42-49, Heb. 10:1, Eph. 1:13-14, Col. 1:12; 2Pe. 1:5-11; 2Pe. 3:18).
The Abrahamic Covenant, which is mentioned several times in Genesis (cf. Gen. 12:2-3; Gen. 12:7; Gen. 13:14-17; chs. 15, 17; ch. 18; Gen. 21:12-13; Gen. 22:9-18) was essentially a covenant of promise; the only requirement was that Abram should respond in faith and trust to Gods calling him away from his land and his family. And, although subsequent ramifications of the covenant occur in Genesis, the two basic features remain constant throughout. These are the land and the descendants. The progeny of Abraham was to be a blessing to all and Abraham was guaranteed a son through whom his line would be perpetuated. This son, Isaac, therefore, came to be known as the child of promise, and the land to which Abram journeyed became designated the land of promise (Exo. 12:25, Deu. 19:8-10, Jos. 23:5, Act. 7:4-5, Gal. 4:22-31; Gen. 17:15-19; Heb. 11:9-12; Heb. 11:17-19, etc.). Green (UBG, 163): In the original promise and in the renewal of it upon two occasions of unusual solemnity, one when the Lord signified his approval of Abrahams unfaltering faith by coming as his guest in human form, and again as a reward of his most signal act of obedience, the blessing is set before him in its most ample sweep. But during all the intervening period of long expectancy of his promised child the divine communications made to him from time to time were designed to keep alive his faith in that particular promise, whose fulfillment was so long delayed; hence, mention is merely made of his numerous seed, and of the land which they were to occupy, alike in Gen. 13:14-17, Gen. 15:5-7; Gen. 15:18, which the critics assign to J, and in Gen. 17:4-8, which they give to P. There is no occasion here for the assumption of different sources.
Note, in this connection, JB (29): As a result of Gods call and promise of posterity Abraham cuts off all earthly ties and with his childless wife, Gen. 11:30, sets out for an unknown land. It is Abrahams first act of faith; it will be renewed when the promise is repeated, Gen. 15:5-6, and put to the test when God asks for the surrender of Isaac who was the fruit of that promise, ch. 22. To Abrahams unquestioning acts of faith the chosen people owes its existence and destiny, Heb. 11:8-19. Not only Abrahams physical descendants, but all who, in virtue of the same faith, become his sons, will have their share in that destiny, as the Apostle shows, Romans 4, Gal. 3:7.
Although the emphasis in the Abrahamic promise is on the land and the seed, in its fullness the promise is a sevenfold one, as follows: (1) I will make of thee a great nation. The phrase, great nation, of course, implies infinitely more than great in number. Since the greatness is of Gods making, it involves true greatness in every sense. If ever there was a great nation, it was Israel. Israel achieved true greatness in her preservation of the knowledge of the living and true God, and Israel was great, inconceivably great, in her presentation to the world of the Messiah, the worlds Redeemer. (2) I will bless thee, This statement refers to Abram himself. A man is blessed when due to the gracious working of God all goes well with him (cf. Gen. 39:5); the things that he undertakes thrives; and true success crowns all his endeavors. (3) I will make thy name great. Note the various names given to him: the father of a multitude (Gen. 17:5), a prince of God (Gen. 23:6); the man in Gods confidence (Gen. 18:17-19); a prophet (Gen. 20:7); the servant of God (Psa. 105:6); and the friend of God (Jas. 2:23). (4) And be thou a blessing. This expresses something that God does. God is the one who in the last analysis makes Abram to be a true blessing unto others. But at the same time, a moral responsibility of Abrams is involved: He should do his part that he may become a blessing to others. Consequently the imperative, be thou a blessing. (5) I will bless them that bless thee, So intimately is God concerned in having men take the proper attitude toward this prophet and servant of His that whoever wishes Abram well, to him will God do good. (6) And him that curseth thee will I curse. The deeper reason behind all this is that Abram will be so closely identified with the good work of God, that to curse him comes to be almost the equivalent of cursing God. (7) And in thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed. This word reaches back to the divided families (Gen. 10:5; Gen. 10:20; Gen. 10:31) of the earth, divided by their sins, as well as to the curse of Gen. 3:17 which is now to be replaced by a blessing. A blessing so great that its effect shall extend to all the families of the earth can be thought of only in connection with the promised Savior. The word, therefore, is definitely Messianic and determines that the Messiah is to emerge from the line of Abram. Quotes from Leupold (EG, I, 411, 412). (Note the parallels of this sevenfold promise in Gen. 18:18; Gen. 22:18; Gen. 26:4; Gen. 28:14).
4. The Promised Land
Gen. 12:1unto the land that I will show thee. (Cf. Gen. 11:31, Gen. 12:5). Haley (ADB, 364): At first the name of the country was not revealed to him. It is designated simply as a land that I will show thee (Gen. 12:1). Even if the name Canaan had been mentioned to Abraham at the outset, it might still be true that he went forth not knowing whither he went. For, in those days of slow transit, imperfect intercommunication, and meager geographical knowledge, the mere name of a country several hundred miles distant would convey almost no idea of the country itself. In our own time, even, of how many an emigrant on his way to America it might well be said, He knows not whither he is going. (Cf. Heb. 11:8). Again: Gen. 11:31 merely shows that Abrahams destination was known to Moses writing at a later date. The same is true of Gen. 12:5.
McClear (COTH, 28:31): This country, the future home of the great nation destined to spring from Abrams loins, was in many respects eminently adapted for its special mission in the history of the world. In extent, indeed, it was but a narrow strip of country, but a little larger than the six northern counties of England, being nearly 180 miles in length, and 75 miles in breadth, and having an area of about 13,600 English square miles. Bounded on the west by the Mediterranean Sea, on the north by the mountains of Lebanon, on the east by the Syrian desert, on the south by the wilderness of Arabia, it was situated at the meeting-point of the two continents of Asia and Africa, on the very outpost, on the extremest western edge of the East. It was a secluded land. A wilderness encompassed it on the east and south, mountains shut it in on the north, and the Great Sea which washed its western shore was the terror rather than the thoroughfare of ancient nations. Unlike the coast of Europe, and especially of Greece, it had no indentations, no winding creeks, no deep havens, but one small portthat of Joppawith which to tempt the mariner from the west. But while thus eminently adapted to be the silent and retired nursery of the Kingdom of God, it was in the very centre of the activity of the ancient world, in the midst of the nations, and the countries that were round about it (Eze. 5:5). On the south was the great empire of Egypt, on the northeast the rising kingdom of Assyria. Neither of these great nations could communicate with the other without passing through Palestine, and so learning something of its peculiar institutions and religion; and when the fullness of time was come no country was better suited, from its position at the extremest verge of the Eastern World, to be the starting-point whence the glad tidings of Redemption might be proclaimed to all nations. Moreover, narrow as were its limits, and secluded as was its position, it yet presented a greater variety of surface, scenery and temperature than is to be found in any other part of the world, and needed not to depend on other countries for anything that either the luxuries or actual wants of its inhabitants required. Four broadly marked longitudinal regions divided its surface. (1) First, there was the low plain of the western seacoast, broad toward the south, and gradually narrowing toward the north, famous for the Shephelah (the low country) with its waving grain-fields, and the vale of Sharon (level country), the garden of Palestine. From this was an ascent to (2) a strip of tableland, every part of which was more or less undulating, but increasing in elevation from north to south, and broken only by the plain of Jezreel or Esdraelon. To this succeeded a rapid descent into (3) a deep fissure or valley, through which the Jordan (the descender), the only river of importance in the country, rushes from its source at the base of Hermon into the Dead Sea, the surface of which is no less than 1316 feet below that of the Mediterranean. Hence was a second ascent to (4) a strip of tableland on the east similar to that on the west, and seeming with its range of purple-tinted mountains to overhang Jerusalem itself. Crowned by the forests and upland pastures of Gilead and Bashan, this eastern table-land gradually melted into the desert which rolled between it and Mesopotamia. Thus within a very small space were crowded the most diverse features of natural scenery, and the most varied products. It was a good land, a land of brooks of water, of fountains and depths that spring out of valleys and hills, a land flowing with milk and honey (Exo. 3:8; Exo. 3:17; Exo. 13:5; Deu. 8:7-9; Deu. 11:8-12; Jos. 5:6, Jer. 11:5, Eze. 20:6; Ezekiel 15; Num. 13:27). The low plains yielded luxuriant crops of wheat and barley, of rye and millet; on the table-lands with their equable and moderate climate grew the vine, the olive, the fig, the almond, the pomegranate; in the tropical neighborhood of Jericho flourished the palm-tree and the balsam; while the noble cedar waved on the mountains of Lebanon. What a role this land has played in the history of the world! and what a role it is still playing in our day!
5. Abrams Response to Gods Call (Gen. 12:1-6).
Gen. 12:4So Abram went, as Jehovah had spoken unto him. This statement gives us the key to Abrams motivation throughout his entire life. When God spoke, Abram acted accordingly (cf. Paul, Act. 22:10; Act. 26:19). This complete dedication to the will of God in all things, as manifested by Abraham throughout his life, surely negates the notion that he had become contaminated by the idolatrous tendencies of his kinsmen. It was this very commitment that caused his name to go down in the sacred records as the Friend of God and the Father of the Faithful (Isa. 41:8, 2Ch. 20:7, Jas. 2:21-24, Joh. 8:39-40; Rom. 4:4; Rom. 4:16-17; Gal. 3:5-9, Heb. 11:8-10, esp. Joh. 15:14). This fact also tends to negate the view of some commentators that two divine calls were necessary to move Abram toward his ultimate destination. The record of Abrams life surely proves that it was not his custom to delay obedience when God called, any longer than circumstances might necessitate. The Scripture record clearly indicates that the place of his nativity was Ur, where he lived with his father Terah, his brothers Nahor and Haran, and where he married Sarai; that on the death of Haran, he migrated with his father, his wife, and his nephew Lot (son of Haran) to the geographical Haran in Upper Mesopotamia (Gen. 11:26-32); and that on the death of his father he (Abram, now 75 years old) left Haran with Sarai and Lot and moved by stages via Shechem and Bethel into the land of Canaan (Gen. 12:1-9). We might compare the language of Stephen (Act. 7:2-4): here we read that the call from the God of glory came to Abraham when he was in Mesopotamia, before he dwelt in Haran; that he came out of the land of the Chaldeans, and dwelt in Haran; and from thence, when his father was dead, God removed him into this land, wherein ye, now dwell. This language would seem to indicate that he was under Gods direction from the very first, and continued to be under this Divine direction throughout his entire pilgrimage. Murphy (MG, 264, 265): Abram took. He is now the leader of the little colony, as Terah was before his death. Sarai, as well as Lot, is now named. The gaining they had gained during the five years of residence in Haran. If Jacob became comparatively rich in six years (Gen. 30:43), so might Abram, with the divine blessing, in five. The souls they had gottenthe bondservants they had acquired. Where there is a large stock of cattle, there must be a corresponding number of servants to attend to them. Abram and Lot entered the land of promise as men of substance. They are in a position of independence. The Lord is realizing to Abram the blessing promised. They start for the land of Kenaan, and at length arrive there. This event is made as important as it ought to be in our minds by the mode in which it is stated.
However, it would be well, I think, for the student to be acquainted with A. Gosmans theory of the two divine calls (CDHCG, 392, n.) as follows: There is no discrepancy between Moses and St. Stephen. Stephens design was, when he pleaded before the Jewish Sanhedrin, to show that Gods revelations were not limited to Jerusalem and Judea, but that He had first spoken to the father of Abram in an idolatrous land, Ur of the Chaldees. But Moses dwells specially on Abrams call from Haran, because Abrams obedience to that call was the proof of his faith (Wordsworth). There is no improbability in the supposition that the call was repeated. And this supposition would not only reconcile the words of Stephen and Moses, but may explain the fifth verse: And they went forth to go into the land of Canaan, and into the land of Canaan they came. Abram had left his home in obedience to the original call of God, but had not reached the land in which he was to dwell. Now, upon the second call, he not only sets forth, but continues in his migrations until he reaches Canaan, to which he was directed.
The fact that stands out here, the one especially to be remembered, is that Abram went first from Ur to Haran, and thence to Canaan. Special mention is made of the fact that in both departures (first from Ur, and then from Haran) Abram was accompanied by his wife Sarai and his nephew Lot. In mentioning Sarai the foundation is laid for the fulfillment of the Abrahamic Promise (Covenant) in the progressive revelation of the Messianic genealogy and its ultimate consummation in Christ Jesus, Messiah Himself, and (2) for other subsequent events of secular history, as, for example, the never-ending conflict between the progeny of Isaac and that of Ishmael (Gen. 16:7-14), a conflict that still rages today. In mentioning Lot, the foundation is laid for the subsequent accounts of (1) the theophany vouchsafed Abraham in the vicinity of Hebron, (2) the subsequent destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah (chs. 18, 19), and (3) the incestuous origin of the Moabites and Ammonites (Gen. 19:30-38).
We are told that men bound from Ur to Haran would set out before the coming of the nine dry months which would strip every blade of grass from the land. The distance was some 600 miles. Some writers think that Terah and his clan followed the west bank of the Euphrates. Hence when they passed through Central Mesopotamia, they would have seen the walls and towers of Babylon on the other side of the river, including the famous eight-storied ziggurat (cf. Gen. 10:10; Gen. 11:1-9). Other writers think they followed the Tigris rather than the Euphrates. Thus Kraeling writes (BA, 57): Terah is said to have started his renewed trek with a more distant objective in mindto go to the land of Canaan. . . . But since he goes to Haran, we may imagine him as taking the familiar migration route back to the home area. Perhaps his herds had not crossed the Euphrates at all to the southern shore of which Ur lay, for the river was certainly a formidable obstacle. In returning he would have gone up the west side of the Tigris. We may imagine him as passing mighty Asshur, the capital of Assyria, and eighty miles beyond he would have seen Nineveh across the river, a city of yet lesser consequence, but destined to become the seat of an empire that was to trample his descendants under its feet. Leaving the Tigris, Terah would have taken the westward track to Nisibis, and crossing the headwaters of the Khabur River would soon have come to Haran on the upper Balikh River, another tributary of the Euphrates. Significant archeological discoveries were made at Haran in the nineteen-fifties under the direction of D. S. Rice. From these discoveries it seems evident that the moon-temple of Haran lay at the site occupied by the later great mosque. Kraeling (ibid.): We here stand on the spot to which Joshua refers when he says to the assembled tribes that their fathers lived of old beyond the river and served other gods (Jos. 24:2). First among these gods was Sin of Haran. It was near here that the divine revelation calling Abraham to a land of promise was given. Truly at Haran one stands at the source of the River of Life.
Payne (OHH, 36, 37): Haran, Gen. 11:31 to Gen. 12:4. Terah knew the destination was Canaan, Gen. 11:31; but he settled in Haran, which was likewise a center for the worship of Sin, and permeated with Hurrian customs, where he died. This was a tragedy: lost faith? Relapse into idolatry? God then called Abram again, this time to leave the fathers house as well, Gen. 12:1. It was to the land I will show thee (in detail); he knew it was Canaan (Gen. 12:5). With this call came promises: (1) personal election, divine discrimination, for salvation is of the Jews, Joh. 4:22. God had previously associated Himself with groups, Noah, and Shem (Gen. 9:26), but with antecedent ethical distinction; Abrams only plea was faith, Heb. 11:6. Election proves Gods control of history and keeps the recipient in humility. He promised Abram posterity, blessing, and fame; and Abrams whole subsequent life demonstrated divine monergism; in his own power he had no seed, no land, no property, Gen. 14:23. (2) universality, Gen. 12:3, for all nations were to be blessed in him. He was an example of faith, Gal. 3:8; and the Gentiles are blessed with faithful Abraham, for Gen. 12:3 is not strictly as Messianic a prophecy as Gen. 22:18, where his seed is specified, cf. Act. 3:25. (1) The student will again note the disagreement among eminent authorities as to whether Abram was the recipient of one or two divine calls. There seems to be no way of resolving this problem conclusively. Note however, our own conclusion, and the reasons for it, in preceding paragraphs. (2) The student must also keep in mind that the history of the cities of Asshur and Nineveh extends far back into that of Mesopotamia, as far back indeed as the fourth millennium B.C. (Gen. 10:10-12). This great antiquity is well confirmed by archaeology. These cities did not attain pre-eminence, however, until the rise of the Assyrian Empire. The First or Old Assyrian kingdom had its beginning about 1750 B.C., soon after the fall of the Third Dynasty of Ur.)
Lange (CDHCG, 393): The calling of Abram: 1. In its requisitions; 2. in its promises; 3. in its motives. (a) The grace of God. The election of Abram. The choice of God reflects itself in the dispositions of men, the gifts of believers. As every people has its peculiar disposition, so the race of Abram, and especially the father of it, had the religious disposition in the highest measure. (b) The great necessity of the world. It appeared about to sink into heathenism; the faith must be saved in Abram. Faith should proceed from one believer to all, just as salvation should proceed from one Savior to all. The whole messianic prophecy was not embraced in Abram. A. Gosman (CDHCG, 396): The promise receives its first fulfillment in Abram, then in the Jews, more perfectly when the Son of God became incarnate, the seed of Abram, then further in the church and the preaching of the gospel, but finally and fully when Christ shall complete his church, and come to take her unto himself. Again (ibid.): The object of the writer is not Abrams glorification, but the glorification of Jehovah. Again (ibid.): Abram is also an illustrious example to all who hear the call of God. His obedience is prompt and submissive. He neither delays nor questions, but went out not knowing whither he went, Heb. 11:8.
Speiser (ABG, 88: Abrahams journey to the Promised Land was thus no routine expedition of several hundred miles. Instead, it was the start of an epic voyage in search of spiritual truths, a quest that was to constitute the cenral theme of all biblical history.
6. Through the Land of Promise (Gen. 12:5-9).
Leaving Mesopotamia, Abram and his retinue crossed the Great River, the Euphrates (Jos. 24:2). Smith-Fields (OTH, 68): This separated him entirely from his old home, and possibly accounts for the title Hebrew which he came to wear (Gen. 14:13). While some think that the name Hebrew came from the patriarch Eber (Gen. 11:16), it may come from the Hebrew verb meaning to cross over. Evidently the caravan then made its way across the great Syrian desert. Although the route is not specifically indicated in the Biblical account, tradition has it that Abram tarried at Damascus. (Josephus, for example, informs us that the patriarch remained there for some time, being come with an army from the land of the Chaldeans (Antiq. I, 1). It should be noted, too, that Damascus was the native place of Eliezer, Abrams household steward, Gen. 15:2). No doubt the caravan then crossed the Jordan, where the first stopping-place was Shechem, in the valley of the same name, lying between Mounts Ebal and Gerizim.
Gen. 12:5. And into the land of Canaan they came. (No doubt a prolepsis, as in Gen. 11:31). This was a distance of some 300 miles from Haran. Cf. Gen. 12:6And the Canaanite was then in the land. The territory originally occupied by the Canaanites as a separate ethnic group is clearly described in Gen. 10:19. A wider use of the term is also encountered in Scripture and in early external sources as including the inhabitants generally of the Syro-Palestianian area. In its wider use also the terms Canaanite and Amorite tend to overlap directly. Thus Abram was promised Canaan (Gen. 12:5; Gen. 12:7) but this occupancy was delayedin fact was never realized by Abraham personallybecause the inquity of the Amorites was not yet full. Several inscriptions indicate clearly the contiguous use of Amorites and Canaanites in Moses time; hence, the use of these terms as the distinguishing marks of different literary hands is erroneous (NBD, 184). It should be noted, too, that Shechem was a Canaanite principality under a Hivite ruler (Gen. 12:5-6; Gen. 34:2; Gen. 34:30), but could be called Amorite (Gen. 48:22). It seems that at the time of the conquest of Abrams descendants, the mountainous land in the center, including the place of Shechem, was occupied by the Amorites and other tribes, while the coast of the Mediterranean and the west bank of the Jordan was held by the Canaanites proper (cf. Jos. 5:1; Jos. 11:3). The statement in Gen. 12:6 has been fastened upon as a proof of the late composition of this history, as implying that though in Abrams time the Canaanite was in the land, he had ceased to have a place there in the writers days. The objection is not founded in historic truth; for it appears from Gen. 34:30, 1Ki. 9:20-21, Eze. 16:3, that the Canaanite continued to a certain extent in after ages to occupy the land (CECG, 131). Murphy suggests three possible interpretations of this passage (MG, 265266): This simply implies that the land was not open for Abram to enter upon immediate possession of it without challenge: another was in possession; the sons of Kenaan had already arrived and preoccupied the country. It also intimates, or admits of, the supposition that there had been previous inhabitants who may have been subjugated by the invading Kenaanites. . . . It admits also of the supposition that the Kenaanites afterward ceased to be its inhabitants. Hence some have inferred that this could not have been penned by Moses, as they were expelled after his death. If this supposition were the necessary or the only one implied in the form of expression, we should acquiesce in the conclusion that this sentence came from one of the prophets to whom the conservation, revision, and continuation of the living oracles were committed. But we have seen that two other presuppositions may be made that satisfy the import of the passage. Moreover, the first of the three accounts for the fact that Abram does not instantly enter on possession, as there was an occupying tenant. And, finally, the third supposition may fairly be, not that the Kenaanites afterwards ceased, but that they should afterward cease to be in the land. This, then, as well as the others, admits of Moses being the writer of this interesting sentence. To the present writer the best explanation of this sentence is the simplest one: namely, that the writer intends us to know that the Canaanite was already in the land. Why try to give it some mysterious significance when the simplest interpretation makes the most sense? The implication could well be also that the Canaanite had driven out the earlier inhabitants.
The Place of Shechem, The Oak of Moreh
This was Abrams first stopping-place. The phrase is perhaps a prolepsis, for the place where the city Shechem, either built by or named after the Hivite prince (Gen. 34:2) was afterward situated, between Ebal and Gerizim. This has been described as the only very beautiful spot in Central Palestine. The oak of Moreh: probably not the oak literally, but rather the terebinth or turpentine tree; however, the oak was a kind of generic name given to various kinds of trees. Cf. Deu. 11:30in all likelihood, the oak-grove or terebinth-grove of Moreh. (Moreh, like Mamre, was probably the name of the owner: cf. Gen. 13:18; Gen. 14:13). It has been assumed by the critics that there was a sacred grove here where pagan rites had been practised, probably some aspect of the Cult of Fertility which prevailed generally among the inhabitants of the land. The phrase, place of Shechem, is assumed to have been a holy place. Moreh means literally teacher or instructor: hence, it may be conceded that oaks of instruction were in the category of oaks of divination (Jdg. 9:37). The notion that sacred trees and groves were inhabited by divinities and hence possessed oracular powers was widespread in the cults of ancient pagan peoples. To this day, we are told, the venerable cedars of Lebanon are tended by Maronite priests. From these facts it is further assumed by the critics that since this was the first place where Abram built an altar unto Jehovah (Gen. 12:7), he selected this particular holy place to worship his particular cult deity. This, of course, is conjecture. Lange (CDHCG, 391): It is not probable that Abram would have fixed his abode precisely in a grove, which according to heathen notions had a sacred character as the residence of divining priests. The religious significance of the place may have arisen from the fact that Jacob buried the images brought with him in his family, under the oak of Shechem (Gen. 35:4). The idols, indeed, must not be thrown into sacred but into profane places (Isa. 2:20). But, perhaps, Jacob had regard to the feelings of his family, and prepared for the images, which, indeed, were not images belonging to any system of idolatry, an honorable burial. At the time of Joshua the place had a sacred character, and Joshua, therefore, erected here the monumental stone, commemorating the solemn renewal of the law (Josh., ch. 24). Thus they became the oaks of the pillar at which the Shechemites made Abimelech king (Jdg. 19:6). Leupold (EG, 419): But all suppositions, such as that the words ought to be rendered oracle-terebinth, or that we have here indications of an animistic religion on the part of the patriarchs, are guesses. It is just as possible that in days of old some worshiper of Yahweh had under this oak admonished and instructed the people. The sum and substance of the whole matter is clear, namely, that Abram encamped by an ancient landmark, and there received a second communication from God, and there built his first altar in the Land of Promise to the God who had called him to undertake this pilgrimage of faith.
The Theophany and the Altar, Gen. 12:7. The patriarch had left Ur of the Chaldees to set out on a trek, the destination of which God had not specified. The divine injunction was simply unto the land that I will show thee (Gen. 12:1, cf. Heb. 11:8, he went out, not knowing whither he went). Now God appears to him and identifies this Land of Promise specifically: unto thy seed will I give this land. Note that God did not declare He would give it to Abram himself: as a matter of fact, Abraham died without owning a foot of it, except the small spot he purchased for a burial-place (Gen. 23:17-20; Gen. 25:9-10; Gen. 49:28-33). Lange (CDHCG, 391, 392): Abrams faith had developed itself thus far since he had entered Canaan, and now the promise is given to him of the land of Canaan, as. the possession of the promised seed. . . . Abrams grateful acknowledgment: the erection of an altar, and the founding of an outward service of Jehovah, which as to its first feature consisted in the calling upon his name (cultus), and as to its second in the profession and acknowledgement of his name. Thus also Jacob acted (Gen. 33:20, Jos. 24:1; Jos. 24:26). Bethel, Jerusalem, Hebron, Beersheba are places of the same character (i.e., places which were consecrated by the patriarchs, and not as Knobel thinks, whose consecration took place in later times, and then was dated back to the period of the patriarchs). Abrams altars stood in the oaks of Moreh, and Mamre, in Bethel, and upon Moriah. Abram, and the patriarchs generally, served also the important purpose of preaching through their lives repentance to the Canaanites, as Noah was such a preacher for his time. For God leaves no race to perish unwarned. Sodom had even a constant warning in the life of Lot. The divine deed to the Holy Land was here made over to the seed of Abraham. Abram himself was to possess only a burial ground. Faith had to accept things not seen.
Let us not forget that the three elements of Biblical religion are the altar, the sacrifice, and the priesthood. Hence Abram did here, precisely what Noah had done on coming out of the ark (Gen. 8:20), what undoubtedly the patriarchs of the Messianic Line had done from the time of Abel (Heb. 11:4; Gen. 4:1-5). Throughout the Patriarchal Dispensation, the patriarch himself fulfilled the three divine offices of prophet (revealer of the will of God to his household), priest (mediator between his household and God), and king (the one who had complete authority over his household). This threefold office was expressed in the titles, Messiah, Christos, Christ, meaning The Anointed One. In Old Testament times those leaders inducted into these three ministries were formally set aside for their service by the ceremony of anointing (Jdg. 9:8, 2Sa. 2:4, 1Ki. 1:34; Exo. 28:41; 1Ki. 19:16). The holy anointing oil used in these ceremonies of induction was typical of the gifts and graces of the Holy Spirit (Mat. 3:16-17; Act. 10:38; Act. 4:26; Luk. 4:18; Heb. 1:9, etc.). We see no reason for assuming that Abraham had not maintained this indispensable institution of sacrifice throughout his entire previous life; indispensable, that is, in the fact that from the beginning of revealed religion every lamb slain on the Patriarchal and Jewish altars was by divine ordination designed to point forward in type to the Lamb of God, our Passover, who would be offered up for the redemption of mankind (Joh. 1:29, 1Co. 5:7, Isa. 53:7, Act. 8:32, 1Pe. 1:19, Rev. 5:4-14)
Note the Abram built his altar unto Yahweh (Jehovah) and called upon the name of Yahweh, Gen. 12:7. Advocates of the Documentary Theory have built up a mass of conjecture based on the assumption of different sources or codes. The name Elohim, they contend, is characteristic of the Elohistic Code (E) and the Priestly Code (P), whereas the name Jehovah characterizes the Jahvistic or Yahwistic Code (J). (This will be treated again infra in connection with Gen. 22:14 as related to Exo. 6:2). Suffices it here to quote from Green on this point (UBG, 167, 168): It is said that J and P differ in their conception of God; Js representation is anthropomorphic, that of P is more exalted and spiritual. But the two aspects of Gods being, his supreme exaltation and his gracious condescension, are not mutually exclusive or conflicting, but mutually supplementary. Both must be combined in any correct apprehension of his nature and his relation to man. These are not to be sundered, as though they were distinct conceptions of separate minds. They are found together throughout the Bible. Since Elohim is used of God as the creator and in his relation to the world at large, while Jehovah is the name by which he made himself known to his chosen people, his chief acts of condescending grace naturally appear in connection with the latter. Leupold (EG, 420): A word from God requires a response on the part of man. Abram felt impelled to give personal public testimony to Gods mercy displayed in this appearance. So he built an altar. This statement is misconstrued by criticism in its attempt to find as many distinctions as possible between so-called sources. This passage, ascribed to J, is said to mean that J never records instances of actual sacrifices by the patriarchs. This is the argument from silence, and it is inconclusive because the word for altar is mizbeach, meaning a place for slaughter. The manifest intention of the author must be that a place for slaughter was made in order to slaughter a victim. Altars became altars when the victim is slain. A mere altar of stones would have been a formalistic gesture on Abrams parta gesture like falling on ones knees to pray but omitting the prayer. The soul of the patriarchal religion was sacrifice, The critics find matters, which no one before their time dreamed of. The altar is said to be built unto Yahweh to emphasize the undeserved mercy of His promise. (Italics oursC. The fact seems to be that the critics are for the most part motivated by zeal to destroy the integrity of the Bible and so to destroy its influence on mankind.) (HSB, 22): Abrahams altar at Shechem implies animal sacrifice which was common to all Semites.
On to Bethel. From the oak of Moreh Abram now moved to the hill east of Bethel, and pitched his tent, with Bethel on the west and Ai on the east (localities that are still recognizedthe former as Beiten, the latter as Teller-Rigmeh, the mount of the heap). Obviously Abram was still predominantly nomadic and apparently was still seeking better pasture land. It could well be also that the Canaanites did not view with too kindly eyes the appearance of this patriarchs tents and flocks and herds; that Abram had neither the power nor the inclination to resort, like Jacob, to his sword and his bow (Gen. 48:22, Smith-Fields, OTH, 99). Abram was now on the heights which skirt the Jordan, on the northern border of what was later the kingdom of Judah, between Bethel and Ai, Bethel was a place, adjacent to which was the town called Luz at the first (Gen. 28:19). (Jacob gave this name to the place twice (Gen. 28:19; Gen. 35:15). Archaeology confirms the fact that the city was established early in the Bronze Age; hence we meet the name as existing as such in Abrams time. Bethel continued afterward to be a place hallowed by the presence of God, to which the people resorted for counsel in the war with Benjamin (Jdg. 20:18; Jdg. 20:26; Jdg. 20:31; xxi. 2), and in which Jeroboam, 1Ki. 12:29, set up one of the golden calves). Ai meant literally a heap of stones (cf. Josh., chs. 7, 8). Here Abram pitched his tent. This was his second stopping-place in the Promised Land. (Tent: used for dwelling, Gen. 4:20; Gen. 9:21; Gen. 12:8; Gen. 13:18; Gen. 18:1; Gen. 13:5; Exo. 18:7; Num. 24:5-6; 2Sa. 20:1; Isa. 13:20; Isa. 38:12; Jer. 6:3. Women had tents apart from men, Gen. 24:67; Gen. 31:33. Used for cattle, 2Ch. 14:15. Manufacture of, Act. 18:3.) Abram called upon the name of Yabweh. Murphy (MG, 267): On the hill east of this sacred ground [Bethel] Abram built another altar, and called upon the name of the Lord. Here we have the reappearance of an ancient custom, instituted in the family of Adam after the birth of Enok (Gen. 4:26). Abram addresses God by his proper name, Jehovah, with an audible voice, in his assembled household. This, then, was a continuation of the worship of Adam, with additional light according to the progressive development of the moral nature of man. But Abram has not yet any settled abode in the land. He is only surveying its several regions, and feeding his flocks as he finds an opening. Hence he continues his journey southward. Leupold on Gen. 4:26 (EG, 227): The name here, as usual, means the whole truth that God had revealed about Himself. Since the name Yahweh is attached to name, this means that from days of old God was known in the capacity of Yahweh, or in the character of Yahweh, whether that word as such was known at this early date or not. The thing that the name stood for was known. Men do not first in the age of Abraham or Moses begin to comprehend Gods faithfulness, unchangeableness, and mercy. Since this calling out by the use of the name definitely implies public worship, we have here the first record of regular public worship. Private worship is presupposed as preceding. The great importance of public worship, both as a matter of personal necessity as well as a matter of public confession, is beautifully set forth by this brief record. This act bears eloquent testimony to the courage of this group, who wanted to be known as such whose hope was placed only in Yahweh. It is not enough to say that Yahwehs religion began with Enosh. It began with Adam and developed into regular public worship in three generations. The significance of the statement here, Gen. 12:8, is the fact of the use of the Name Yahweh in worship, that is, to call out by the use of the Name. (SIBG, 239): Abram called on God, i.e., worshiped him by prayer, by preaching to his family, and by offering sacrifices for himself and them, ch. Gen. 18:19, Gen. 21:13. . . . It is not uncommon for men to speak and act religiously in one company or place, where religion is prevalent, or, if it may be so called, fashionable, who yet totally lay it aside in another place or company, where religion is less regarded, or perhaps altogether despised. Abram testifies for God wherever he goes. Again: That Abram, before this time, knew and worshiped God, there can be no doubt; but this [Shechem] is the first altar erected by him; that is, the first decided and public establishment of the worship of Jehovah in his family. It is well known, that young Christians, who worship God in private, often find considerable difficulty in commencing family worship. Let them remember Abrams faith, Abrams altar, and Abrams blessing, and take courage.
7. The Round Trip to Egypt (Gen. 12:10-20)
Literally, Abraham pulled up stakes and kept on moving toward the south, that is toward the Negeb. Evidently the hill area adjacent to Bethel, though it may have protected him somewhat from the animosity of his neighbors (who surely did not look with too friendly an eye on this nomadic intruder) furnished scanty pasturage for his cattle. He therefore went on southward, that is, toward the Negeb (dry land). The Negeb is the Palestinian region which extends south from Hebron. It is a more or less arid region in parts of which isolated flocks may be tended, as far south at least as Beersheba. The terrain and character of the Negeb was such that Judea was almost never invaded from the South through this area. When Israel sought to enter the Promised Land the procession was repulsed by this formidable barrier and its inhabitants (Deu. 1:42-46). Of course it may have been less desiccated in the days of the patriarchs. Frequently in Scripture the word is used merely to indicate direction, south. (The reference to the Negeb here and elsewhere in Genesis takes on great significance since Dr. Nelson Gluecks archaeological discoveries which make it clear that the region was occupied from 21001800 B.C., the period of Abraham. Incidentally, it is now believed by some archaeologists that Abraham and the Babylonian king Hammurabi were relatively contemporary. See Gluecks fascinating book, Rivers in the Desert, RD in our Bibliographical Abbreviations.) The route taken, from the Beersheba region was probably by the way of Shur, an area in the northwest part of the isthmus of Sinai, south of the Mediterranean coastline and the way of the land of the Philistines (Gen. 16:7; Gen. 25:18; Exo. 13:17-18; Exo. 15:22; 1Sa. 15:7; 1Sa. 27:8).
There arose a famine in the Land of Promise, so Abram pressed on to the south. The Land of Promise, we are told, is watered by rain periodically, but seasons of drought occur in which the growth of vegetation is arrested and thus famine is brought on. Because the fertility of her soil was guaranteed by the annual inundation of the Nile, Egypt as a rule enjoyed protection from drought; hence it was customary for peoples of Syria and Palestine to seek refuge there in times of famine in their own lands, as did Jacob later. Thus it will be noted that insofar as the Promised Land is considered, it was literally true that Abram simply passed through the land (Gen. 12:6). The first journey was apparently one of exploration and it seems to have been rapidly consummated and then terminated in a brief sojourn in Egypt.
Abram in Egypt: The Problem of Sarais Age
Abrams wife, Sarai, is now thrust forward into what was an unenviable situation, and surely not one of her own making. Abram testified to her attractiveness: thou art a fair woman to look upon (Gen. 12:11) and the princes of Pharaoh on seeing her beauty praised her to Pharaoh (Gen. 12:14-15). The statement Sarai was so fair as to attract the attention of Pharaoh, even to the peril of her husbands life (Gen. 12:11; Gen. 12:15) is said by the critics to be incompatible with Gen. 12:4 (cf. Gen. 17:17), according to which she was at that time upward of sixty-five years old. It is said to be still more incongruous that she should have attracted Abimelech when she was more than ninety years old (Gen. 20:2-7, Gen. 7:17). Green (UBG, 167): The only point of any consequence in this discussion is not what modern critics may think of the probability or possibility of what is here narrated, but whether the sacred historian credited it. On the hypothesis of the critics R (redactor) believed it and recorded it. What possible ground can they have for assuming that J and E had less faith than R in what is here told of the marvelous beauty and attractiveness of the ancestress of the nation? If the entire narrative could be put together by R, and related by him with no suspicion of discord, the same thing could just as well have been done by one original writer. It may be added, if it will in any measure relieve the minds of doubting critics, that Abimelech is not said to have been taken with Sarahs beauty. He may have thought an alliance with a mighty prince like Abraham (Gen. 23:6) desirable, even if Sarahs personal charms were not what they had once been. And when Abraham lived to an age of one hundred and seventy-five, who can say how well a lady of ninety may have borne her years? It has been suggested that Sarais complexion, coming from a mountainous country, was no doubt fresh and fair as compared with the faces of Egyptian women, which, as the monuments show, were dark-brown or copper-colored (CECG, 132). This suggestion surely has merit.
Abram in Egypt: His Attempted Deception (Gen. 12:10-20).
Leupold (EG, 421, 422): Now follows an episode that is less attractive. Abram does not appear to good advantage in it. With impartial truth Moses records what Abram did. If the account remains entirely objective without the addition of a subjective opinion or estimate of the ethical value of Abrams conduct, this can readily be seen to be offset by the fact that the narrative as such in its unvarnished truth so plainly sets forth the unworthy sentiments that animated the patriarch, that the sympathetic reader is almost made to blush for the thing done by the man of God. The charge of the critics is decidely unfair when they say: There is no suggestion that either the untruthfulness or the selfish cowardice of the request [of Abram] was severely reprobated by the ethical code to which the narrative appealed. Prochsch sees the situation more nearly as it actually is when he asserts: It is quite impossible here not to notice the narrators sarcasm, and adds that this step that Abram took is most sharply condemned by the writer. Comparing chapters twenty and twenty-six, we find two situations that constitute a close parallel to the one under consideration. Strange as such recurrences may strike us, it should be remembered that life often brings us into situations that are practically duplicates of what transpired at an earlier date; and he that marvels that a patriarch sinned a second time after a definite rebuke, let him remember how often he himself may repeat a sin for which a stern admonition had been addressed to him. To say this must have been a very popular story in ancient Israel hardly does justice to the facts of the case. Why should Israel have deemed the failings of its patriarchs material for popular stories? The recording of three such instances is explicable only on the score of the strict impartiality of the author. See the parallel stories of Abram and Abimelech (ch. 20) and of Isaac and Abimelech (ch. 26). It must be understood that the Bible is a very realistic book: it pictures life just as men lived it; it does not turn away from the truth to cover up the weaknesses of the heroes of the faith. It deals with them realistically as it deals with all men realistically, in the fact that it finds them in sin (as they know they are if they will but be honest with themselves and with God), but at the same time offers the only possible remedy, the Atonement, Gods Covering of Grace (Joh. 1:29, 1Jn. 1:7-10, Rom. 3:24, Eph. 1:7, Heb. 9:12). Divine Justice required the Atonement, and Divine Love provided it (Joh. 3:16). It should be noted that the severe reproof which God administered to those practising deception, on all these occasions, was administered through the instrumentality of those who had been made the victims of their deception. In each case, too, the reproof was accompanied with manifestations of great mercy and benevolence.
According to a previous understanding with Sarai, Abram palmed her off on the king of Egypt as his sister. This, of course, was a half-truth and a half-lie (Gen. 20:12), which makes the incident more interesting and more complex ethically. Some authors have tried to minimize the deception by appeals to customs. Speiser, for example, would have us know that, according to the inscriptions, in the Hurrian culture of the time men were accustomed to confer special status on their wives by adopting them as sisters. This, we are told, would have made Sarai eligible for sistership status in Haran which was predominantly a Hurrian city; and because this relationship was for Sarai a matter of prestige, Abram would have stressed it in introducing her to Pharaoh (ABG, 9194). This notion is surely out of tune completely with the Genesis account: it is completely contrary to the motive explicitly attributed to Abram and Sarai in that account. Speisers attempted explanation of the motives involved in Abrams deception makes it to be no deception at all. He writes: Why was tradition so interested in the matter, enough to dwell on it repeatedly. We know now that the wife-sister position was a mark of cherished social standing. This kind of background would be an implicit guarantee of the purity of the wifes descendants. The ultimate purpose of the biblical genealogies was to establish the superior strain of the line through which the biblical way of life was transmitted from generation to generation. In other words, the integrity of the mission was to be safeguarded in transmission, the purity of the content protected by the quality of the container. This is why the antecedents of the wifethe mother of the next generationin the formative early stages were of particular significance. Hence, too, all such notices would be obligatory entries in the pertinent records (ibid., 94). In opposition to this view, we may ask two questions: (1) What evidence have we that this special sister-wife status over in Haran was recognized, or even known, down in Egypt? (2) If the Old Testament writers were seeking to protect the moral integrity of the mothers of each succeeding generation, why do they present the deception practised by Abram and Sarai as a deception pure and simple, and as motivated by selfishness. It strikes this writer that from the viewpoint taken by Dr. Speiser, the Genesis accounts of these deceptions would have been omitted from the history.
See JB (p. 29, n.): Here we have another attempt to explain away Abrams defection, and this is equally without any positive evidence to support it. We read: The purpose of this narrative (the same theme recurs in ch. 20 where Sarai figures again, and in Gen. 26:1-11, where the story is told of Rebekah) is to commemorate the beauty of the ancestress of the race, the astuteness of its patriarch, the protection that God afforded them. The story reflects a stage of moral development when a lie was still considered lawful under certain circumstances and when the husbands life meant more than his wifes honor. God was leading man to an appreciation of the moral law but this appreciation was gradual. It will be noted that this writer puts the emphasis on the importance of the father, whereas Speiser puts it on the moral integrity of the mother. These views are hardly reconcilable.
Why, then, do we not allow the Bible to say what it means and to mean what it says? Let us get away from the nit-picking propensities of the intellectual who frequently cannot see the forest for the trees. Let us take a look at the other sidethe realistic sideof the problem. For example (HSB, 22, n.): Gods will, done Gods way, never lacks for Gods blessing. Say you are my sister, Here Abraham did not tell the truth. Selfishness overtook this man of faith. Fear for his own life made him forget what consequences his deceit would bring for Sarah and others. Although Abraham was a man of faith he was not a perfect man. This incident serves to illustrate the fact that the end does not justify the means. The means and the end must both be right. (SIB, 232): Sarai was his sister in some sense . . . but it was not in that sense, but in the common acceptation of the words, sister and brother, they sinfully wished the Egyptians to understand them. Jamieson (CECG, 132): On reaching the confines of Egypt, which was the greatest primeval kingdom in the world, Abram began to feel uneasy. Increasing signs of civilization, grandeur, and power, met his eye on every side; and as the immigration of so numerous a tribe as his from the neighboring desert would certainly arrest public attention, the prospect of encountering the authorities of Egypt, so different from the simple nomads of Asia, to whom his experience had hitherto been limited, filled him with awe. But all other anxieties were forgotten and absorbed in one cause of alarm. . . . He entertained a bad opinion of the morals and manners of the country; and anticipating that Sarai, whose style of beauty was far superior to that of the Egyptian women, might captivate some proud noble, who would try by any means to obtain possession of her, Abram became apprehensive of his life. The idea so completely unnerved him that his fortitude and faith alike gave way; and he formed an artful plan, which, while it would retain his wife beside him, would, he hoped, by leading to betrothal and other negotiations connected with the dowry, put off the evil day. The counsel of Abram to Sarai was true in words: but it was a deception, intended to give an impression that she was no more than his sister. His conduct was culpable and inconsistent with his character as a servant of God; it showed a reliance on worldly policy more than a trust in the promise; and he not only sinned himself, but tempted Sarah to sin also. Leupold (EG, 424): Abram knows how little the rights of foreigners were respected in olden times. He also knows how beautiful women would be sought out when they came to a foreign land. He also understands that marriage was respected sufficiently that men felt they must dispose of the husband before they could take his wife. Egyptian parallels prove that men had no hesitation about committing murder in order to secure their object. There was nothing beside the point in the estimate that he makes of the situation except the morals of the patriarch. Though Gen. 20:12 indicates that the literal truth was being told, there is yet the possibility of telling it with the intent to deceive; and so it becomes a lie. In addition, there is something cowardly and mean about expecting Sarai to encounter the hazards in order that Abram might avoid danger. The heroic is notably absent in this request. In reply to the question as to how Sarai could be deemed beautiful at the age of sixty-five, this author writes (ibid., 424): It must be remembered that according to the limits of longevity of those times she was only middle-aged. Middle-aged women may have retained their beauty, especially if they have not borne many children. On Pharaohs part the taking of a woman into his harem may be largely a political expedient to enhance his own influence. Lange (CDHCG, 392): It must be observed that by the side of the Hamitic women in Egypt and Canaan, Semitic women, even when advanced in years, would be admired as beautiful. Abram desired that Sarah should say that she was his sister, lest he should be killed. If she was regarded as his wife, an Egyptian could only obtain her when he had murdered her husband and possessor; but if she was his sister, then there was a hope that she might be won from her brother by kindly means. The declaration was not false (Gen. 20:12), but it was not the whole truth. Lange goes on to say, trying to justify what Abram did in this case, that the patriarchs policy to report that Sarai was his sister was determined at an early period in their migrations, but was first brought into use in his dealing with Pharaoh. (To the present writer, this seems to be an unjustified assumption and wholly contrary to the tenor of Gen. 12:11.) He continues as follows: Abrams venture was not from laxity as to the sanctity of marriage, or as to his duty to protect his wife; it was from a presumptuous confidence in the wonderful assistance of God. It was excused through the great necessity of the time, his defenceless state among strangers, the customary lawlessness of those in power, and as to the relations of the sexes. Therefore Jehovah preserved him from disgrace, although he did not spare him personal anxiety, and the moral rebuke from a heathen. It is only in Christ, that with the broad view of faith, the knowledge of its moral human measures and limitations is from the beginning perfect. In the yet imperfect, but growing faith, the word is true, The children of this world are wiser in their generation than the children of light. As a mere matter of prudence, Abram appeared to act prudently. He told no untruth, although he did not tell the whole truth. His word was, at all events, of doubtful import, and therefore, through his anxious forecast, was morally hazardous. But the necessity of the time, the difficulty of his position, and his confidence that God would make his relations clear at the proper time, serve to excuse it. It was intended to effect a final deception: his God would unloose the knot. In his faith Abram was a blameless type of believers, but not in his application of his faith to the moral problems of life. Still, even in this regard, he unfolds more and more his heroic greatness. We must distinguish clearly between a momentary, fanatical, exaggerated confidence in God, and the tempting of God with a selfish purpose. It strikes the present writer that there is much in the foregoing apologetic that is not in harmony with the Genesis account. Is it not the plain fact that Abram, in concealing the whole truth, did actuallyby implication which cannot be ignoredtell an untruth? Oftentimes the most destructive lies are perpetrated by concealing that part of the truth which has the most bearing on the moral situation involved. We are reminded of the well-known couplet:
A lie that is wholly a lie
Can be met and fought outright,
But a lie that is half a lie
Is a harder matter to fight.
There are situations in which a person can lie simply by keeping silent. Cf. Smith-Fields (OTH, 99): It is enough here to observe that the mighty kingdom of the Pharaohs had already been long established in Lower Egypt. In this crisis the faith of Abram failed. To protect his wife from the license of a despot, he stooped to that mean form of deceit, which is true in word but false in fact. The trick defeated itself. Sarai, as an unmarried woman, was taken to the harem of the king, who heaped wealth and honors upon Abram. Whitelaw (PCG, 188) comments on Abrams introduction of Sarai to Pharaoh as his sister as follows: A half truth (Gen. 20:12) but a whole falsehood. The usual apologies, that he did not fabricate but did cautiously conceal the truth, that perhaps he was acting in obedience to a Divine impulse, that he dissembled in order to protect his wifes chastity, are not satisfactory. On the other hand, Abram must not be judged by the light of New Testament revelation. It is not necessary for a Christian in every situation of life to tell all the truth, especially when its part suppression involves no deception, and is indispensable for self-preservation; and Abram may have deemed it legitimate as a means of securing both his own life and Sarahs honor, though how he was to shield his wife in the peculiar circumstances it is difficult to see, Rosenmuller suggests that he knew the preliminary ceremonies to marriage required a considerable time, and counted upon being able to leave Egypt before any injury was done to Sarah. The only objection to this is that the historian represents him as being less solicitous about the preservation of his wifes chastity than about the conservation of his own life. . . . No defence can be offered for a man who, merely through dread of danger to himself, tells a lie, risks his wifes chastity, puts temptation in the way of his neighbors, and betrays the charge to which the Divine favor had summoned him (Dykes). The plain fact is that should anyone take Sarah into his harem on the supposition that she was his sister, Abram as the honored brother would be given most respectful treatment. Hence, as Leupold puts it (EG, 425): Fully aware of the fact that such a course may involve the sacrifice of Sarais honor in order that he himself might fare well, he nevertheless asks Sarai to make the sacrifice. Abram never sank lower, as far as we know, than when he made this request. Sarais acquiescence, however, seems to grow out of the idea that there actually is no other safe course to follow. She was as sadly deficient in faith as he himself on this occasion, We repeat:
The Bible is the most realistic book ever given to mankind. It never turns away from the truth to cover up the faults of the heroes of the faith. It deals with man as he is, and as he knows that he is, if he will but be honest with himself and with God. It finds him in sin, and proffers the only remedy for it.
As A, Gosman puts it (CDHCG, 394, n.): We are not to be harsh or censorious in our judgments upon the acts of these eminent saints. But neither are we called upon to defend their acts . . . it is well to bear in mind that the Scripture records, these acts without expressing distinctly any moral judgment upon them. It impliedly condemns. The Scripture, however, contains the great principles of moral truth and duty, and then oftentimes leaves the reader to draw the inference as to the moral quality of the act which it records. And its faithfulness in not concealing what may be of questionable morality, in the lives of the greatest saints shows the honesty and accuracy of the historian. Wordsworth says well: The weaknesses of the patriarchs strengthen our faith in the Pentateuch.
Did Pharaoh enter into marital relations with Sarai? There is nothing in the records to indicate that he did; as a matter of fact, the customary prerequisites to any kind of royal marriage in the ancient world involved considerable time. As Simpson writes (IBG, 581): Had the author intended such a representation he would have stated the fact explicitly by saying, e.g., at the end of Gen. 12:15, that Pharaoh lay with her. We may surely conclude that precisely what happened in the case of Rebekah (Gen. 26:8-11) happened in the similar instances in which Abram and Sarai were involved, namely, that the woman was divinely protected against physical coition. It is interesting to note, too, that in each case the royal victim of patriarchal duplicity protested in almost the same language, What is this than thou hast done unto me? (Gen. 12:18, Gen. 20:9, Gen. 26:10). In a word, the man of God was rebuked, and that rightly, by the man of the world. Cf. Bowie (IBG, 581): In this unvarnished story there are several points that are significant. Conspicuousto begin withis the fact that here, as elsewhere, the O.T. is written with an unhesitating realism. The faults even of its greatest figures are not disguised. What Abraham is described as having done when he went into Egypt would throw discredit on any man. Being afraid that the Egyptians would covet Sarah, and thinking that if they knew she was tied to him as her husband they would kill him to get possession of her, he persuaded Sarah to pose as his unmarried sister; and as such she was taken to the house of Pharaoh. In the climax of the story the Egyptian stands in a much better light than Abraham, the man of the covenant; for he denounced indignantly the lie that Abraham had told him, gave Sarah back to him, and let him go out of the country with the rich possessions which had been bestowed upon him when Sarah was taken.
What is this that thou hast done unto me? he demanded of Abram when he learned of the latters deception. Thus, as F. W. Robertson has written (NG, 53): The man of God was rebuked by the man of the world: a thing singularly humiliating. It is common to find men of the world whose honor and integrity are a shame to every Christian; and common enough to find men of religious feeling and aspiration, of whom that same world is compelled to say that whenever they are tried in business there is always a something found wanting. . . . Morality is not religion; but unless religion is grafted on morality, religion is worth nothing.
Be sure your sin will find you out is the solemn warning of Scripture as voiced by Moses in the days of old. If it does not find you out here, it will surely do so in the Great Judgment (1Ti. 5:24-25, Mat. 16:27, Act. 17:30-31, Rom. 2:4-6, Rev. 20:12). God saw to it that Abrams sin found him out, and that through the instrumentality of his victim (precisely as in the two other similar incidents). And Jehovah plagued Pharaoh and his house. Murphy (MG, 271, 272): The mode of divine interference is suited to have the desired effect on the parties concerned. As Pharaoh is punished, we conclude he was guilty in the eye of heaven in this matter. He committed a breach of hospitality by invading the private abode of the stranger. He further infringed the law of equity between man and man in the most tender point, by abstracting, if not with violence, at least with a show of arbitrary power which could not be resisted, a female, whether sister or wife, from the home of her natural guardian without the consent of either. A deed of ruthless self-will, also, is often rendered more heinous by a blamable inattention to the character or position of him who is wronged. So it was with Pharaoh. Abram was a man of blameless life and inoffensive manners. He was, moreover, the chosen and special servant of the Most High God. Pharaoh, however, does not condescend to inquire who the stranger is whom he is about to wrong; and is thus unwittingly involved in an aggravated crime. But the hand of the Almighty brings even tyrants to their senses. . . . The princes of Pharaoh were accomplices in his crime (Gen. 12:15), and his domestics were concurring with him in carrying it into effect, But even apart from any positive consent or connivance in a particular act, men, otherwise culpable, are brought into trouble in this world by the faults of those with whom they are associated. On account of Sarai: Pharaoh was made aware of the cause of the plagues or strokes with which he was now visited.
Fully cognizant now of the fact that the plagues he and his household were suffering were divine visitations for a wrong he had committed, we can well suppose, I think, that this Egyptian king was motivated in large part by sheer superstitious fear of the gods or god whose will he had violated; hence, he was willing to do most anything he could to get this foreigner and his caravan out of Egypt posthaste, even providing him with an escort to see that he left the country unharmed. He actually sent Abram out with all the wealth the latter had acquired, some of it probably as the kings own purchase price for the projected admission of Sarai into his harem. (Bride purchase is a custom as old as the history of the race itself.) Pharaoh consoled himself with upbraiding Abram for the latters deceit, and so permitted the incident to be terminated without any further unpleasantness. Abram, we are told, left Egypt, now very rich in cattle, in silver, and in gold (Gen. 13:2). Traveling back through the south of Palestine (the Negeb) Abram finally reached his old camping-ground between Bethel and Ai, unto the place of the altar, which he had made there at the first. And there Abram called on the name of Jehovah, that is, re-established the worship of the living and true God. Murphy suggests that by this experience in Egypt, the patriarch, thus reproved through the mouth of Pharaoh, will be less hasty in abandoning the land of promise, and betaking himself to carnal resources (MG, 272).
Recapitulation: Leaving Haran, Abram journeyed through Shechem (Gen. 12:6), Bethel (Gen. 12:8), southward (Gen. 12:9), Egypt (Gen. 12:10), back to the Negeb (Gen. 13:1), and to Bethel (Gen. 13:3); but he seems not to have settled down until he reached Hebron (Gen. 13:18). Here he remained (Gen. 13:18, Gen. 14:13, Gen. 18:1), through the birth of Ishmael at 86 (Gen. 16:16), and the conception of Isaac at 99 (Gen. 17:1). The most significant event of this period, and indeed of his whole life, was the revelation of the Abrahamic covenant (ch. 15) and its confirmation (ch. 17), the means by which he and his fleshly seed were reconciled to God.
REVIEW QUESTIONS ON PART TWENTY-SIX
1.
Where were the earliest civilizations located and why?
2.
What does the word Mesopotamia mean?
3.
What especially enhanced the development of civilization in Mesopotamia?
4.
Where did Semitic and Indo-European cultures flourish respectively?
5.
Where did the Akkadians and Sumerians flourish geographically?
6.
What was the Akkadian Empire and who established it?
7.
Who were the Amorites? In what city especially have archaeologists discovered their cultural remains?
8.
Who was their greatest king and in what city did he reign?
9.
State the chief facts of the early history of Ur.
10.
State the main facts of the later history of Ur.
11.
Who were the Hurrians? What is the best known site of their cultural remains?
12.
What was the kingdom of the Mitanni?
13.
Who were the Hittites? Where did they establish themselves in the Near East? What was their chief city and where was it located?
14.
What economic development enhanced the power and prosperity of the Hittites?
15.
Who were the Hyksos? When did they enter Palestine and why?
16.
State the important facts about the Third Dynasty of Ur.
17.
Name the centers of archaeological excavation the remains of which are relevant to the culture of the Patriarchal Age.
18.
What light does Stephens account in Act. 7:2-3 throw on the Call of Abram?
19.
For what purpose in particular are the generations of Terah introduced in Genesis?
20.
In what sense was the Call of Abram a turning-point in human history?
21.
In what sense was it a turning-point in Messianic history?
22.
Why do we take the view that Abram was not Terahs eldest son?
23.
What two basic features of the Abrahamic Promise occur in all the statements of it in Genesis?
24.
In what three ways was the Divine Promise in re Abrams seed fulfilled? Who was his eminent seed?
25.
Summarize Murphys eloquent treatment of the sequence of the earthly and the heavenly.
26.
How was this sequence fulfilled in the life of Abraham?
27.
Why do we say that the Abrahamic Covenant was the Covenant of Promise?
28.
Who was the Child of Promise and why so called?
29.
Why do many commentators assume that two divine calls were made to Abram?
30.
Is it possible to harmonize Abrams many manifestations of faith in God with the notion that he had yielded to the religious apostasy which seems to have characterized his kinsmen?
31.
What was the first lap of Abrams pilgrimage of faith?
32.
How does Gosman reconcile the apparent discrepancy between Moses and Stephen concerning the Call of Abram?
33.
Why are Sarai and Lot both mentioned in the accounts of Abrams departure from Ur and his departure from Haran?
34.
What was the distance from Ur to Haran? How was Haran associated in Biblical history with Abrams various kinsmen? Where did Terah die?
35.
State again the three fulfillments of the Abrahamic Promise concerning Abrahams seed.
36.
Trace Abrams route from Haran to his first stopping-place at Shechem. What was the distance involved? How old was Abram when he left Haran?
37.
How does the ancient city of Damascus figure in the story of the life of Abraham?
38.
Explain the different uses of the word Canaanite in the Old Testament.
39.
What suggested interpretations have we of the statement, And the Canaanite was then in the land?
40.
What is the simplest explanation of this statement?
41.
Why is it assumed that the place of Shechem is descriptive of a pagan holy place? Have we any reason for assuming that Abram himself participated in pagan rites?
42.
Are we justified in assuming that we have in the oak of Moreh indications of primitive animism?
43.
What is the significance of Gods word to Abram in Gen. 12:7?
44.
What was Abrams second stopping-place?
45.
At what places were Abrams altars erected?
46.
What are the three elements of Biblical religion?
47.
Explain the statement that altars become altars only when a victim is slain.
48.
What institution was the very soul of Patriarchal religion?
49.
What typical meaning did sacrifice have under the Patriarchal and Jewish Dispensations?
50.
Name in their proper sequence the three Dispensations of divine grace. What was the extent of each?
51.
What specific changes determined the changes of Dispensations also?
52.
In what other instances does Bethel figure in Old Testament history?
53.
Explain the full meaning of the statement that Abram called upon the name of Jehovah.
54.
What was the Negeb? The Way of Shur?
55.
What caused Abram to journey into Egypt?
56.
What fact made Egypt a breadbasket in times of famine in Syria and Palestine?
57.
In the light of Gen. 17:17 how old was Sarai when Abram entered Egypt?
58.
How harmonize Sarahs age with her alleged attractiveness?
59.
What deception did Abram perpetrate on Pharaoh?
60.
What was the actual relationship of Sarai to Abram?
61.
What according to the Genesis account motivated Abrams attempted deception in this case?
62.
What explanation of Abrams deception is suggested by Speiser?
63.
What explanation is suggested in the Jerusalem Bible?
64.
How does Jamieson explain it ?
65.
What other cases of the same kind of deception are related in Genesis?
66.
In what sense was Abrams introduction of Sarai to Pharaoh a half-truth but a whole lie at the same time?
67.
In what sense is the Bible completely realistic? How is this illustrated by the report of Abrams behavior toward Pharaoh?
68.
What evidence do we have that Pharaoh did not enter into marital relations with Sarai?
69.
Discuss F. W. Robertsons statement that in this case the man of God was rebuked by the man of the world, and the parallels he draws from the incident.
70.
Through whose instrumentality did God cause Abrams sin to find him out?
71.
In what ways did God deal out justice to Pharaoh also?
72.
How did Pharaoh deal with Abram?
73.
To what place in Palestine did Abram return?
74.
Give the recap of Abrams journey from Ur to Egypt and back into the Land of Promise.
75.
What statement in the Abrahamic Promise shows that God did not abandon the other families of the earth when he called out Abrams seed, but was in fact making provision ultimately for their spiritual welfare also?
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
XII.
(1) Now the Lord had said unto Abram.Heb., And Jehovah said unto Abram. There is no new beginning; but having briefly sketched the family from which Abram sprang, and indicated that he had inherited from them the right of primogeniture, the narrative next proceeds to the primary purpose of the Tldth Terah, which is to show how in Abram Jehovah prepared for the fulfilment, through Israel, of the prote-vangelium contained in the promise made to Eve at the fall (Gen. 3:15). The rendering had said was doubtless adopted because of St. Stephens words (Act. 7:2); but it is the manner of the Biblical narrative to revert to the original starting point.
Thy country.A proof that Abram and his father were no new settlers at Ur, but that the race of Shem had at this time long held sway there, as is now known to have been the case.
Thy kindred.This rendering is supported by Gen. 43:7; but it more probably means thy birthplace. It is the word translated nativity in Gen. 11:28. where its meaning is settled by the prefixed land; and the sense is probably the same here. If so, the command certainly came to Abram at Ur, though most of the versions suppose that it happened at Haran.
A land that I will shew thee.In Gen. 11:31 it is expressly said that the land was Canaan, but possibly this knowledge was concealed from the patriarch himself for a time, and neither he nor Terah knew on leaving Ur what their final destination would be.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
THE CALL OF ABRAM, Gen 12:1-3.
The history now narrows again to a single branch of the family of Terah Abram and his descendants. The other branches, which are only incidentally alluded to hereafter as they are connected with the fortunes of the covenant people, remained in Chaldea at least for generations, and a large portion of them settled around the wells of Haran, where, in the days of Isaac and Jacob, we find them forming a community which furnished these patriarchs wives of their kinsfolks, Rebekah, Rachel, and Leah, while the sons of Abram were still sojourners among the children of Ham. It was now more than four centuries since God’s last revelation to Noah, and the blessing of Shem. The scattered nations were fast sinking into idolatry; but that the knowledge of God was yet in the earth, incidental notices, as that of “Melchizedek, king of Salem and priest of the most high God,” sufficiently declare. Where there was such a priest, and a royal priest, there must have been established worship and a number of worshippers. Probably the history of Job, the patriarch of Uz, wherein, as Ewald says, the manners, customs, style of thought and expression are all of the pre-Mosaic age, furnishes another example of genuine faith in the true God among a people who had never heard of the Abrahamic covenant.
But Abram was now called from the family of Terah to be a blessing to the whole earth; the father of a missionary nation, who should preserve and disseminate the knowledge of the true God through all nations and ages. His whole life was to be an education in faith, which is the root of true religion. “Every movement in the physical and ethical history of Abraham is fraught with instruction of the deepest interest for the heirs of immortality. The leading points in spiritual experience are here laid before us. The susceptibilites and activities of a soul born of the Spirit are unfolded to our view. These are lessons for eternity.” Murphy. It is in this way that the biblical history is so profitable for doctrine, counsel, and instruction in righteousness.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
1. The Lord had said Rather, the Lord said . The pluperfect rendering was adopted by our translators from a supposed necessity of harmonizing this verse with Act 7:2. But it is not necessary to suppose the writer here refers to a second call, which Abram received in Haran . According to a usage often noticed in these pages, the writer goes back and takes up his narrative at a point previously recorded so we may believe, with Stephen, that this call of Abram occurred “before he dwelt in Haran.” The history of Terah was in the last chapter finished, and now begins the continuous history of the chosen seed from the great event in which it had its birth. It was a Jewish tradition, as we see from the book of Judith, that the descendants of Terah were driven out from Chaldea because they refused to follow the prevalent idolatry: “For they left the way of their ancestors, and worshipped the God of heaven, the God whom they knew: so they [the Chaldeans] cast them out from the face of their gods, and they fled into Mesopotamia, and sojourned there many days. Then their God commanded them to depart from the place where they sojourned, and to go into the land of Canaan.” Jdt 5:8-9 .
Get thee out Go for thyself; a special command. Note four particulars in this divine call. 1) Abram was to leave his native country, the fertile land where his fathers had dwelt for centuries, with its cities and its civilization, the mountains and noble rivers of his childhood. 2) His kindred, the stock of Eber, whom he left in Chaldea. 3) His father’s house, the family of Terah, whom he left in Haran. The closest earthly ties were to be broken. 4) He was to go forth, he knew not whither, unto a land that God should show him. Heb 11:8. He was to exchange the town and the pastoral life for that of the nomad; to leave the massive temples of Chaldea to build altars here and there in the wilderness. But by faith he saw his father-land, his home, in the promise of God. Heb 11:14.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘And Yahweh said to Abram, “Leave your country and your kinsfolk, and your father’s house, for the land that I will show you. And I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you and make your name great, and you be a blessing. And I will bless those who bless you and the one who curses you I will curse, and in you all the families of the earth will be blessed”.’
This is the first appearance of Yahweh to Abram of which we learn, and it is spoken as matter of fact, without introduction. We are not told how Abram had come to know of Yahweh, but possibly we are to recognise that he would come to know Him from the family records, Gen 1:1 – Gen 11:27 a. Later appearances draw attention to the awesome nature of these experiences that Abraham has with God.
We note again at this point that all the records which are pieced together in the account of Abram’s dealings with God are built around covenants. They are covenant records, and only incidentally history. Thus they would be recorded in writing immediately as evidence of the covenant with Yahweh. (We do not have a ‘life of Abraham’, we have a record of covenants in which Abraham was involved. This is why so much is missing from his life story. This is also why knowledge of Isaac’s life is so limited. He did not have the experiences with God that Abraham had).
It is easy through familiarity to fail to recognise the stupendous nature of these experiences of Abram. Here was a man, in a family where other gods were prominent, who had established himself semi-independently, and was now experiencing an awe-inspiring theophany which would determine his whole future. The whole of what has gone before has been leading up to this.
We must not have the wrong idea about Abram. He was already a prince of his own family tribe, well-to-do and with many servants (Gen 12:5). He would not be going alone, for his family tribe would go with him. But he was called to leave his family and all his ties, for only then could he establish an exclusive community of Yahweh, (the first ‘church’). It required faith – no longer would he enjoy the protection of the larger tribal connections and the place ahead was unknown – and obedience, for the decision lay with him and with him alone. Sometimes much is required of one to whom much will be given.
“Leave —- for a land that I will show you”. He is called to venture into the unknown. The way ahead will be revealed to him as he takes the path of obedience. His part is to trust and obey. What a crucial moment this is in his life. It will determine his whole destiny. Indeed it will determine the destiny of the world.
God does not hold back on what is being demanded. It is spelled out clearly. He must leave his land, to which by now he has become tied by a sense of belonging. He must leave his kinsfolk, those whom he knows so well and has relied on so often. He must leave his position in the family hierarchy, his father’s house, those who are most important to him. The thoughts are progressive.
But in return he is promised what every man dreams of. He is to enjoy a new land. He will become ‘a great nation’. He will experience God’s special protection. He is to become ‘a blessing’. Indeed the whole earth will be blessed through what he does, or rather what God does through him. The ideas are in parallel. He must leave a land to receive a land. He must leave kinsfolk in order to become part of a great nation. He must leave his close family so that all the world might become his family. This is God’s covenant. Obey, he is told, and you will receive abundantly and flowing over. And Abram believes and obeys.
It was against all natural common sense. Surely his opportunity to become a great nation lay in inheriting his father’s position over the combined family sub-tribes? But God knows that unless he breaks free he will not be truly free, for always he will be held back by tradition, connections with his father’s gods and responsibility to others. Only when he has fully broken free to become master of his own destiny will he be able to receive and to offer the fullness of blessing. When God chooses a man He strips him of all that could prevent his usefulness. But sometimes we are not willing to let go. Abram was willing to let go.
“I will make you a great nation”. This thought is prominent in all the promises to Abram. He will have many descendants, and in Gen 17:5-6 (compare Gen 17:20) the promise is expanded to become ‘nations’ (see Gen 13:16; Gen 15:5; Gen 17:5 on; Gen 18:18; Gen 22:17; Gen 26:4; Gen 26:24; Gen 28:14; Gen 35:11).
“Make your name great.” There is a deliberate contrast here with those who went to Babel (Gen 11:4). They went out from their family background to make themselves a name, but it ended in miserable failure, for they built what was only temporary, and they brought division to the world which would only result in further misery. Abram will build what is permanent, which will result in blessing. He builds no city but what he builds, a household of faith, will be a blessing to the world. The choice the world always faces is spelled out clearly here. God or mammon? The ‘pleasures of civilisation’ or joy in God? It is where the heart is that really matters.
“Be a blessing”. The covenant is full of blessing. Blessing for Abram. Blessing for his friends. Blessing for the world. Abram is to be the earthly source of that blessing. He is not given the narrow view of seeking to achieve blessing for himself. He is to seek to be a blessing. And as he does so he will be blessed himself. What a contrast this is with those who sought to build ‘civilisation’ only for their own ends.
“I will bless those who bless you, and the one who curses you I will curse.” There is a deliberate contrast between the plural and the singular. His friends will be many, his enemies few. But enemies he will have for he seeks to serve God and this will always result in those who react to such an attitude. But Abram is assured that God will be watching over his relationships and acting accordingly.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
God’s Divine Calling to Abraham – Canaan Was at the Crossroads of the Gentile Nations – We get the term “the Promised Land” from Gen 12:1-3 because it is in this passage of Scripture that God told Abraham to leave Haran and travel to a land that God would give him. Thus, we call it the Promised Land. It was to be a land where God’s people were to dwell forever, at the crossroads of all civilizations. Notice that this Promised Land, the land of Israel, was strategically located where three continents join, Europe, Asia and Africa. Note:
Eze 5:5, “Thus saith the Lord GOD; This is Jerusalem: I have set it in the midst of the nations and countries that are round about her.”
This means that when other nations traveled the long trade routes, they very often would need to pass through the land where God’s people dwelt. They would see the people of the covenant living in peace and prosperity and would hear the message of God’s covenant which brought this about. In this way, the Gospel could be more quickly spread throughout the inhabited world.
Not only did God use the central location of Israel to testify of God’s blessings. He also used it to demonstrate His judgment for all nations to see. God told Ezekiel that Jerusalem would be judged in the sight of all that “pass by.”
Eze 5:8, “Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I, even I, am against thee, and will execute judgments in the midst of thee in the sight of the nations.”
Eze 5:14, “Moreover I will make thee waste, and a reproach among the nations that are round about thee, in the sight of all that pass by.”
A second possible reason that God gave to Abraham the land of Canaan may be hinted at in The Book of Jubilees. According to Jewish tradition, the three sons of Noah divided the earth into three lots during the days of Peleg (Gen 10:25) and the land of Canaan was one of the areas that was given to Shem and to his descendants. But when the children of Noah scattered and moved into their heritage, Canaan, the son of Ham, took the land of Canaan, which belonged to the sons of Shem, and he refused to enter into his appointed inheritance. As a result, the curse that Noah spoke over those children who took possession of another person’s land was placed upon Canaan. Thus, the Canaanites were living on land that did not belong to them and God chose to remove them from this land which rightfully belonged to Shem and his descendants, one of which was Abraham. Thus, Abraham has legal rights to the land of Canaan (see The Book of Jubilee 10.29-35). We can read again in The Book of Jubilees of how Abraham saw this as the reason that God would one day cut off the seed of Canaan when he was about to die and blessed Jacob.
“Be thou ware, my son Jacob, of taking a wife from any seed of the daughters of Canaan; For all his seed is to be rooted out of the earth. For, owing to the transgression of Ham, Canaan erred, And all his seed shall be destroyed from off the earth and all the residue thereof, And none springing from him shall be saved on the day of judgment.” ( The Book of Jubilees 22.20-21)
God Blesses Those Who Bless Israel One of the first promises that God gave to Abraham is that He would make Abraham and his descendants a blessing to all the families of the earth. In doing this, God said that He would bless those who blessed Abraham and curse those who cursed him. We see these blessings and curses come upon people and nations throughout the entire Scriptures. In Gen 12:17 God plagued the house of Pharaoh because this king took Abraham’s wife. We see in the story of Jacob serving Laban for Rachel his daughter that God blessed Laban for Jacob’s sake (Gen 30:27) and warned Laban not to harm him when he fled (Gen 31:24; Gen 31:29). God also blessed Pharaoh for giving Israel the land of Goshen by making his nation wealthy and powerful. In the time of Moses God cursed Pharaoh by destroying his nation with the ten plagues, and by drowning his army in the Red Sea for persecuting Israel in the land of Egypt. God blessed Rahab for hiding the two spies in Jericho by saving her family (Jos 6:25). We read in the book of Esther how God destroyed wicked Haman because he tried to destroy the Jewish people. In Luk 7:1-10 we read how Jesus healed the centurion’s servant because the Jews testified of his good deeds to the Jews. In Act 10:1-48 God blessed Cornelius and his household by sending Peter to preach to him the Gospel of Jesus Christ. God sent His angel to the home of Cornelius because “he feared God with all his house, which gave much alms to the people (the Jews), and prayed to God alway” (Act 10:2). Paul said in Rom 15:27 that the Gentiles are debtors to the Jews; “for if the Gentiles have been made partakers of their spiritual things, their duty is also to minister unto them in carnal things.”
God Generally Calls Men to Take Giant Steps of Faith It is interesting to note that God generally calls men to go out by faith without a full understanding of where they are going or what they will do or say. God called Abraham to go to the land of Canaan, then told him to sacrifice his son Isaac on the altar. God also tested Job. This is because God created man differently than a woman. A woman is generally more emotionally based and her mind is concerned about the details of her life and family, while a man is generally more logical and does not need to know details. In other words, it is generally more important for a woman to understand how things are going to work out than for a man. It would be easier for a woman to become stressed in such a call, while the man generally has the ability to focus on the call and remain calm. This has been my experience as a married man having been called to the mission field for many years. I have seen the challenges of a husband taking care of his wife while taking steps of faith similar to those of Abraham. However, it is important to note that God has used women to accomplish great feats of faith.
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:
Gen 12:1
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.”
The Book of Jubilees (12.16-25) tells us that God spoke these words to Abraham because he was asking the Lord about the destiny of his life in prayer. Note other parallel passages that refer to this call to Abraham:
Gen 20:13, “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 shew unto me; at every place whither we shall come, say of me, He is my brother.”
Gen 24:7, “The LORD God of heaven, which took me from my father’s house, and from the land of my kindred, and which spake unto me, and that sware unto me, saying, Unto thy seed will I give this land; he shall send his angel before thee, and thou shalt take a wife unto my son from thence.”
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.”
Gen 12:1 “Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father’s house” Comments – Note the progressive order of people groups that God commanded Abraham to depart from. He was to leave his nation, his clan and even his immediate family.
Gen 12:1 “Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father’s house” – Comments – In Genesis 11, we see that Abraham was already on the move. He had moved with his father from Ur to Haran. But this was not enough. God had a greater plan for him than what his father could see. His father had taken him as far as he had faith to go. Now it was time to leave his father’s faith, and move up to a higher level of faith than what any of his kindred had ever walked. In order to do this, he had to leave them behind.
Illustration – My wife tells me of the unique customs of her hometown in Cagayan de Oro, Philippines. In this city, people lived in small neighbourhoods. In each neighbourhood, the people were expected to carry out certain Christmas rituals and infant baptism rituals by choosing godfathers and godmothers, and many other customs. Superstitions were intermingled with Catholic traditions. In other words, there was a tremendous amount of peer pressure from friends and relatives to live a certain lifestyle, while these ancient superstitions mixed with Catholic beliefs held people in darkness to the truth.
Once Menchu was able to come out of her hometown environment, she began to see how many superstitions had been taught to her. She was able to learn the Word of God without the pressure of her superstitious Catholic neighbourhood and peers. She was able to begin learning how to serve the Lord in the liberty given to her by the saving grace of the Lord Jesus Christ. As she begun to grow in the Lord, she was able to lay aside wrong thinking and superstitious instructions that had been handed down through her family for generations. She began to instruct her family in the ways of righteousness and lead them to salvation in Christ Jesus. She began to see the darkness that her people lived under and how much they needed the light of the Gospel to be set free. All of this because she was able to escape from this environment and freely exercise her faith in God with the hindrances of family and peers.
Such an environment of peer pressure was present in Abraham’s community. By his leaving, he was given the freedom to learn about God’s ways, and serve YHWH without criticism from his relatives and friends. This was the reason that Abraham had to leave his family in order to freely worship the Lord.
Gen 12:1 “unto a land that I will shew thee” – Comments – When Abraham arrived in this land, although he was called by God to go here, he found a land in severe famine. He had obeyed God’s first instruction of departing from his family. Now, when he pitched camp at Shechem in the plain of Moreh (Gen 12:6), the Lord appeared unto him and told him that this was the land that he was to live and his descendants were to inherit. This is how God showed him where he was to go. However, it was not until he separated from Lot that God revealed to him the full revelation of his inheritance (Gen 13:14-18). Perhaps Lot was the final relative that Abraham separated from so that he was in God’s perfect will to receive this full revelation
Gen 12:1 Comments – On 22 July 1997 my wife and I stepped onto a plane and headed for Africa to do missionary work. I had answered the call to missions fifteen years earlier in a chapel service in seminary. A few months I was asked to go to Africa, I received four dreams that gave me confirmation that this was the right decision. In December 2000, someone asked me if my wife also had a word from the Lord to go with me to Africa.
I answered and said that because my wife was submitted to me, she made a decision based on her role as a wife, not based on a revelation from the Lord. Then I gave an illustration:
When Abraham received a call to leave his country and go to Canaan, he obeyed the Lord. On the other hand, the Scriptures do not record anywhere that Sarai received a word from the Lord. But the Scriptures do record Sarai’s submissive role to Abraham in that she called him Lord. So, my wife did have a revelation from the Lord. This revelation was a principle that she implemented in her life daily. I had received a specific revelation, and my wife had received a general revelation. Both of us were following the Lord’s will in these revelations.
1Pe 3:6, “Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose daughters ye are, as long as ye do well, and are not afraid with any amazement.”
Gen 12:1 Comments – Note that God called Abraham out from Haran at the age of 75 (Gen 12:4). His father was 145 years old (205 – 60 = 145 = 70 + 75) when he left Ur. Terah did not die until 60 years later in Haran (Gene Gen 11:32).
Gen 12:4, “So Abram departed, as the LORD had spoken unto him; and Lot went with him: and Abram was seventy and five years old when he departed out of Haran.”
Gen 11:32, “And the days of Terah were two hundred and five years: and Terah died in Haran.”
Gen 12:2 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:
Gen 12:2
Gen 11:4, “And they said, Go to, let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven; and let us make us a name , lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth.”
Gen 12:2 Comments – In this promise that God would make of him a great nation, Abraham knew that he had no son to fulfill the promise. Therefore, he adopts Eliezer of Damascus to be his heir (See Gen 15:2-3). This was against God’s plan.
Gen 15:2-3, “And Abram said, Lord GOD, what wilt thou give me, seeing I go childless, and the steward of my house is this Eliezer of Damascus? And Abram said, Behold, to me thou hast given no seed: and, lo, one born in my house is mine heir.”
God will bless Abraham so that he can bless others. God gives to us so that we can give to others. If we are not doing anything with the blessing, then there is no reason for God to give more blessings. He blesses us so that we can bless others. It is the principle of giving and receiving.
Gen 12:3 And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.
Gen 12:3
Gen 30:27, “And Laban said unto him, I pray thee, if I have found favour in thine eyes, tarry: for I have learned by experience that the LORD hath blessed me for thy sake.”
Oba 1:15, “For the day of the LORD is near upon all the heathen: as thou hast done, it shall be done unto thee: thy reward shall return upon thine own head.”
Mat 25:40, “And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.”
Luk 7:4-5, “And when they came to Jesus, they besought him instantly, saying, That he was worthy for whom he should do this: For he loveth our nation, and he hath built us a synagogue.”
Act 10:22, “And they said, Cornelius the centurion, a just man, and one that feareth God, and of good report among all the nation of the Jews, was warned from God by an holy angel to send for thee into his house, and to hear words of thee.”
Gen 12:3 “and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed” Comments – God loves all peoples and nations. He has made a plan of redemption for all mankind through the redemption of Israel. The Table of Nations has just been listed in Gen 10:1-32. Now God reveals to Abraham His plan of redemption for all seventy nations listed in this table. God will supernaturally create another nation from his loins to affect redemption for mankind.
Gen 12:3 “and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed” Comments – Paul the apostle quotes from Gen 12:3 in his epistle to the Galatians (Gal 3:8).
Gal 3:8, “And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed .”
Gal 3:8 tells us that this is perhaps the first Old Testament prophecy of God justifying the Gentiles by faith. The type of faith required would be the faith that Abraham used when he believed God’s promises to him. Thus, we are told in Gal 3:8 that God preached the Gospel of salvation through faith in Christ (Abraham’s seed) beforehand in Gen 12:3. The “families”, or nations, that God would bless through Jesus Christ are listed by name in the Table of Nations (Gen 10:1-32). We are, thus, reminded of Joh 3:16, which tells us of God’s love for the nations and people of this world.
Joh 3:16, “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”
Gen 12:2-3 Comments – God’s Divine Plan of Redemption Revealed – We see in Gen 12:2-3 how God, in His sovereignty, is revealing His divine plan of redemption for mankind (see Gal 3:13-14, Eph 1:11; Eph 2:6-7).
Eph 1:11, “In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will.”
Eph 2:6-7, “And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus: That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus.”
Gal 3:13-14, “Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree: That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.”
Up until this point in the history of mankind, God had not given a person any particular calling since man’s fall in the Garden of Eden. Now, Abraham is the first person to whom God spoke to and gave a particular task. Abraham was faithful to that task. All of mankind have benefited from his obedience to God’s plan for his life. Praise God that we are part of that divine plan.
Gen 12:4 So Abram departed, as the LORD had spoken unto him; and Lot went with him: and Abram was seventy and five years old when he departed out of Haran.
Gen 12:5 Gen 12:5
Gen 11:28, “And Haran died before his father Terah in the land of his nativity, in Ur of the Chaldees.”
Gen 12:5 Comments – A modern map of the Middle East suggests that the journey from Haran to Shechem was approximately four hundred (400) mile. The total journey from Ur to Canaan was approximately 1,500-mile journey.
Gen 12:6 And Abram passed through the land unto the place of Sichem, unto the plain of Moreh. And the Canaanite was then in the land.
Gen 12:7
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.
Gen 12:7
God had told Abraham while he was in Ur of the Chaldees and in Haran to “Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father’s house, unto a land that I will shew thee.” (Gen 12:1) We read in Heb 11:8 that Abraham was not told where he was going. It was not until Abraham arrived in Canaan that he had a divine visitation recorded in Gen 12:7 in which the Lord confirmed that this was the place where God had called him.
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.”
God uses this same principle in our lives. He will give us a word from Heaven. If we will obey it, He will give us further revelation. But if we do not obey the first word, He will not continue to give us more specific revelation because our hearts are not ready to obey it. But Abraham obeyed each of God’s instructions, and therefore received further revelation.
I remember when I first came to Uganda in July 1997. Within a few weeks the Lord gave me an impressionable dream in which I saw myself being invited into a nation. I saw myself opening cage after cage of people who were bound in prisons. Thus, God gave me a confirmation by this dream that He had sent me to this nation in the same way that God appeared to Abraham when he arrived in the Promised Land.
Gen 12:7 Scripture Reference – Note Paul’s reference to the phrase “unto thy seed” in his epistle to the Galatians:
Gal 3:16, “Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed , which is Christ.”
Note a New Testament reference to this verse:
Act 7:5, “And he gave him none inheritance in it, no, not so much as to set his foot on: yet he promised that he would give it to him for a possession, and to his seed after him, when as yet he had no child.”
Gen 12:8 And he removed from thence unto a mountain on the east of Bethel, and pitched his tent, having Bethel on the west, and Hai on the east: and there he builded an altar unto the LORD, and called upon the name of the LORD.
Gen 12:8
Gen 28:19, “And he called the name of that place Bethel: but the name of that city was called Luz at the first.”
Abraham was still journeying south, as the author clarifies in the following verse, “And Abram journeyed, going on still toward the south” (Gen 12:9).
Gen 12:8 “and there he builded an altar unto the LORD, and called upon the name of the Lord” Comments – Abraham could have spent hours in prayer at a time, seeking God, much like men do today with prayer and fasting.
Gen 12:7-8 Comments – Abraham’s Altars – To Abraham these altars were his prayer closet where he would spend time with God. Raising this altar as quickly as he had pitched his tent shows his great concern for prayer and communion with God Almighty, his Creator, who is blessed forever.
Gen 12:9 And Abram journeyed, going on still toward the south.
Gen 12:10 Gen 12:11 Gen 12:11
Gen 12:12 Therefore it shall come to pass, when the Egyptians shall see thee, that they shall say, This is his wife: and they will kill me, but they will save thee alive.
Gen 12:13 Gen 12:13
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.”
This sibling relationship between Abraham and Sarah is also stated in The Book of Jubilees that Sarai was the daughter of Abraham’s father.
“And in the fortieth jubilee, in the second week, in the seventh year thereof, [1925 A.M.] Abram took to himself a wife, and her name was Sarai, the daughter of his father, and she became his wife.” ( The Book of Jubilees 12.9-10)
We see Isaac calling Rebekah his sister when she was in fact not (Gen 26:7). So, Abraham was not necessarily telling the truth.
Gen 26:7, “And the men of the place asked him of his wife; and he said, She is my sister: for he feared to say, She is my wife; lest, said he, the men of the place should kill me for Rebekah; because she was fair to look upon.”
Gen 12:14 And it came to pass, that, when Abram was come into Egypt, the Egyptians beheld the woman that she was very fair.
Gen 12:15 Gen 12:16 Gen 12:16
Job 1:3, “His substance also was seven thousand sheep, and three thousand camels, and five hundred yoke of oxen, and five hundred she asses, and a very great household; so that this man was the greatest of all the men of the east.”
Gen 12:17 And the LORD plagued Pharaoh and his house with great plagues because of Sarai Abram’s wife.
Gen 12:18 Gen 12:9
Gen 12:19 Why saidst thou, She is my sister? so I might have taken her to me to wife: now therefore behold thy wife, take her, and go thy way.
Gen 12:19
Est 2:12, “Now when every maid’s turn was come to go in to king Ahasuerus, after that she had been twelve months, according to the manner of the women, (for so were the days of their purifications accomplished, to wit, six months with oil of myrrh, and six months with sweet odours, and with other things for the purifying of the women;)”
Gen 12:20 And Pharaoh commanded his men concerning him: and they sent him away, and his wife, and all that he had.
Gen 12:17-20
Abram Israel 1. Wife in Bondage God’s children in bondage 2. Egyptians Plagued Egyptians Plagued 3. Set free from Egypt with wealth
into Canaan (in faith) Set free from Egypt with wealth
to return to Canaan (in faith) Is this a foreshadowing of Israel’s bondage an effect of this particular sin?
Abraham leaving Terah and dwelling in the Promised Land is an illustration of us forsaking all, and following Jesus, living as pilgrims and strangers on this land in our lifetime.
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
God Calls Abraham
v. 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 show thee. v. 2. 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; v. 3. and I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee; and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
EXPOSITION
Gen 12:1-5
Designed to trace the outward development of God’s kingdom on the earth, the narrative now concentrates its attention on one of the foregoing Terachites, whose remarkable career it sketches with considerable minuteness of detail, from the period of his emigration from Chaldea to his death at Hebron in the land of Canaan. Distinguished as a man of undoubted superiority both of character and mind, the head of at least two powerful and important races, and standing, as one might say, on the threshold of the historical era, it is yet chiefly as his life and fortunes connect with the Divine purpose of salvation that they find a place in the inspired record. The progress of infidelity during the four centuries that had elapsed since the Flood, the almost universal corruption of even the Shemits portion of the human family, had conclusively demonstrated the necessity of a second Divine interposition, if the knowledge of salvation were not to be completely banished from the earth. Accordingly, the son of Terah was selected to be the founder of a new nation, in which the light of gospel truth might be deposited for preservation until the fullness of the times, and through which the promise of the gospel might he conducted forward to its ultimate realization in the manifestation of the woman’s seed. Partly to prepare him for the high destiny of being the progenitor of the chosen nation, and partly to illustrate the character of that gospel with which he was to be entrusted, he was summoned to renounce his native country and kinsmen in Chaldaea, and venture forth upon an untried journey in obedience to the call of Heaven, to a land which he should afterward receive for an inheritance. In a series of successive theophanies or Divine manifestations, around which the various incidents of his life are groupedin Ur of the Chaldees (Act 7:2), at Moreh in Canaan (Gen 12:7), near Bethel (Gen 13:1-18.), at Mamre (Gen 15:1-21; Gen 17:1-27.), and on Moriah (Gen 22:1-24.)he is distinctly promised three thingsa land, a seed, and a blessingas the reward of his compliance with the heavenly invitation; and the confident persuasion both of the reality of these gracious promises and of the Divine ability and willingness to fulfill them forms the animating spirit and guiding principle of his being in every situation of life, whether of trial or of difficulty, in which he is subsequently placed. The miraculous character of these theophanies indeed has been made a ground on which to assail the entire patriarchal history as unhistorical. By certain writers they have been represented as nothing more than natural occurrences embellished by the genius of the author of Genesis (Eichhorn, Bauer, Winer), as belonging to the domain of poetical fiction (De Wette), and therefore as undeserving of anything like serious consideration. But unless the supernatural is to be in toto eliminated from the record, a concession which cannot possibly be granted by an enlightened theism, the Divine appearances to Abraham cannot be regarded as in any degree militating against the historical veracity of the story of his life, which, it may be said, is amply vouched for by the harmony of its details with the characteristics of the period to which it belongs (cf. Havernick’s ‘Introduction,’ 18). Nor does the employment of the name Jehovah in connection with these theophanies warrant the conclusion that the passages containing them are interpolations of a post Mosaic or Jehovistic editor (Tuch, Bleek, Colenso, Davidson). “Such a hypothesis,” says Keil, “can only be maintained by those who’ misunderstand the distinctive meaning of the two names, Elohim and Jehovah (q.v. on Gen 2:4), and arbitrarily set aside the Jehovah in Gen 17:1, on account of an erroneous determination of the relation in which El Shaddai stands to Jehovah.” Indications of the literary unity of the patriarchal history will be noted, and replies to objections given, in the progress of the Exposition.
Gen 12:1
Now the Lord. Jehovah = the God of salvation, an indication that the narrative is now to specially concern itself with the chosen seed, and the Deity to discover himself as the God of redemption. The hypothesis that Gen 12:1-4 were inserted in the fundamental document by the Jehovist editor is not required for a satisfactory explanation of the change of the Divine name at this particular stage of the narrative. Had said. Literally, said. In Ur of the Chaldees, according to Stephen (Act 7:2), reverting, after the usual manner of the writer, to the original point of departure in the Abrahamic history (Aben Ezra, Mede, Piscator, Pererius, Calvin, Willet, Rosenmller, Dathins, Alford, Murphy, ‘Speaker’s Commentary’); or in Haran, after Terah’s death, as the first call given to the patriarch (LXX; Chaldee, Syriac, Raschi, Lyra, Keil, Kalisch, Dykes), or as a repetition of the call addressed to him in Ur (Clarke, Wordsworth, Inglis). Luther conjectures that the call in Ur was given “fortasse per pattiarcham Shem;” but if the authority of Stephen be recognized, this was the occasion of the first theophany vouchsafed to Abram. Get thee out. Literally, go for thyself, a frequent Hebraism, expressive of the way in which the action of the verb returns upon itself, is terminated and completed; hence, though not necessarily emphatic, it may be equivalent to “Go thou,” whoever else remains behind (Jarchi, Ainsworth, Bush). Of thy country. A proof that the date of the call was while Abram was in Ur (Calvin), though if Ur was at Edessa (vide supra) the patriarch could scarcely have been said to be from home. And from thy kindred. At Ur in all probability Nahor and Milcah were left behind; at Haran, Nahor and his family, if they had already arrived thither, and according to some (Kalisch, Dykes) Terah also. And from thy father’s house. I.e. if they will not accompany thee. No Divine interdict forbade the other members of the family of Terah joining in the Abrahamic emigration. Unto a (literally, the) land that I will show thee. Through a revelation (Lange), or simply by the guidance of providence. The land itself is left unnamed for the trial of the patriarch’s faith, which, if it sustained the proof, was to be rewarded by the exceeding great and precious promises which follow:according to one arrangement, seven in number, one for each clause of the next two verses (Cajetan, Willet); according to another, four, corresponding to the clauses of the second verse, the last of which is expanded in the third (Keil); according to a third, six, forming three pairs of parallels (Alford); according to a fourth, and perhaps the best, two, a lower or personal blessing, comprising the first three particulars, and a higher or public blessing, embracing the last three (Murphy).
Gen 12:2, Gen 12:3
And I will make of thee a great nation. A compensation for leaving his small kindred. The nation should be great
(1) numerically (Keil, Rosenmller),
(2) influentially (Kalisch, Inglis),
(3) spiritually (Luther, Wordsworth).
And I will bless thee. Temporally (Pererius, Murphy), with every kind of good (Rosenmller), in particular with offspring (Vatablus); but also spiritually (Rupertus, Bush), in the sense; e.g; of being justified by faith, as in Gal 3:8 (Candlish). The blessing was a recompense for the deprivations entailed upon him by forsaking the place of his birth and kindred (Murphy). And make thy name great. Render thee illustrious and renowned (Rosenmller); not so much in the annals of the world as in the history of the Church (Bush); in return for leaving thy father’s house (Murphy). So God made David a great name (2Sa 7:9; cf. Pro 22:1; Ecc 7:3). And thou shalt be a blessing. I.e. “blessed,” as in Zec 8:12 (Chaldee, Syriac, LXX; Dathe, Rosenmller, Gesenius); or “a type or example of blessing,” so that men shall introduce thy name into their formularies of blessing (Kimchi, Clericus, Knobel, Calvin); but, best, “a source of blessing’ (spiritual) to others” (Tuch, Delitzsch, Keil, Kalisch, Murphy). The sense in which Abram was to be a source of blessing to others is explained in the next verse. First, men were to be either blessed or cursed of God according as their attitude to Abram was propitious or hostile. And I will bless themgrace expecting they will be many to bless (Delitzsch)that bless thee, and curse (with a judicial curse, the word being the same as in Gen 3:14; Gen 4:11) himonly an individual here and there, in the judgment of the Deity, being likely to inherit this malediction (Delitzsch)that curseth (literally, treateth lightly or despiseth The verb is applied in Gen 8:11 to the diminution of the waters of the flood) thee. The Divine Being thus identifies himself with Abram, and solemnly engages to regard Abrams friends and enemies as his, as Christ does with his Church (cf. Act 1:4). And in thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed. Not bless themselves by thee or in thy name (Jarchi, Clericus); but in thee, as the progenitor of the promised seed, shall all the families of the ground (which was cursed on account of sin, Gen 3:17) be spiritually blessedcf. Gal 3:8 (Calvin, Luther, Rosenmller, Keil, Wordsworth, Murphy, ‘Speaker’s Commentary’). Thus the second sense in which Abram was constituted a blessing lay in this, that the whole fullness of the Divine promise of salvation for the world was narrowed up to his line, by which it was in future to be carried forward, and at the appointed season, when the woman’s seed was horn, distributed among mankind.
Gen 12:4
So (literally, and) Abram departedfrom Ur of the Chaldees, or from Haran (vide supra)as the Lord had spoken unto him; and Lot went with him. Lot’s name being repeated here because of his connection with the ensuing narrative. And Abram was seventy and five years oldliterally, a son of five years and seventy years (cf. Gen 7:6)when he departedliterally, in his going forth upon the second stage of his journeyfrom Haran.
Gen 12:5
And Abram took (an important addition to the foregoing statement, intimating that Abram did not go forth as a lonely wanderer, but accompanied by) Sarai his wife, and Lot his brother’s son, and all the substancerecush, acquired wealth, from racash, to gain (cf. Gen 14:11, Gen 14:16, Gen 14:21; Gen 15:14), which consisted chiefly in cattle, Lot and Abram being nomadsthat they had gathered (not necessarily implying a protracted stay, as some allege), and the soulshere slaves and their children (cf. Eze 27:13)that they had gotten“not only as secular property for themselves, but as brethren to themselves, and as children of the one heavenly Father” (Wordsworth); that they had converted to the law (Onkelos); that they had proselyted (Raschi, Targam Jonathan, and Jerusalem Targum)in Haran; and they went forth to go into the land of Canaan;a prolepsis (cf. Gen 11:31, q.v.)and into the land of Canaan they camea distance of 300 miles from Haran, from which their course must have been across the Euphrates in one of its higher affluent, over the Syrian desert, southwards to Lebanon and Damascus (cf. Gen 15:2), where, according to Josephus, the patriarch reigned for some considerable time, “being come with an army from the land of the Chaldaeans” (‘Ant.,’ 1.7), and a village survived to his day called “Abraham’s habitation.” According to the partitionists (Tuch, Bleek, Colenso, Davidson) this verse belongs to the Elohist or fundamental document; but if so, then the Jehovist represents Abram (Gen 12:6) as journeying through the land without having previously mentioned what land.
HOMILETICS
Gen 12:4
The Chaldaean emigrant.
I. THE CALL OF GOD. Whether spoken in a dream or distinctly articulated by a human form, the voice which summoned Abram to emigrate from Ur was recognized by the patriarch to be Divine; and so is the gospel invitation, which through the medium of a written word has been conveyed to men, essentially a message from the-lips of God. The call which Abram received was
1. Distinguishing and selectingcoming to him alone of all the members of Terah’s family, of all the descendants of the line of Shem, of all the citizens of Ur, of all the inhabitants of earth; and the gospel invitation which men now receive, in its widest no less than in its narrowest acceptation, is differentiating and elective, passing by one nation and falling on another, addressing itself to one individual and allowing another to remain uncheered by its joyful sound (Rom 9:16).
2. Separating and dividingsummoning the patriarch to disentangle himself from the idolatries of his native land, and even sever his connection with the nearest and the dearest, rather than imperil his salvation by remaining in Chaldaea; and in a like spirit does the voice of Jesus in the gospel direct men to forsake the world (spiritually regarded the land of their nativity), to relinquish its infidelities, iniquities, frivolities; to renounce its possessions, occupations, amusements; yea, to dissolve its friendships and endearing relationships, if they would now be numbered among his disciples, and eventually enter into life (Luk 14:26).
3. Commanding and directingenjoining on the patriarch a long and arduous pilgrimage, that must necessarily be attended with many difficulties and dangers, and perhaps with not a few sorrows and privations that would require the most heroic fortitude and the most enduring patience, and that could only be accomplished by minutely following the Divine instructions, and taking each successive step in faith; and of a like character is the journey to which the follower of Christ is invited in the gospela journey as painful and laborious in its nature, as much demanding self-sacrifice and heroic resolution, as repugnant to the carnal heart, and as unprofitable to the eye of sense, as uncertain in its various steps, and as much dependent on the principle of faith (2Co 5:7).
4. Cheering and encouragingassigning to the patriarch a number of exceeding great and precious promises which should abundantly compensate for the sacrifices and deprivations that should be entailed upon him by compliance with the heavenly invitationa great inheritance, a great posterity, a great salvation, a great renown, a great influence; and in the gospel, too, are held forth to stimulate and comfort heaven’s pilgrims, a variety of rich rewards that shall more than recompense them for all that they may do or suffer in yielding to the call of Christ.
II. THE FAITH OF ABRAM. As the heavenly invitation which the patriarch received was designed to be symbolic of the gospel call Which is addressed to us, so the faith of the patriarch, which responded to the voice of God, was intended for a pattern of that hearty trust with which by us the gospel message should be embraced. The faith of Abram was
1. Submissive and obedient. Summoning his household, gathering his flocks, and taking with him his aged father Terah, he departed. Without this indeed he could not have been possessed of faith. Whenever the Divine testimony contains a precept and a promise, the faith that is sincere must yield obedience to the precept as well as cling to the promise. In the gospel message both are present: a promise of salvation, a full, free, and generous offer of eternal life; and along with this a precept of separation from the world, of consecration to a life of faith, holiness, and love; and the second must be obeyed, while the first is embraced to render faith complete.
2. Prompt and unhesitating. Without question or complaint, without the slightest shadow of reluctance, so far at least as the narrative reveals, the Chaldaean flock-master puts Jehovah’s order into execution; and in this respect again he is worthy of imitation. The same promptitude which he displayed should be exhibited by us in responding to the gospel call, and all the more that in our case there is less room than there was in his to doubt that the voice which calls is Divine.
3. Intelligent and reasonable. Even if Abram had departed from Chaldaea purely sua sponte, in order to escape contamination from its idolatries, instead of being open to a charge of folly because he had gone forth, “not knowing whither he went,” he would have been entitled to be regarded as having performed an act of highest prudence. Much more then was his conduct wise and commendable when he was acting in obedience to Heaven’s express commandgoing forth beneath the guidance and protection of Almighty strength and Omniscient love. And just as little can Christian faith be challenged as fanatical and rash, possessing as it does the same sanction and supervision as that of the father of the faithful.
4. Patient and persevering. Delayed at Haran, the traveler was not diverted from his path. Undaunted by prospective perils, he had left Chaldea to go to a land which God was to show him; unconquered by actual hardships and trials, he halted not till he set his foot within the promised land. And so we learn that faith to begin the Christian life is not enough; not he who commences the heavenward pilgrimage) but he who endureth to the end, shall be saved.
HOMILIES BY R.A. REDFORD
Gen 12:1-5
The preparations of grace.
We may call this the genesis of the kingdom of God.
I. It is FOUNDED in the word of the Divine covenant, the faith given by Divine grace to individuals, the separation unto newness of life.
II. The one man Abram gathers round him a small SOCIETY, kindred with him by the flesh, but bound to him doubtless by spiritual bonds as well. Tiros God has sanctified the family life by making it as the nidus of the spiritual genesis. When the new kingdom began its course in the Messiah, he drew to himself those who were previously associated by neighborhood, relationship, and familiar intercourse in Galilee. The Divine does not work apart from the human, but with it and by it.
III. The PROMISE was that of Abram should be made a great nation, that he should be blessed and a blessing, and his blessing should be spread through all families of the earth. The structure which Divine grace rears on the foundation which itself lays is a structure of blessed family and national life.
IV. The land of CANAAN may not have been indicated with positive certainty to the migrating children of God, but it was enough that he promised them a land which he would hereafter show them. “A land that I will show thee.” There was the certainty that it was a better land: Get thee out of thy country, because I have another for thee. The day-by-day journey under Divine direction was itself a help to faith to make the promise definite. The stay at Haran, from whence the pilgrimage might be said to make a true start, was itself a gathering of “souls” and “substance” which predicted a large blessing in the future. When once we have followed the word of God’s grace and set our face towards Canaan we soon begin to get pledges of the future blessings, laid-up riches of soul and substance, which assure us of the full glory of the life to come.
V. Even in that first beginning of the kingdom, that small Church out of Ur of the Chaldees, there is the evidence of that individual VARIETY OF CHARACTER AND ATTAINMENT and history which marks the whole way of the people of God. Lot was a very different man from Abram. As the story of this little company of travelers develops itself we soon begin to see that the grace of God does not obliterate the specialties of human character. Out of the varieties of men’s lives, which to us may seem incapable of reconciliation, there may yet be brought the onward progress of a Divine order and a redeeming purpose.R.
HOMILIES BY W. ROBERTS
Gen 12:1
The voices of God at the opening of the world’s eras.
I. AT THE OPENING Or CREATION. “And God said, let there be Light.”
II. AT THE OPENING OF REDEMPTION. “And God said, I will put enmity between thee and the woman,” &c.
III. AT THE OPENING OF THE OLD DISPENSATION. “And God said to Abram, Get thee out of thy country.”
IV. AT THE OPENING OF THE CHRISTIAN ERA. “And God said, This is my beloved SON?”
V. AT THE OPENING OF THE ETERNAL STATE God will say, “Come, ye blessed of my Father.”W.
HOMILIES BY W. ROBERTS
Gen 12:2, Gen 12:3
Sevenfold promises.
I. OF THE FEE–INCARNATE JEHOVAH TO ABRAM.
1. A great inheritance.
2. A great posterity.
3. A great name.
4. A great blessing.
5. A great alliance.
6. A great defense.
7. A great influence.
II. OF THE INCARNATE WORD TO HIS DISCIPLES.
1. The kingdom of heaven.
2. Divine consolation.
3. Inheritance of the earth.
4. Divine satisfaction.
5. Divine mercy.
6. The vision of God.
7. A place in God’s family (see Mat 5:1-9).
III. OF THE GLORIFIED CHRIST TO HIS CHURCH.
1. The tree of life.
2. A crown of life.
3. Hidden manna, the white stone, and a new name.
4. Power over the nations, and the morning star.
5. White raiment.
6. The distinction of being made a pillar in God’s temple.
7. A seat on Christ’s throne (see Rev 2:1-29; Rev 3:1-22.).W.
Fuente: The Complete Pulpit Commentary
Gen 12:1. Now the Lord had said unto Abram, &c. It is observable how Moses hastens over other events, to introduce the principal subject of his history; he comprises the history of the world, from the creation to the deluge, in six chapters, though that was a period of one thousand six hundred and fifty years; while he bestows on the history of Abram fourteen chapters, though it contains no longer space of time than one hundred and seventy five years. The reason is evident: he was not writing a history of mankind, but of that wonderful and gracious method, by which God determined to preserve at once the knowledge of himself in the world, and to prepare the way for the full accomplishment of the original promise. For this end God’s purpose was to choose and adopt one family, afterwards to be formed into a nation, instructed in religious knowledge by the Lord himself, and favoured with such extraordinary privileges and honours above all other nations of the earth, as were adapted to engage them, by the most rational motives, to adhere to God and his worship. At the same time, to prevent their being infected with the idolatries and vices of the rest of the world, as they certainly would have been, had they mingled with them; they were to be distinguished and separated from all other people, by their diet, and by divers civil and religious rites and ceremonies; but, more especially, by a secret mark in the flesh, by which they might certainly be known from other men. Thus they would be kept together in a body, and hindered from mixing with, and being corrupted by, their idolatrous neighbours. And further, their laws and religious institutions, being originally recorded in books, would more certainly be preferred and known in all future ages and dispensations. Thus God provided a storehouse of religious knowledge, a school of instruction and wisdom, for all the world. ABRAM, a person of the most eminent piety and holiness, was chosen to be the head and father of this nation; that, as he would always be held in great veneration among them, he might always shine before their eyes as an illustrious pattern of godliness. To which end, Moses gives so circumstantial an account of him.
But the ground of this whole scheme, and of God’s singular regard to Abram and his posterity, was the COVENANT OF GRACE; the PROMISE or Grant of favours and blessings to mankind, in, Jesus Christ our Lord: a covenant first made with Adam, renewed with Noah, and well known to the patriarchs; but more clearly revealed to Abram. See this ch. Gen 12:3 Gen 17:7; Gen 17:19. Gen 18:18. Gen 22:18.
The Lord had said “Though we are told in the former chapter,” Houbigant observes, “that Abram left Ur with his father Terah, yet this must have been after the revelation made here by God to Abram; St. Stephen assuring us, that the God of Glory appeared to him, when he was in Mesopotamia, before he dwelt in Charran,” Act 7:2. And they judge inconsiderately, who suppose the words of God here spoken, to be another revelation made to him, when he dwelt at Haran. For when God says, “Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred;” what can be more manifest, than that he had not yet left his country? for Abram’s country was Ur of the Chaldees, not Haran. St. Stephen, after relating the Divine command, Get thee out of thy country, immediately adds, then came he out of the land of the Chaldees, and dwelt in Charran. We are therefore to understand, that the departure of Terah from Ur was in consequence of the command given to Abram: which command is placed here, 1st, Because the narration concerning Abram begins here; 2nd, Because the command was given to Abram, not to Terah, who did not worship the true God, though probably he was converted to him by means of Abram; and, 3rdly, we may add, Because the sacred historian chose to conclude his account of Terah, before he entered more immediately upon the history of Abram. Though we are not told how God revealed himself to Abram, yet it seems to follow, from St. Stephen’s words, that there was such a visible manifestation of himself, as could leave Abram no room to doubt of the reality of a Divine appearance; The God of Glory appeared to our father, &c. God had various ways of ascertaining the reality of his revelations to those whom he favoured with them; and it seems probable, that the second Divine Person was more immediately concerned in such appearances as we read of in the Old Testament, and which were accompanied, no doubt, with evident tokens of the Shechinah or Divine Presence.
Get thee out of thy country, &c. We are certainly assured from the sacred writers of the New Testament, that Abram’s was a voluntary obedience to this command, and an act of faithful reliance on the Divine Commander. St. Paul expressly says, By faith Abraham, when he was called to go out into a place, which he should afterwards receive for an inheritance, obeyed; and he went out, not knowing whither he went, Heb 11:8 that is, not knowing, till he had left Ur, when God, most probably, directed him by some revelation which way to steer his course; and not knowing what sort of country it was, or how, or when, or by what means he should possess it: an act certainly of triumphant faith.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
SECOND PERIOD
The Genesis of the patriarchal faith in the promise and of the covenant religion; of the antagonistic relation, between the faith in the promise and heathenism; of the harmonious oppositions between the patriarchs and the human civilization of the heathen world. Patriarchal religion and patriarchal customs.Gen 12:1 to Gen 36:43
A
ABRAHAM, THE FRIEND OF GOD, AND HIS ACTS OF FAITH. Gen 12:1 to Gen 25:10
FIRST SECTION
The call of Abram. The emigration to Canaan. The first promise of God. His companionship with Lot. The first manifestation of God in Canaan, and the first homeless alienage in the land of promise. Abram in Egypt and Pharaoh
Gen 12:1-20
1Now the Lord had said [rather, said] to Abram, Get thee [for thyself, ] out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy fathers house, unto a land that I will show thee [through a revelation]. 2And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing: 3And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed [not bless themselves, which is expressed by the use of the Hithpael, Gen 22:18]. 4So Abram departed [went forth] as the Lord had spoken unto him, and Lot went with him: and Abram was seventy and five years old when he departed out of Haran. 5And Abram took Sarai his wife, and Lot his brothers son, and all their substance [gains] that they had gathered, and the souls [all the living] that they had gotten in Haran; and they went forth to go into the land of Canaan, and into the land of Canaan they came.
6And Abram passed through the land unto the place of Sichem [shoulder, ridge or water-shed] unto the plain [grove] of Moreh [teacher, owner]. And [Although] the Canaanite was then [already] in the land. 7And 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. 8And he removed from thence unto a mountain on the east of Bethel [house of God] and pitched his tent, having Bethel [now Beitin] on the west [seawards], and Hai [heaps] on the east; and there he builded an altar unto the Lord, and called upon the name of the Lord. 9And Abram journeyed, going on still [gradually further and further] toward the south. 10And there was a famine in the land: and Abram went down into Egypt to sojourn there; for the famine was grievous in the land. 11And it came to pass, when he was come near to enter into Egypt, that he said unto Sarai his wife, Behold now I know that thou art a fair woman to look upon [or of fair appearance]: 12Therefore it shall come to pass, when the Egyptians shall see thee, that they shall say, This is his wife: and they will kill me, but they will save thee alive. 13Say, I pray thee, thou art my sister, that it may be well with me for thy sake; and my soul shall live because of thee.
14And it came to pass, that when Abram was come into Egypt, the Egyptians beheld the woman that she was very fair. 15The princes also of Pharaoh saw her, and commended her before Pharaoh [Frst, ]: and the woman was taken into Pharaohs house. 16And he entreated Abram well for her sake: and he had sheep [small cattle] and oxen, and he-asses, and men-servants, and maid-servants, and she-asses and camels. 17And the Lord plagued Pharaoh and his house because of Sarai, Abrams wife. 18And Pharaoh called Abram and said, What is this that thou hast done unto me? Why didst thou not tell me that she was thy wife? 19Why saidst thou, She is my sister? so I might have taken her to me to wife; now, therefore, behold thy wife, take her and go thy way. 20And Pharaoh commanded his men concerning him: and they sent him away, and his wife, and all that he had.
GENERAL PRELIMINARY QUESTIONS
1. The age and state of the world at the patriarchal period. A multitude of nations who were to share in the salvation, through the faith of Abram, were not yet born into the world, especially the Roman and English people. The Germanic tribes lay still in the bosom of the Scythian nomadic life. A thousand years must roll away before the development of the Greek life, and a much longer period before the historical appearance of Rome. The foundation of the patriarchal family, out of whose fuller development into the twelve tribes the Jewish people sprang, begins with Abram. Patriarchalism appears still as the fundamental form under which the popular life exists and works. But out of this constitution a multitude of small kingdoms have grown up in Canaan and Syria. The first feeble attempt at founding a grand world-monarchy was made by Nimrod at Babel and Nineveh. In Egypt the kingdom of the Pharaohs already existed. The formation of national divisions began with the migrations of the people, and to these we may probably trace the rise of castes. The mechanical resemblance of the kingdom of heaven in the dynasty Hia in China appears to have been complete in its outline and characteristic features, before the definite foundation of the organic and living kingdom of heaven was begun in Abram.
2. The Biblework will treat more fully of the land of Canaan in the division, Book of Joshua. We refer in passing to the Bible-dictionaries, the geographies, and journals of travellers. See also Zahn: The Kingdom of God, i. p. 105. In this section we notice especially Sichem, Bethel, Ai, and the central part of Palestine; the South, especially the vicinity of Hebron and Sichem (now Nablous) lying between Gerizim and Ebal, about eighteen hours from Jerusalem and sixteen from Nazareth, marks the northern principal residence of the patriarchs. Hebron (also Kirjath-Arba, from the giant Arba, now El Kalil, i. e., friend, beloved, in honor of Abram), southerly about eight hours from Jerusalem, a very old city, the city of Abram and David, lying in a blooming and beautiful region, was their principal dwelling-place in the south. Their central residence is the region of Bethel (the name is here anticipatedoriginally Luz, Gen 28:19, now the ruins of Beitin), and Ai (the old Canaanitish royal city, Jos 7:2, two hours easterly from Beitin, northerly from Jerusalem, now Medineh), an elevated rich pasture-ground.
3. The nomadic life forms the natural basis of the patriarchal society. The Greek term nomad ( from pasture-ground) designates the herdsman in a specific sense, as one who roams with his herds over uncultivated tracts, which as commons are in one aspect wastes, in another pasture-grounds. The nomads are thus pastoral tribes and nations which have no fixed dwelling-place. According to the Conversations-lexicon, they stand higher in the scale of human society than the tribes who live by hunting and fishing, and lower than those who follow agriculture and trade, and belong essentially to the grade of barbarians. But as an original form of human life, and indeed as the form of the most quiet and retired life, the nomadic state is the basis upon which both the highest human culture and the most extreme savage wildness rest. Original thoughtful minds grew up to be the spiritual princes of humanity in the quietude of the nomadic life; mere common natures grew wild and savage under the same influences. The nomadic state still covers large portions of the race. In Europe we find only weak nomadic tribes on the great steppes skirting the Black sea, and in the high uncultivated northern latitudes, there Tartar and Turkish, here Finnish tribes. Asia and Africa are the congenial homes of the nomadic life. Nearly all the Finnish, Mongolian, and Turkish tribes, and the mixed tribes which have sprung from them, in the steppes and wastes in the northern, central, and border Asia are nomads; so also the Kurds and Bedouin Arabs of border Asia and North Africa, and nearly all the tribes of Southern Africa, Caffres, Betschuanas, Koranas, and the Hottentots. In South America the Gauchos, and in many respects some Indian tribes, are to be regarded as nomads. For the nomadic tribes of the East see Schrder, p. 273, Kohlrausch, a description of the Caravan March, p. 282. For the shepherd, headsman, wilderness, tents, see the articles in Winer [Kitto, Smith, Bible dictionaries.A. G.]
4. The Period of the Patriarchal Religion, and Form of Religion. In the New Testament the term is applied to Abraham, Heb 7:4, to the twelve sons of Jacob, Act 7:8 f., and to David, Act 2:29. Generally it designates the sacred ancestors of the early periods of the Israelites (Tob. 6:21, Vulgate) whom Paul, Rom 9:5; Rom 11:28, calls . Hence it has become customary even in historical language to call all the fathers of the early human races, and especially of the Israelitish people (including the twelve sons of Jacob), who are referred to and distinguished in biblical history, Patriarchs (German Erzvater). Its history, from the old theological point of view, is given by J. H. Heidegger, exercitat. select. de historia sacra patriarchar. (Amsterdam, 16678, Zrich, 1729), and is, perhaps, more critically treated by J. Jak. Hess: History of the Patriarchs (Zrich, 1776). Winer. The patriarch is the beginner or founder of a race or family (the word is formed from and ). The Hebrew designation , which the Septuagint translates (1Ch 9:9; 1Ch 24:31), but in 1Ch 27:22, where the Hebrew term is , and 2Ch 19:8, , does not refer to our patriarchs (which Bretschneider labors in his lexicon to authorize), but to the heads of individual branches of the tribes of Israel. Even in the New Testament, as is clear from Act 2:29, the word has a more comprehensive meaning. In Herzogs Real-Encyclopedia, article Patriarchs, there is a threefold distinction drawn between the biblical and theological, the Jewish usage as to the synagogue officers, and the churchly and official idea of the word. The Jews, e. g., even after the destruction of Jerusalem, call the presidents of the two schools at Tiberias and Babylon, patriarchs. In the Christian Church all bishops were originally termed patriarchs, but the council of Chalcedon limited the name to those renowned bishops who had raised themselves above bishops, and metropolitans. Here we are dealing only with the biblical and theological meaning of the term. In this relation we must distinguish the general, the narrower, and the most restricted idea of the word. In the general and widest sense, all the theocratic ancestors are included in the term, since the patriarchal faith, as the faith of salvation, forms the highest unity running through the Old and New Testaments. In the wider, earlier usual acceptation, the patriarchal period is viewed as including the pious ancestors of biblical history, from Adam to the twelve sons of Jacob, or to the Mosaic era. See Winer, the article in question, the work of Heidegger above referred to, and Hases Hutterus redivivus (Religio patriarchalis antediluviana et postdiluviana). Still, Hess, in his history of the patriarchs, has correctly placed the patriarchs before Abram in an introductory history, and begins the history itself with Abram. The earlier division of the Old Testament revelation into patriarchal, Mosaic, and prophetic religion (i. e., form of religion) is not now at all satisfactory. This division must be completed in one direction through the period of the national Israelitish piety or religiousness (from Malachi to Christ), and in the other through the period of the symbolic original monotheism from Adam to Abram, which may be again divided into the two halves of the antediluvian and postdiluvian primitive history. The symbolic monotheism is distinguished from the patriarchal period both as to form and essence. As to the form of the revelation, the symbol has there the first place, the explanatory word the second (paradise and the paradisaic word, the rainbow and the covenant with Noah); but in the history of the patriarchs the word of revelation holds the first rank, and the signs of the theophany enter in a second line, as its confirmation. Thus also the patriarchal religion stands in a relation of opposition and coherence with the Mosaic system. The Mosaic system is a remoulding of the patriarchal religion so far as Israel, grown into a people in Egypt, may require a preparatory, and thus a legal and symbolic instruction as to the nature of the faith of Abram and to receive that faith; it is a lower form of that religion so far as the religious life, which already in the patriarchs began to be viewed as an inward life, is here set before the people, who are strangers to it, as an external law; but is also a higher form of that religion so far as the ideas of the religion of promise are unfolded in the law, and in this explicit form are introduced into the life of the people. The law, however, is not the fundamental type of the Old Testament, but the faith of Abram. In the patriarchal religion the word of God is prominent, the symbol is subordinate; the Mosaic system, as also the primitive religion, brings the symbol into prominence (although the symbol as an institution). In Abram the divine promise occupies the foreground, the divine command rests upon it; in the legal period, as to the outward appearance the relation is just the reverse. Evidently the patriarchal religion, as also the prophetic period succeeding to the Mosaic system, regarded in a narrower sense, bears a marked resemblance to Protestantism, while the Mosaic system appears as the primitive type of the Medival Catholic Church. (See Herzogs Encyclopedia, article Patriarchs.)
As to its nature, the faith of Abram is distinguished from the faith of the pious ancestors in this, that he obtains and holds the promise of salvation, not only for himself, but for his family; and from the Mosaic system, by the fact that it expressly holds the promised blessing, in the seed of Abram, as a blessing for all people. In reference to the first, there were earlier lines of the promise: the line of Seth in contrast to that of Cain, the line of Shem in opposition to those of Japheth and Ham. But the line of Seth, through its corruption, is gradually lost in the line of Cain, and the line of Shem forms no well-defined opposition to the one all-prevailing heathenism. It is gradually infected with the taint of heathenism, while on the other hand pious believing lives appear in the descendants of Japheth and Ham. Melchisedec, with his eminent piety, belongs to the Canaanitish people, and thus to the family of Ham. During the whole period of the symbolic primitive religion, the theocratic and heathen elements are mingled together. The dark aspect of this religion is a mythological, ever-growing heathenism; its light side the symbolical, ever-waning, primeval monotheism. Heathenism gathers gradually, as a general twilight, through which glimmer the men of God, as individual stars. Thus Melchisedec stands in the surrounding heathenism. In a religious point of view he is , , . And he is so far greater than Abram, as he stands as the last shining representative in the Old Testament of the primitive religion looking backwards to the lost paradise (which, however, did not entirely cease in the whole Old Testament period, and is not absolutely extinguished even in later periods of the world); while Abram stands as the first representative of the decided religion of the future, who, as such, has already the promise, that in his seed all the families of the earth should be blessed, who is neither nor , since the beginning of his calling appears already in his father, Terah. But the old religion develops itself more definitely into the religion of the future at every step, when the corruption for the time has reached such a degree, that faith, looking out beyond the present and the judgment resting upon it, must fix in its eye a new beginning of salvation. Thus it was in Noah, thus also later in the Messianic prophets. But while Noah out of the flood of waters saved a new race of men, Abram has, through the overflowing flood of heathenism, to found a new particular people of faith, who should be a blessing for all. The blessing is already a very advanced idea of the salvation. For Eve the salvation assumes the idea of victory, for Lamech, rest, for Noah, the preservation of the divine name and the human race; for Abram, it forms the opposition to the curse. For as the curse is the endless, mysterious, progressive destruction of life, so the blessing is the endless, mysterious, progressive enriching and conservation of life. As the condition, indeed, Abram must go out from the heathen world. It is only as in opposition to it, that he can introduce the blessing which is promised in his seed. The pious forefathers had indeed already taken the first step of faith (Hebrews 11). They have, by faith in the creation of the world, uttered the denial of the independence of matter, the fundamental dogma of heathenism (Heb 11:3). Abel has taken the second step of faith; he has introduced the sacrifice of faith into the world, and on account of it sacrificed his own life. Enoch has taken the third; he sealed the faith in the new life and rewards beyond the present. Noah carried faith on to the salvation of God in the divine judgments. Abram, through the required renunciation of the world, introduced the Israelitish faith of the future, the hope for the eternal inheritance of God, and its introduction through the inheritance of his blessing. It was the legitimate result of his renunciation of the world that he sealed it through the sacrifice of Isaac. The succeeding patriarchs have developed this faith more fully, each in his own way. Isaac learned to prefer the first-born of the spirit before the first-born of blood; Jacob pointed out Judah as the central line of blessing within the blessings of his sons; Joseph proved his fidelity to the promise until his death. Thus was prepared the renunciation and the calling of Moses. (Taken from Langes article in Herzogs Encyclopedia.)
With the introduction of the Abrahamic religion (see the foregoing section) correspond its mild nature and form, and its rich development. As to the first, it must be observed that Abram, notwithstanding the decisive character of his separation from heathenism, still opposes himself to the heathen without any fanaticism. Hence it is said indeed, Get thee out! but the second word follows immediately: thou shalt be a blessing, and in thee shall be blessed, or shall bless themselves, all the families of the earth. Hence the patriarchs stand upon a friendly footing with the princes of Canaan. In the point of marriage alone, warned by the history of the Sethites, they dreaded theocratic misalliances (Gen 24:3; Gen 27:46). In the fourth generation the first historical characteristic type of fanaticism appears in the deed of Simeon and Levi (Genesis 34). The judicial and solemn disapproval of this deed by Jacob (Gen 49:5) marks the true spirit of the Israelitish religion; the bold commendation of this deed in the book Judith (Gen 9:2) reveals the later pharisaic Judaism. Even the mixed marriage is legal except in the case of the proscribed Canaanites; and to the questionable and unhappy connections, e. g. of Esau, there are opposed the blessed connections of Joseph and Moses. The only matter of question is whether there is such a certainty of faith that the believing party may raise the unbelieving into the sphere of faith. This was precisely that which modified the crime of Thamar; her fanatical attachment to the house of Jacob, or the tribe of Judah. Mild as was this patriarchal spirit of separation (because it was actually spirit) it was just as strict in the other aspect. Hence there are relative distinctions of the elect from those who are less strictly the chosen, running down through the family of Abram, first in the opposition between Isaac and Ishmael, then in that between Jacob and Esau, finally in the sharp distinctions in the blessings of Jacob. (From the same article.)
As to the development of faith in the patriarchal period, it proceeds from the acts of faith in the life of Abram, through the endurance (or patience) of faith in the life of Isaac, to the conflicts of faith in the life of Jacob; but in the life of Joseph the opposition between the sufferings and the glory on account of faith, comes into clear and distinct relief. The promise also unfolds itself more and more widely. The blessing of the descendants of Abram, who should inherit Palestine, divides itself already in the blessing of Isaac upon Jacob, into a blessing of the heavens and the earth, and Jacobs authority to rule announces more definitely the theocratic kingdom. But in the blessing of Jacob upon Judah, the Shiloh is designated, as the prince of war and peace, to whom the people should be gathered (a further extract from the article in question, p. 199). For the periods of the history of the covenant, see Kurtz, p. 135. For the nature of the patriarchal history, Delitzsch, p. 241249; [also Baumgarten, Commentary, p. 165168: Keil, p. 123125.A. G.]
[Kurtz arranges the history of the covenant under the following periods or stages: the period of the family, including the triad of patriarchs with the twelve sons of Jacob; the period of the people, having its starting point in the twelve sons of Jacob, and running through the Judges; the period of the kingdom; the period of the exile and restoration; the period of expectancy; and the period of the fulfilment.A. G.]
[Delitzsch holds, as we may abridge and condense his views, that the patriarchal history is introductory to the history of Israel, and is completed in three partsthe histories of the three patriarchs. The personal history of the patriarchs revolves around the promise as to Israel, and Canaan its inheritance. The characteristic trait of the patriarchs is faith. This faith shows itself in the whole mighty fulness of its particular elements in Abram; ceaselessly struggling, resolutely patient and enduring, overcoming the world. He is the type of the conflicts, obedience, and victory of faith . His loving endurance repeats itself in Isaac, his hopeful wrestlings in Jacob. is their motto. The promise and faith are the two correlated factors of the people of God. Renouncing the present, and in the midst of trials, its life passes in hope. Hope is its true life, impulse, and affection. Desire is Israels element.
Viewing the patriarchal history from the central point of that history, the incarnation of God in the fulness of time, its position in the history of salvation may be thus defined. There are seven stages in this history: 1. The antediluvian time, both paradisaic and after paradise, during which God was personally and visibly present with men, closing with the flood, when he retires into the heavens and from thence exercises his judicial and sovereign providence. The goal of history is thenceforward the restoration of this dwelling of God with men. The history has ever tended towards this goal. 2. The patriarchal time during which God manifested himself personally and even visibly upon the earth, but only at times and only to a few holy men, the patriarchs, at important points in the history of salvation; and even these revelations cease from Jacob to Moses. The revelation of God in the name , i. e. as the one coming down into history, and revealing himself in it, belongs to this time of the completed creation, of the opening redemption of Israel, His peculiar people. 3. The Israelitish period prior to the exile, during which God did not reveal himself personally and visibly as in the patriarchal period to a few, and to these only at times, but to a whole people and permanently, but still only to a people and not to mankind. There are two distinguishable epochs in this period. In the first Israel is led by the Angel of Jehovah in the pillar of cloud and firethe glorious and gracious presence of God, visible for the whole people. The second is that of the presence of God in the temple and in the word; in the temple for Israel, but only through the mediation of priests, in the word, but only through the mediation of prophets. But even this lower, less accessible temple-presence ceases when Israel filled up the measure of its iniquities. The glory of Jehovah departed from the temple. As God at first withdrew his manifested presence from the race and destroyed it with the flood, so now from the Jewish people, and abandons Jerusalem to destruction. As the first stage of the history closes with a judgment from the ascended God, and the second in the long profound silence from Jacob to Moses, so the third again ends like the first. 4. The time succeeding the exile, at its commencement not essentially different from the close of the third period. God was present in the word, but the ark of the covenant, the covering, the cherubim, the Urim and Thummim, and, more than all, the Shechinah, the visible symbol of the presence of Jehovah, were wanting in the temple. But prophecy itself grew speechless with Malachi and Daniel. The people complain, We see not our signs, there is no more any prophet (Psa 74:9). They named Simon the brother of the Maccabeean Jonathan the , but it was . Thus forsaken of God, and conscious of its forsaken state, the true Israel passed through this fourth stage of the history, a school of desire for believers waiting and longing for the new unveiling of the divine countenance. Then at last the dawn broke, Jehovah visited his people, and in the mystery now unveiling itself completes in far-surpassing glory the antitype of Paradise. 5. The time of the life of Christ in the flesh. It is now true in the most literal and real sense, . But at first Israel alone saw him. The rays of his glorious grace reach the heathen only as an exception. But his own received him not. They nailed the manifested in the flesh to the cross. But he who died, rose, , and ascended into heaven. He withdrew himself from the people who had despised him. But as Jehovah, after he had seated himself upon his heavenly throne, sent down at the close of the first stage the judgment of the flood, at the close of the third works the destruction of Jerusalem, so now the God-man ascended into heaven abandons Jerusalem to destruction and Judah to an exile which still endures. For Israel he will come again, but in the fire of judgment; and for believers he will also come again, but not visibly nor in the fire of judgment, but in the fire of the Spirit. 6. The stillenduring present, the time of the spiritual presence of the incarnate God in his church. This presence is both more than the visible presence of Christ in the days of his flesh, and less than the visible presence of the exalted one in which it reaches its enlargement and completion. We must not forget that the Spirit sent upon us from the glorified Son of Man is so far the as he comforts us on account of his absence; that all the desire of the Christian is to be at home with Christ; and that the hope of the whole church is embraced in the hope for the revelation of Christ. Without sharing in the exaggerated estimate of the miraculous gifts by the Irvingites, it cannot be denied that our time resembles the second part of the post-exile period, and that the church now, as believers then, desires the return of the wonderful intensity and gracious fulness of the spiritual presence in the primitive church. This desire will receive its fulfilment in the glorious time of the church upon the earth. 7. But the seventh stage of the history of salvation, which endures through the ons of ons, will first give full satisfaction to all the desires of all believers, and bring that glorious, transcendent restoration of the paradisaical communion with God in the incarnation, to its final perfection. The new Jerusalem (Rev 21:8) is the antitype of Paradise. The communion of God with the first man to be redeemed, has now become his communion with the finally redeemed humanity. His presence is no longer a transitory alternating, now appearing then vanishing, but enduring, ever the same, and endless; not limited to individuals nor bound to localities, but to all, and all-pervading; not merely divine, but divine and human; not invisible, but visible; not in the form of a servant, but in unveiled glory. God ascends no more, for sin is for ever judged and the earth has become as heaven. He descends no more, for the work of redemption is complete, the whole creation keeps its solemn sabbath, God rests in it, and it rests in God; Jehovah has finished his work, and Elohim is now all in all, . See Delitzsch, p. 239249.A. G.]
5. The fundamental form of divine revelation, particularly of the revelation of the old covenant, and still more particularly of the patriarchal period (see p. 48, Introd.). The historically-completed fundamental form of the divine revelation of salvation, is the revelation of God in Christ, the God-man, i. e. in one distinct, unique life, wherein the divine self-communication and revelation, and the human intuition of God, are perfectly united in one, while yet as elements of life they are clearly distinguished from each other. The progressive revelation must correspond in its outline and characteristic features to this goal to which it tends. In its objective aspect it must be through theophanies, in its subjective the vision of the revelation of God, in its plan, tendency, and development, Christophanies; the chief points in the interchange between God manifesting himself personally and the receptive human spirits in the pre-figurations of the future advent of Christ. The individual phases in the development of this form of revelation are these: (1) The revelation of God through the symbolism of heaven and earth; visibly for the paradisaic spiritual and natural clear-sighted vision; and coming out in particular words and representations of God, addressed to the ear and eye, promptly, according to the necessities of human development, and according to the energy of the Spirit of God, who translates the signs into words. The form of the primitive religion. (2) The self-revelation of God in the form of an angelic appearance, distinct from his being; the pre-announcement of the future Christ, or the Angel of Jehovah in reciprocal relation and action with the unconscious seeing, as in vision, resting upon the unconscious ecstasies of believers, manifesting himself first through the miraculous report or voice, then through miraculous vision, i. e. first through the word, then through the figurative appearance. The form of the patriarchal religion. (3) The revelation of God, distinguishing his face, i. e. his gradual incarnation, from his being, or nature, or the angel of his presence in reciprocal relation and action, with the conscious visions, based upon unconscious ecstasies. The Angel of his face, or the face. The fundamental form of the Mosaic system. (4) The appearance of Jehovah himself in his glory, in the brightness of his glory, surrounded by angelic forms, in reciprocal relation with the conscious visions, resting upon the conscious ecstasy of the prophets, or Jehovah appearing in his divine Archangel and with his angel-bands over against the prophets overwhelmed and trembling, drawing gradually nearer to the incarnate angel of the covenant (Mal 3:1). The fundamental form of the prophetic period. (5) The hidden preparation for the advent of the angel of the covenant, in the period of national religiousness; his work in the depths of human nature. (6) Christ the Angel of the Covenant, the unity of the divine revelation and the human intuition of God, and therefore also upon the divine side the unity of God and his Angel, and upon the human side the unity of the spiritual intuitions and the natural vision of Christ.
We have already, in what we have thus said, as indeed elsewhere (Leben Jesu, p. 46; Dogmatik, p. 586; Herzog, Encyclopedia, The Patriarchs of the Old Testament), stated our view of the Angel of the Lord; but we must here repeat that in our conviction the exegetical prejudice, ever coming into greater prominence, that the Angel of the Lord is a creature-angel, as also the prejudice in reference to the supposed angels (Genesis 6), burdens, obscures, and confuses in a fatal way, Old Testament theology, and leaves no room for a clear psychology of the faith of revelation, an intuitive Christology, or an organic unity of biblical theology.
In regard to this point, Kurtz has undertaken with great zeal the defence of the erroneous interpretation, although he had earlier defended the true one, History of the Old Covenant, p. 144, 2d ed. We introduce here his reference to the state of the question before we enter upon its discussion. The views of interpreters, as to the nature and being of the Angel of the Lord ( , also called ) who appears first in the patriarchal history, have been divided into two classes. The one sees in him a representation of the deity, entering perceptibly the world of sense, in a human form, and thus is to be regarded as the prefiguration of the incarnation of God in Christ; the other sees in him an angel, like other angels, but who, because he appears in name and mission as a representative of Jehovah, is even introduced and spoken of as Jehovah; indeed, himself speaks and acts as Jehovah. The first view has already made a beaten path for itself in the oldest theology of the synagogue, and in the theological doctrine of the Metatron, of that, from God emanating, godlike revealer of the divine nature, has assumed a definite shape and form, although embracing foreign elements (comp. Hengstenberg: Christology, iii. 2. pp. 3186). It was adhered to by most of the Fathers (Hengstenberg, as above), and with these must be counted the old churchly Protestant theologians. In recent times it has been defended most decidedly and fully by Hengstenberg (i. pp. 125142, 2d ed.; and iii. 2. pp. 3186), who, with the Fathers and the old Protestant theologians, recognizes in the angel of the Lord the manifested God, the logos of the Christian doctrine of the Trinity, and holds this view to be so widely developed in the history of the Old Testament revelation, that it lays the foundation for the doctrine of the logos in the Gospel by John (compare his Commentary on the book of Revelation, i. p. 613). Sack (Comment. theol., Bonn, 1821), had already discussed the question, and reached the conclusion, that the angel of the Lord is identical with Jehovah, but that the term does not designate a person distinct from him, but merely a form of manifestation, on which account he prefers to render the commission rather than the sent (comp. his Apologetik, 2d ed. p. 172). In the footsteps of these two last-named persons, the writer of this [Kurtz] sought to prove, in Tholucks Anzeiger, 1846, No. 1114, that the Maleach Jehovah is God, as presented in the authors of the Old Testament; appearing, revealed, entering into the limitations of space and time, as perceptible by the senses, distinguished from the invisible God, in his exalted and therefore imperceptible existence, above the world of sense, and removed from all the limitations of space and time; still without bringing it to a full, distinct consciousness, whether this distinction was merely ideal or essential, whether it was to be regarded as supposed for the moment, or grounded in the very nature of God. The most important parts of this essay were included in the first edition of this work. Delitzsch: Biblical and Prophetical Theology, p. 289; Nitzsch: System; T. Beck: Christian Science of Doctrine; Keil: Book of Joshua, p. 87; Hvernick: Old Testament Theology, p. 73; Ebrard: Christian Dogmatics, vol. i.; J. P. Lange: Positive Dogmatics, p. 586; Stier: Isaiah, not Pseudo Isaiah, p. 758, and others, all agree in the same exhibition of this theological question.
The other view has found a defender in Augustin: De Trinitate, 11. 3, and meets the approval of the Catholic theologians under the influence of their view of the adoration of angels; and of the Socinians, Arminians, and Rationalists, from their opposition to the ecclesiastical doctrine of the Trinity. In more recent times, however, some eminent persons, who are entirely free from these interested motives, have adopted this view, viz., Steudel, in his Pfingstprogramme for 1830, and in his Old Testament Theology, p. 252 ff.; Hofmann: Weissagung und Erfllung, i. p. 127, and Schriftbeweis, pp. 154159 and 321340; Baumgarten: Com. p. 195; Tholuck: Gospel by John, 6th ed. p. 52; Pelt: Theological Encyclopedia, p. 241; and still more recently, Delitzsch, renouncing his earlier view, and adopting that of Hofmann: Com. on Genesis, p. 249. Between Steudel and Hofmann there is, however, this difference, that the former sees in the Maleach Jehovah an angel especially commissioned by God for each particular caseit being left undetermined whether it is one and the same or not, while, in Hofmanns view, it is one and the same angel-prince, who here, as the Maleach Jehovah, later as the captain of the hosts of the Lord (Jos 5:14), as the angel of his face (Isa 63:9), under the personal name of Michael (Dan 10:13; Dan 10:21; Dan 12:1), as the representative of Jehovah, controls the commonwealth and history of Israel (Weissagung und Erfllung, pp. 131, 132). In his later work, however, Hofmann has modified his view so far, that the angel who performs this or that work is ever a definite angel, but the same one is not destined for all time, while it is still true that Israel has his prince, his special angel, who is named Michael (Schriftbeweis, p. 157).
Barth has in a most peculiar way attempted to unite the views of Hengstenberg and Hofmann: The Angel of the Covenant. A Contribution to Christology. A Letter to Schelling. Leipzig, 1845. He holds, with Hengstenberg, the divine personality, and with Hofmann, the angelic created nature of the Maleach Jehovah, and unites the two views through the assertion of a past assumption of the angelic nature of the logos, analogous to his later incarnation. We leave this view unexamined, as utterly baseless.
Kurtz closes his reference (in the 2d ed.) with the explanation, that he finds himself in the same position as Delitzsch, constrained by his conviction to adopt the view of Hofmann.
According to the view of the old ecclesiastical theology, the (First) argument in favor of the self-revelation of God, in the Angel of the Lord, is the personal and real identity in which this Angel-name always appears. If Maleach Jehovah, Maleach Elohim, may designate, some one angel of the Lord, in a peculiar appearance, still it must be kept in view here, that from Genesis 16 onwards this name, with slight and easily explained modifications, is a standing, permanent figure. Hofmann replies: Maleach Hamelech is not the king himself, but the kings messenger. So also Maleach Jehovah is not Jehovah himself. Certainly! so also the kings son is not the king himself. According to Hofmanns view, therefore, it must follow that the Son of God is not God. The nature of God in his self-distinction is exalted far above that of earthly kings.
Secondly. The Angel of Jehovah identifies himself with Jehovah. He ascribes to himself divine honors, divine determinations (Gen 16:10-11; Gen 18:10; Gen 18:13-14; Gen 18:20; Gen 22:12; Gen 22:15-16 , etc., etc.). Some one objects: The prophets also identify themselves in a similar way with Jehovah. This is simply an incorrect assertion. There is no authentic passage in which the prophet, in the immediate announcement of the word of God, does not in some way make a clear distinction between his person and the person of Jehovah. The examples which Delitzsch quotes, that ambassadors have identified themselves with their kings, rest upon the political rights and style of ambassadors, and are as little applicable to the style of a creature-angel as to that of apostles and prophets.
Thirdly. The writers of the history, and the biblical persons, use promiscuously the names Angel of Jehovah, and Jehovah, and render to this angel divine honor, in worship and sacrifice (Gen 16:13; Gen 18:1-2; Gen 21:17-19; Gen 22:14; Gen 48:15-16, etc.). Our opponents answer: It is not high treason when an officer, in the name and commission of the king, as the representative of the person of the king, receives the homage of the subjects. It is not his own person, but the person of the king, whom in this case he represents, which comes into strong relief. With this halting, limping comparison, they seek to justify the conduct of the men of faith in the Old Testament, who, in their view, rendered freely and without reproof divine honor to a creature-angel, and did this constantly, whenever this angel appears, notwithstanding the Old Testament abhors and condemns the deifying of the creature, and that here the express divine watchword is: My glory will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images (Isa 42:8).
The following reasons are urged in favor of the supposition of a creature-angel:
a. The name angel designates, throughout, a certain class of spiritual beings. Kurtz formerly replied to this that the name angel is not one of nature but of office (Mal 2:7; Hag 1:13). Although the name angel now indeed points in many cases to a certain class of spiritual beings, still the fact that there are symbolic angel-forms is a sufficient proof that the Angel of the Lord need not necessarily be regarded as a being of that class of spirits.
b. Hofmann urges that since the advent of Christ the New Testament speaks of the (Mat 1:20; Luk 2:9; Act 12:7). Kurtz has answered that in the places quoted the expression designates a different person from the Maleach Jehovah of the Old Testament, or even of the speech of Stephen (Act 7:30). He recalls this reply, however, with the remark that if Matthew and Luke had even had a suspicion that the in the Old Testament always designated the Son of God, who has since become man in Christ, they would never have used this expression even once in reference to a creature-angel. With this conception of angelic appearances the transition to Hofmanns view was surely possible and easy. To his objection (p. 120) we reply, that the incarnate Christ at Bethlehem could just as well be made by God to assume an angelic form, near at hand and remote, as the Logos of God in the preparatory steps to his incarnation. To Kurtz this wonderful manifestation of the ubiquity of Christ is only a pure idea or fancy. But just as (Gen 18:19) the two angels who went to Sodom are distinguished from the Angel of Jehovah before whom Abraham stood with his intercessory prayer, and as Paul (Gal 3:19) suggests the distinction between the angel giving the law at Sinai and the Angel of his face, who was the Christ of the Old Testament (1Co 10:4), so we can distinguish in the New Testament between the two men or the two angels at the grave of the risen one (Luk 24:4; Joh 20:12), or the two men upon the Mount of Olives (Act 1:10) on the one side, and the angel who announces the birth of Christ on the other. Only Matthew, in his solemn and festive expression, has embraced these two angels in one symbolic form of the Angel of the Lord, and this indeed upon good grounds, since in the resurrection or the second birth of Christ the Logos was active, as in his birth at Bethlehem.
c. Baumgarten urges: Why should the Angel of the Lord first appear to the Egyptian bondwoman, Genesis 16? Kurtz and Delitzsch have, in their earlier works, given various replies to this question. We answer with another question: Why should the risen Christ first appear to Mary Magdalene, and not to his mother or John? We think, according to the simple law, that the Lord reveals himself first to the poorest, most distressed and receptive hearts. It is, besides, a mere supposition that the Angel of the Lord has first appeared here, where he is first named with this name, as we shall see further below.
d. Kurtz urges again: It lies against the idea of a continuous development of the knowledge of the historical salvation, in the Holy Scriptures, if there is actually in the very beginning of the Old-Testament history so clear a consciousness of the distinction between the unrevealed and revealed God, and this consciousness is ever becoming more obscure in the progress of the Old Testament, but has vanished entirely and forever in the New Testament. But this is all as manifestly a pure supposition as when Hofmann thinks the Old Testament cannot speak of the self-distinction of God because in that case it would anticipate the doctrine of the Trinity. That indeed is the organic development of revelation from the Old to the New Testament, that the revelation of the Trinity in the divine being was introduced through the revelation of the duality. But when the form of the Angel of the Lord in Genesis, passes to the Angel of his face, or the personified face of Jehovah himself in Exodus, then to the prince over the armies of God in Joshua, and finally to the Archangel, the Angel of the Covenant of the later prophets, the organic development of the doctrine in question is manifest.
e. Kurtz remarks again the fact that in the New Testament the law is said to be ordained by angels or spoken by the angel (Act 7:53; Gal 3:19; Heb 2:2), as in favor of the doctrine of the created angel. Here he plainly refutes himself. For Paul (Gal 3:19) clearly refers to this feature of the law, that it was ordained by the angel, in order to show that the law was subordinate to the promise given to Abram. But if the mediation through angels is a mark of the imperfection of the law, it follows that Abram could not have received the promise through such a mediation of a created angel. To this end he presses especially the appeal to (Heb 2:2) the great superiority of the promise to the law is derived from this, that the law was announced but the gospel . For the answer see Romans 4 where the promise to which the law is subordinated appears as the yet undeveloped gospel of the old covenant.
f. Heb 13:2 refers to the three men who appeared to Abram in the plains of Mamre (Genesis 18). But why not to the two angels whom Lot received (Genesis 19)? The words can refer only to a peculiar kind of hospitality, Abram knew, however, that the men who were his guests were of a higher order, while Lot appears not to have known it at the beginning.
g. The angel-prince Michael (Dan 10:13; Dan 10:21; Dan 12:1) has the same position which the Maleach Jehovah has in the historical books. But that Michael cannot be the Logos is clear, since he is not the only . Gabriel appears as a second archangel (Dan 8:16; Dan 9:21), (Tob 12:15), adds Raphael and (4 Ezr 4:1) still further Uriel. When I now, from the identity of Gabriel or Michael with the appearing figure in Revelation 1, draw the conclusion,Gabriel or Michael are symbolical manifested images of Christ (as the old Jewish theology saw in Michael the manifested image of Jehovah), and thus the one symbolical angel-form of the Angel of the Lord or angel-prince has branched itself into the seven archangel forms of the coming Christ. Kurtz finds in these forms pure ideas or fancies. But I call them the veiled angelic modes of the revelation and energy of Christ, in the foundation, limits, and life of humanity and history. But Michael had need of help (Dan 11:1). Indeed! that can in no case be said of the Logos (Luk 22:43).
h. Zec 1:12, the Angel of the Lord was subordinated to Jehovah. The Angel of Jehovah as the intercessor for Israel prays to Jehovah of hosts (compare the high-priestly prayer John 17).
i. Mal 3:1, the Messiah was named the Angel of the Covenant. But, Kurtz argues, if Malachi had intended by the Angel of the Covenant the Angel of Jehovah, he would certainly so have named him. Then Moses could not have meant the Angel of the Lord when he speaks of the Angel of his face. Certainly it is true that in the Angel of the Covenant the union of the divine form of the Angel of Jehovah and of the human Son of David, as the divine-human founder of the New Testament, is prophetically consummated.
k. The Angel of his face (Exo 23:20), of whom Jehovah says, My name is in him (Exo 32:34; Exo 33:15; Isa 63:9), is according to Kurtz the same with the Angel of Jehovah in Genesis. But now (Exo 32:34) Jehovah appears so to distinguish this angel from himself that we cannot think of him as one with Jehovah. We cannot indeed freely use the ingenious answer to this difficulty by Hengstenberg,1 which Kurtz contests (see p. 154). But the opposition here is not this, that either a created angel goes with Israel, or the Logos-angel, but this, that he would not longer himself be present in the camp of Israel (Exo 33:5), but beyond it (Gen 12:7), that thus a stricter distinction and separation should be made between the impure people and his sanctuary.
l. In the history of the three angels who visit Abram in the plains (the oaks) of Mamre (Gen 18:19), not only the one angel who remains with Abram enters as Jehovah, but the two others, so soon as they were recognized by Lot in their super-earthly being, were addressed by him with the names of God, Adonai, etc. Kurtz, overlooks here the change of persons which appears in the narrative (Gen 19:17-19). The peculiar work of the two angels continues until Gen 12:16. They lead Lot out of the city and set him without (before) the city. The angels now retire to the background, and Jehovah comes into view and says, Escape for thy life. That Jehovah had gone up from Abram into heaven, and here again stands before Lot, can only be a source of error to the literal conception, which attributes to Jehovah a gross corporeal form, and in the same measure the local changes in space. We do not wonder now that Lot clings to the vanishing angel-forms with the cry, Adonai. Now the one unique appearance presents itself clearly before him (Gen 19:21). Then (Gen 19:24) Jehovah rained upon Sodom and Gomorrah brimstone and fire from Jehovah out of heaven. Without a perception of the change of different voices and visions, and the corresponding change of different revelations, any one will have great difficulty in finding his way through this statement of the struggles of Lot.
We now bring into view the gradual development of the specific revelation of God, which begins with the call of Abram. Hofmann asks: Ought we not to expect that the manifestations of God, so far as they form a preparation for the coming of Christ, should from the very beginning of the history of salvation, and not first from Abram, be described as manifestations of the Maleach Jehovah? The whole distinction between the primitive and patriarchal religion is thus overlooked. The faith of salvation first takes on the form of a definite religion of the future and becomes a more definite preparation for the incarnation of Christ, in the faith of Abram. Hofmann himself, as he in other places admits that the Maleach Jehovah is the one only form of theophany in the history of the old covenant, notwithstanding the numerous changes in the designation of the revelation: e. g. Jehovah appeared, etc., deprives the implied objection in the above question of any force. Indeed, the appearance of the Maleach Jehovah is announced with the patriarchal revelation. It is recorded (Gen 12:1), And Jehovah said to Abram. Starke holds, agreeing with the older theologians, that the Angel of the Lord (see Gal 3:16) is the Son of God himself. But Stephen (Act 7:2) says the God of glory () appeared to our father Abram when he was in Mesopotamia, before he dwelt in Haran. The question meets us here therefore: In what relation does the Maleach Jehovah stand to the or of Jehovah? In Luk 2:9 there is a very significant parallelism , , i. e. both ideas are bound together in the closest manner and by an inward tie. In Exo 24:16, Exo 40:34, the of Jehovah is in the same way intimately connected with Jehovah. But in Genesis 33 the of Jehovah, Gen 12:18, is fully identified with the face of Jehovah, Gen 12:20. According to Gen 12:14 (compared with Gen 12:2 and Isa 63:9), the face of Jehovah is identical with the Angel of his face. The Angel of Jehovah is thus the manifested figure of Jehovah, in the same way as his . The glory fills the holy of holies, and Jehovah appears in the holy of holies (Exo 40:34 and other passages). According to Isa 6:3 the revelation of the of Jehovah shall fill the whole earth (compare Eze 1:28; Eze 3:12, etc.). In Tit 2:13 Christ who comes to judgment is described as the (glorious) appearing of the great God, and in Heb 1:3 he is styled . It is certain that the word has a manifold signification, and that when used to designate the theophany it points rather to the manifested splendor of the Spirit, than to the spirit of this glorious appearance. (Hence it is closely connected with the pillar of cloud and of fire.) But so much is clearly proved, that the of Jehovah can properly be personally united with Jehovah himself, with Christ, but not with any creature-angel. It is now in accordance with the course of development, as it is with the character of the patriarchal theophany, that it should begin with the miraculous report or voice, the word (Gen 12:1), and advance to the miraculous vision or manifestation (Gen 12:7). For the word of Jehovah is in the first place the primary form of revelation in the time of the patriarchs, and in regard to the vision, it is the more interior (subjective) event, which appears already in a lower stage or grade of the development in the line of visions. After the separation of Abram from Lot (Gen 13:14) he receives again the word of Jehovah, which blesses him for his generous course, and in a way corresponding with it. So also after his expedition (Gen 15:1). The blessings in both cases correspond to his well-doing: to his renunciation of the better portions of the land, the promise of the whole land is given, and to the pious man of war, God gives himself as a shield and reward. In the important act of the justification of Abram (Genesis 15), the miraculous appearance enters with the word of Jehovah. The word of the Lord came to him in vision. If now the Angel of the Lord first appears under this name in the history of Hagar (Gen 16:9), we have the reason clearly given. Hagar had learned faith in the house of Abram, and its power to behold as an organ of vision was developed in accordance with her necessities. But the Angel of Jehovah, as the Christ who was to come through Isaac, had a peculiar reason for assisting Hagar, since she for the sake of the future Christ is involved in this sorrow. Besides, there is no increase of the divine revelation in this appearance; Abram saw Jehovah himself in the Angel of Jehovah, and Sarah also in the manifestation of Jehovah sees above all the Angel.
Between Abrams connection with Hagar and the next manifestation of Jehovah there are full thirteen years. But then his faith is strengthened again, and Jehovah appears to him (Gen 17:1). The most prominent and important theophany in the life of Abram is the appearance of the three men (Genesis 18). But this appearance wears its prevailing angelic form, because it is a collective appearance for Abram and Lot, and at the same time refers to the judgment upon Sodom. Hence the two angels are related to their central point as sun-images to the sun itself, and this central point for Abram is Jehovah himself in his manifestation, but not a commissioned Angel of the Lord. Thus also this Angel visits Sarah (Gen 21:1; compare Gen 18:10). But the Angel appears in the history of Hagar a second time (Gen 21:17), and this time as the Angel of God (Maleach Elohim), not as the Maleach Jehovah, for the question is not now about a return to Abrams house, but about the independent settlement with Ishmael in the wilderness. The person who tempts Abram (Gen 22:1) is ElohimGod as he manifests himself to the nations and their general ideas or notions, and the revelation is effected purely through the word. Now also, in the most critical moment for Abram, the Angel of the Lord comes forward, calling down to him from heaven since there was need of a prompt message of relief. In the rest of the narrative this Angel identifies himself throughout with Jehovah (Gen 12:12; Gen 12:16). To Isaac also Jehovah appears (Gen 26:2), and the second time in the night (Gen 19:24). He appears to Jacob in the night in a dream (Gen 28:12-13). Thus also he appears to him as the Angel of God in a dream (Gen 31:11), but throughout identified with Jehovah (Gen 12:13). Jehovah commands him to return home through the word (Gen 31:3). Laban receives the word of God in a dream (Gen 31:24). The greatest event of revelation in the life of Jacob is the grand theophany, in the night, through the vision, but the man who wrestles with him calls himself God and man (men) at the same time. According to the theory of a created angel, Jacob is not a wrestler with God (Israel), but merely a wrestler with the Angel. It is a more purely external circumstance which God uses to warn Jacob through the word to remove from Shechem (Gen 35:1). In the second peculiar manifestation of God to Jacob after his return from Mesopotamia (Gen 35:9), we have a clear and distinct reflection of the first (Gen 32:24). In the night-visions of Joseph, which already appear in the life of Isaac, and occur more frequently with Jacob, the form of revelation during the patriarchal period comes less distinctly into view. But then it enters again, and with new energy, in the life of Moses. The Angel of Jehovah (Exo 3:2) is connected with the earlier revelation, and here also is identified with Jehovah and Elohim (Gen 12:4). But he assumes a move definite form and title, as the Angel of his face, since with the Mosaic system the rejection of any deifying of the creature comes into greater prominence, and since it is impossible that the face of God should be esteemed a creature.
The reasons which are urged for the old ecclesiastical view of the Angel of the Lord, are recapitulated by Kurtz in the following order: 1. The Maleach Jehovah identifies himself with Jehovah. 2. Those to whom he appears recognize, name, and worship him as the true God. 3. He receives sacrifice and worship without any protest. 4. The biblical writers constantly speak of him as Jehovah. We add the following reasons: 1. The theory of our opponents opens a wide door in the Old Testament for the deifying of the creature, which the Old Testament everywhere condemns; and the Romish worship of angels finds in it a complete justification. 2. The Socinians also gain an important argument for their rejection of the Trinity, if, instead of the self-revelation of God, and of the self-distinction included in it in the Old Testament, there is merely a pure revelation through angels. As the fully developed doctrine of the Trinity cannot be found in the Old Testament, so no one can remove from the Old Testament the beginnings of that doctrine, the self-distinction of God, without removing the very substructure on which the New Testament doctrine of the Trinity rests, and without obscuring the Old Testament theology in its very centre and glory. 3. It would break the band of the organic unity between the Old and New Testaments, if it could be proved that the central point in the Old Testament revelation is a creature-angel, and that the New Testament revelation passes at one bound from this form to that of the God-man. The theory of the creature-angel in its continuation through a colossal adoration of angels, points downwards to the Rabbinic and Mohammedan doctrine of angels which has established itself in opposition to the New Testament Christology, and is bound together with that exaggerated doctrine of angels in more recent times, which ever corresponds with a veiled and obscure Christology. On the other hand, it removes from the New Testament Christology its Old Testament foundation and preparation, which consists in this, that the interchange between God and men is in full operation, and must therefore prefigure itself in the images of the future God-Man 1:4. The doctrine of angels itself loses its very heart, its justification and interpretation, if we take away from it the symbolic angel-form which rules it, as its royal centre, i. e. that angelic form which, as a real manifestation of God, as a typical manifestation of Christ, as a manifestation of angels, has the nature and force of a symbol. But with the obliteration of the symbolic element, all the remaining symbolic and angelic images, the cherubim and seraphim, will disappear, and with the key of biblical psychology in its representation of the development of the life of the soul, to an organ of revelation, we shall lose the key to the exposition of the Old Testament itself. 5. Augustin was consistent when, with his interpretation of the Angel of Jehovah as a creature-angel, he decidedly rejects the interpretation which regards the sons of God (Genesis 6) as angel-beings; for the assumption of angels who, as such, venture to identify themselves with Jehovah, notwithstanding they are in peril, and abandon themselves to lustful pleasures with the daughters of men until it issues in apostasy and a magical transformation of their nature, combines two groundless and intolerable phantoms. We hold, therefore, that Old Testament theology, in its very heart and centre, is in serious danger from these two great prejudices, as the New Testament from the two great prejudices of a mere mechanical structure of the Gospels, and of the unapostolic and yet more than apostolic brothers of the Lord. (See the defence of the old ecclesiastical view in the Commentary by Keil,2 also with a reference to Kahnis, de Angelo Domini diatribe, 1858. The assertion of the opposite view held by Delitzsch in his Commentary, meets here its refutation).
6. The aspect of all theophanies as visions. It is a general supposition, that divine revelation is partly through visions, or through inward miraculous sights and sounds. We must, however, bring out distinctly the fundamental position, that every theophany is at the same time vision, and every vision a theophany; but that in the one case the objective theophany, and in the other the subjective vision, is the prevailing feature. The subjective vision appears in the most definite form in dream-visions, of which Adams sleep, and Abrams night-horror (chs. 2 and 15), are the first striking portents. It develops itself with great power in the lives of Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph, and is of still greater importance in the lives of Samuel and Solomon, as also in the night-visions of Zechariah. We find them in the New Testament in the life of Joseph of Nazareth and in the history of Paul. It needs no proof to show that the manifestations of God or angels in dreams, are not outward manifestations to the natural senses. In the elements of the subjective dream-vision, veils itself, however, the existing divine manifestation. But what the dream introduces in the night-life, the seeing in imagesthat the ecstasy does in the day or ordinary waking life (see Lange: Apostolic Age). The ecstasy, as the removing of the mind into the condition of unconsciousness, or of a different consciousness, is the potential basis of the vision, the vision is the activity or effect of the ecstasy. But since the visions have historical permanence and results, it is evident that they are the intuitions of actual objective manifestations of God. Mere hallucinations of the mind lead into the house of error, spiritual visions build the historical house of God. But in this aspect we may distinguish peculiar dream-visions, night-visions of a higher form and power, momentary day-visions, apocalyptic groups or circles of visions, linked together in prophetic contemplation, and that habitual clear-sightedness as to visions which is the condition of inspiration. But that theophanies, which are ever at the same time Angelophanies and Christophanies, and indeed as theophanies of the voice of God, or of the voice from heaven, of the simple appearance of angels, of their more enlarged and complete manifestations of the developed heavenly scenethat these are always conditioned through a disposition or fitness for visions, is clear from numerous passages in the Old and New Testaments. (2Ki 6:17; Dan 10:7; Joh 12:28-29; Joh 20:10-12; Act 9:8; Act 12:7-12; Act 22:9-14.
In theology the psychological aspect of revelation has been hitherto very much neglected. All possible forms of revelation have been placed side by side without any connection. Starke says, the Son of God has appeared to believers under six forms or ways: 1. through a voice and words; 2. in an assumed form either of an angel, at least under that name, or in the form of a man, prefiguring his future incarnation; 3. in a vision; 4. in dreams; 5. in a pillar of cloud and fire; 6. especially to Paul, in a light from heaven.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
1. The call of Abram and his migration to Canaan until he reaches Sichem (Gen 12:1-7). The call of Abram demands from him a threefold renunciation, increasing in intensity from one to the other: 1. Out of thy country.The fatherland. The land of Mesopotamia as it embraced both Ur of the Chaldees and Haran.2. And from thy kindred.The Chaldaic descendants of Shem.3. From thy fathers house.Terah and his family (Gen 11:31-32). With the threefold demand it connects a threefold promise: 1. Of the special providence of God, leading him, indeed, to a new land (see Hebrews 11); 2. of the natural blessing of a numerous seed (Gen 13:16; Gen 15:5; Gen 17:2; Gen 17:6; Gen 17:16; Gen 18:18; Gen 21:13; Gen 22:17); 3. of a spiritual blessing for himself, and in its wide extension to all the families of the earth, making his name glorious, and constituting about his person in its spiritual import and relations the great contrast between the subjects of the blessing and the curse.And will make thy name great.That is, as the divinely blessed ancestor and father of a renowned people (Knobel). The name of the father of believers should shed its light and wield its influence through the worlds history.Thou shalt be a blessing.Lit: Be thou a blessing. It is a superficial view of this word which interprets it, thy name shall become a formula of blessing (Kimchi, Knobel: so that those who desire the greatest happiness shall wish themselves as happy as Abram). It is through the union of men with him (in that they pronounce and wish him blessed), that the mercy and blessing of God passes over to them, and through their enmity to him, which only reveals itself in calumnies and blasphemies3 they draw upon themselves the curse of God. The prelude to the blessing and the curse flowing through and from the Church. The curse: (Gen 3:14; Gen 3:17; Gen 4:11; Gen 5:29; Gen 9:25; Gen 27:29).In thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed.4The rendering it as reflexive is arbitrary, since we have the special form of the hithpael to express this, and the interpretation all families shall desire that their prosperity may be as thine, is shallow and incorrect (Jarchi, Clericus and others). The reflexive rendering is not necessary, indeed, in Gen 48:20.V. 4. The obedience of Abram. He left what he was required to leave, and took with him what it was in his power to take, Lot, although Lot was a burden to him rather than a source of strength (see article Lot, in the Bible Dictionaries). The emigration was the more heroic, since he was 75 years old, and his father was still living5 (Genesis 11). He probably went by Damascus (see Gen 15:2).V. 5. The souls that they had gotten.Strictly, made, descriptive of the gain in slaves, male and female.6Sichem.The first resting-place of Abram, who came to the place Sichem,7 and, indeed, to the oaks of Moreh (Deu 11:30), the oak-grove of Moreh.Moreh.Probably the name of the owner. Knobel: the oaks of instruction, which appear to be the same with the oaks of divination (Jdg 9:37). It is not probable that Abram would have fixed his abode precisely (as Knobel thinks) in a grove, which according to heathen notions had a sacred character as the residence of divining priests. The religious significance of the place may have arisen from the fact that Jacob buried the images brought with him in his family, under the oak of Shechem (Gen 35:4). The idols, indeed, must not be thrown into sacred but profane places (Isa 2:20). But, perhaps, Jacob had regard to the feelings of his family, and prepared for the images, which, indeed, were not images belonging to any system of idolatry, an honorable burial. At the time of Joshua the place had a sacred character, and Joshua, therefore, erected here the monumental stone, commemorating the solemn renewal of the law. Thus they became the oaks of the pillar at which the Shechemites made Abimelech king (Jdg 9:6).Then also the Canaanite was in the land.This explains why in his migrations he must pass through the land to Sichem, to find a place suitable for his residence.8 It does not follow from this statement, either that the narrative originated at a time when the Canaanite was no longer in the land, or that the term here designates only a single tribe of this name, which in the time of Moses dwelt upon the sea-coast, and in the valley of the Jordan (as Knobel thinks), comp. Gen 13:7; Gen 34:30. It is a tradition of the Jews, that Noah had assigned Africa as the home of the children of Ham, but that the Canaanites had remained in Canaan against his command, and that therefore Abram, the true heir, was called thither. Gen 12:7. The first appearance of Jehovah in vision. Abrams life of faith had developed itself thus far since he had entered Canaan, and now the promise is given to him of the land of Canaan, as the possession of the promised seed. The second progressive promise9 comp. Gen 13:15; Gen 13:17; Gen 15:18; Gen 17:8; Gen 26:3; Gen 28:4; Gen 28:13; Gen 35:12. Abrams grateful acknowledgment: the erection of an altar, and the founding of an outward service of Jehovah, which as to its first feature consisted in the calling upon his name (cultus), and as to its second, in the profession and acknowledgment of his name.10 Thus also Jacob acted (Gen 33:20; Jos 24:1; Jos 24:26). Bethel, Jerusalem, Hebron, Beersheba are places of the same character (i. e., places which were consecrated by the patriarchs, and not as Knobel thinks, whose consecration took place in later times, and then was dated back to the period of the patriarchs). Abrams altars stood in the oaks of Moreh, and Mamre, in Bethel, and upon Moriah. Abram, and the patriarchs generally, served also the important purpose of preaching through their lives repentance to the Canaanites, as Noah was such a preacher for his time. For God leaves no race to perish unwarned. Sodom had even a constant warning in the life of Lot.
2. Abrams migration through Canaan from Sichem to Bethel and still further southwards(Gen 12:8-9). The want of pasture for his herds, the presentiments of piety, the yielding of the patriarch to the divine guidance, led him further southwards to a new residence east of Bethel. He pitched his tent between Bethel and Ai. In the time of the Judges there was a sanctuary of Jehovah at Bethel (1. Sam. Gen 10:3), and at one time also it was the abode of the ark of the covenant (Jdg 20:18; Jdg 20:26). In later times it was the chief seat of the illegal worship (cultus) established by Jeroboam (1Ki 12:29; Amo 7:10), and hence its name Bethel in the place of the old name Luz (Gen 28:19; Jos 18:13; Jdg 1:23). In Genesis it bears this name already in the time of the patriarchs, who here received manifestations of God and offered sacrifices to him (Gen 13:4; Gen 28:22; Gen 35:7). Thus Knobel explains the name as if there was an internal necessity for denying the fact of the consecration of Bethel through the dream and vision of Jacob. But that Bethel should be geographically known as Luz by the Canaanites, long after the patriarchs had made it theocratically Bethel, involves no real difficulty.11Abram journeyed (broke up his encampment and went).The whole statement brings to view and illustrates the nomadic life, as also the allusion to his dwelling in tents.12Going on still toward the South.The southern part of Canaan toward the wilderness, a rich pastureland. A particular definite residence in Hebron is spoken of in Gen 13:18.
3. Abrams journey to Egypt(Gen 12:10-20).There was a famine in the land.The frequent famines are a peculiar characteristic of early times and of uncivilized lands. Egypt as a rich and fruitful land was even then a refuge from famine, as it was in the history of Jacob (Joseph., Antiq. xv. 9, 2).Say, I pray thee (or now, still), thou art my sister.The women at that time went unveiled, and this receives confirmation from the Egyptian monuments. The custom was changed after the conquest of the land by the Persians. Sarah was ten years younger than Abram (Gen 17:17), and, therefore, about 65 years of age. In the patriarchal manner of life, her age would not make so deep a mark; and there is no real ground for questioning the continuance of her youthful bloom and beauty. It is more remarkable that Abram should adopt the same course again (Genesis 20), and that Isaac should once have imitated his example (Gen 26:7). Modern criticism in this case, as often in other cases, chooses rather to admit, that there is a remarkable confusion in the narrative, than that there should have been a remarkable repetition of the same act. It is held with good reason, says Knobel, that one and the same event lies at the foundation of these three narratives. But the result of the first act of Abram did not necessarily restrain him from the second, and Isaac, especially in moments of anxiety, may have easily yielded himself to a slavish imitation of his fathers conduct. The name Abimelech lays no real ground for the identity of the second and third narrative, since this was a standing title of the kings of Philistia, as Pharaoh13 was of the kings of Egypt. According to (Gen 20:13) Abram had already in his migration from Haran arranged with Sarah the expression referred to for his protection while among strangers, and this explains the repetition of the act, the prominent point in the moral problem (see below). The Hebrew consciousness, says Knobel, pleased itself with the thought that on different occasions the mothers were objects of admiration for their beauty, while they were kept from insult, and their husbands protected in their rights by God. Since the Israelitish consciousness has not concealed by silence that Leah, the mother of the larger part of the Jews, was not beautiful, we may trust its account of the beauty of Sarah, Rebekah and Rachel, and the more so since the beauty of that type appears still in Jewish women. It must be observed also that by the side of the Hamitic women in Egypt and Canaan, Semitic women, even when advanced in years, would be admired as beauties. Abram desired that Sarah should say that she was his sister, lest he should be killed. If she was regarded as his wife, an Egyptian could only obtain her, when he had murdered her husband and possessor; but if she was his sister, then there was a hope that she might be won from her brother by kindly means. The declaration was not false (Gen 20:12), but it was not the whole truth. Knobel.
Gen 12:15. And commended her before Pharaoh.Modern travellers speak in a similar way of oriental kings, who incorporate into their harem the beautiful women of their land in a perfectly arbitrary way. Knobel. The recognition of Sarahs beauty is more easily explained, if we take into view that the Egyptian women, although not of so dark a complexion as the Nubians or Ethiopians, were yet of a darker shade than the Asiatics. The women of high rank were usually represented upon the monuments in lighter shades for the purpose of flattery. Hengstenberg. According to older records the Egyptian court consisted of the sons of the most illustrious priests.Into Pharaohs house, i. e., harem. Schrder.
Gen 12:16. The possessions of the nomadic chief. According to Burkhardt and Robinson all the Arabic Bedouin hordes do not own horses. Strabo already relates this as true of the Nabatans (p. 16). Knobel. The horse does not appear with the patriarchs, and as a costly, proud animal, both as a war-horse and in ordinary use, was generally in the theocratic view regarded as a symbol of worldly splendor.
Gen 12:17. The Lord plagued Pharaoh with great plagues [blows].They were such plagues of sickness as to guard Sarai from injury (Gen 20:4; Gen 20:6).
Gen 12:18. This Pharaoh is not hardened like the later king of that name. He concludes that he is punished for the sake of Sarai. Whence he draws this conclusion we are not told.14V. 20. Now follows the dismissal of Abram, but still a dismissal full of honorable accompaniments. Pharaohs conduct moreover shows how under all that idolatry which then held the Egyptians in its embrace, there was still existing a certain faith in the supreme God, and a kind of reverential fear before him.
DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL
1. Keil: The history of the life of Abram from his calling to his death unfolds itself in four stages, whose beginnings are marked by divine revelations of special significance. The first stage (chs. 1214) begins with his calling and emigration to Canaan; the second (chs. 15, 16) with the promise of an heir and the formation of the covenant; the third (chs. 1721) with the establishment of the covenant through the change of name and the introduction of the covenant-sign of circumcision; the fourth (chs. 2225:11) with the trial or temptation of Abram for the preservation and perfecting of his faith. All the divine revelations to him proceed from Jehovah, and the name Jehovah prevails through the whole life of the father of the faithful, the name Elohim appearing only where Jehovah, according to its significance, would have been entirely out of place, or less appropriate. Viewing his life with respect to his faith, the first Section (chs. 1214) marks peculiarly the calling of Abraham; the second states his justification, confirmed through his reception into the covenant of Jehovahobscured, but not weakened, through the erroneous workings of his faith in his connection with Hagar (chs.15, 16); the third states his consecration to be the father of the faithful, and therewith the legal separation of his house, and the establishment of his mild and yet strictly marked relations to the heathen (Genesis 17-21); the fourth treats of the sealing or confirmation of his faith. (From these we must distinguish as a fifth Section the time of the solemn festive rest of his faith, or the evening of life (chs. 2325:10). For the nature of the patriarchal history, compare Delitsch, above.
2. The translation of Stier (Gen 12:1), the Lord had said, is based upon an incorrect interpretation of the passage, in accordance with a misunderstanding of the words of Stephen (Act 7:3). As the first call of Abram in Ur is by no means excluded here by the second call in Haran, so in Acts, the second calling in Haran is not excluded by the first in Ur. The first calling was plainly to Abram and his fathers house. In the call before us he was told to go out from his fathers house, while his father with the rest should remain in Haran. Starke also fails to distinguish these two callings correctly.15
3. The particularism entering with the calling of Abram must be viewed as the divine method of securing universal results. In the particular we see the general, in the individual the whole, in the small the great; Abrams calling is the seed out of which springs the great tree under whose shade many nations rest; all indeed shall one day rest. Lisco.There is no mere external preference for Israel in the Old Testament. God has, in his word, threatenings and judgments, dealt as strictly with Israel as with any people; with peculiar strictness, indeed, according to the peculiar gifts and graces which Israel had received. But the proper restriction is the truest universality. In the example of the Jewish people God declares, that which was concealed, the method and law of his wisdom, and authorizes us to apply it for direction in our own lives, and to other subjects, people, and events. A quotation in Lisco.The elements of Abrams character: heroic faith, humility, and self-sacrifice, energy, benevolence, and gentleness. His call in the East: Christians, Jews, and Mohammedans trace their origin back to him. The purer elements of Islamism come from him.
4. The calling of Abram: 1. In its requisitions; 2. in its promises (see the Exegesis); 3. in its motives, a. The grace of God. The election of Abram. The choice of God reflects itself in the dispositions of men, the gifts of believers. As every people has its peculiar disposition, so the race of Abram, and especially the father of it, had the religious disposition in the highest measure, b. The great necessity of the world. It appeared about to sink into heathenism; the faith must be saved in Abram. c. The destination of Abram. Faith should proceed from one believer to all, just as salvation should proceed from one Saviour to all. The whole Messianic prophecy was now embraced in Abram.16
5. The calling of Abram to the pilgrimage of faith (Heb 11:8). His migration: 1. into Canaan; 2. through Canaan; 3. to Egypt; 4. his return. His calling and migrating an example of the calling and pilgrimage of his race.A type of the calling and pilgrimage of all believers.
6. The character of the life of faith: a. The experience of faith. Personal revelation of God, the personal providence of God. b. The work or concession of faith. Personal trust and personal obedience.
7. The word of God to Abraham, sealed through the manifestation of God in Canaan, as the word of the gospel is sealed to the believer through the sacrament. Keil: The promise was raised from its temporal form to its real nature through Christ, through him the whole earth becomes a Canaan.
8. Abram and the companions of his faith. Sarai, Lot. The blessings and perils of the companionship of the faithful. The father of believers and his successors appear constantly in the Bible as one whole: hence it is said so often, To thee will I give this land (Gen 15:7, etc.) Gerlach.
9. The solitude of the nomadic life of the patriarchs, a source of the life of prayer and illuminationa prerequisite for the higher revelation. The solitude of Moses, the prophets (by the rivers of Babylon, in the desert,) of John the Baptist, of Christ the Lord, of the Christians in deserts, of the mystics in the cloisters of the middle ages, of Luther (Jacob Bhme, Fox, etc.). In tranquil retirement. Abram was a rich, independent herdsman, just as the Bedouin chiefs are still in the deserts and the broad pasture-grounds of Syria, Arabia, and Palestine. Gerlach. There were already a variety of pursuits; huntsmen, husbandmen, and shepherds. Their separations and variances (Gen 43:32; Gen 46:34). For the tents, deserts, pasturages (uncultivated regions), see Bible Dictionaries.
10. The consecration of Canaan, through the manifestations of God, and the altars of Abram (as well as of the other patriarchs). The heavenly signs of the Church of Christ; the setting apart of the old earth, to a new. The chosen land a type of the Christian earth and of Paradise. Abram takes his church with him. Calwer Handbuch.
11. Abrams altars, or his calling upon the name of Jehovah, is at the same time a testimony to his name. The true worship is a source of the true missionarythe cultus itself a mission.
12. Abrams maxim or rule, to report that Sarah was his sister.17 It was determined upon in the early period of his migrations (Gen 20:13), but was here first brought into use, and from its successful issue was repeated once by himself, and once imitated by Isaac. It was with respect to his faith a fearful hazard. Faith is at the beginning un certain as to the moral questions and complications of life. Every broad view of the general is at first an uncertain view as to the particular. Thus it is in the broad synthetic view in science; it is at first wanting in reference to the critical and analytical knowledge as to the particular. Still the scientific Synthesis is the source of all true science. And thus faith, the great synthesis of heaven, is at first uncertain as to the moral problems of the earthly life. The history of all the great beginnings of faith furnishes the proof. But still, the great life of faith is the source of all pure and high morality in the world. Abrams venture was not from laxity as to the sanctity of marriage, or as to his duty to protect his wife; it was from a presumptuous confidence in the wonderful assistance of God. It was excused through the great necessity of the time, his defenceless state among strangers, the customary lawlessness of those in power, and as to the relation of the sexes. Therefore Jehovah preserved him from disgrace, although he did not spare him personal anxiety, and the moral rebuke from a heathen. It is only in Christ, that with the broad view of faith, the knowledge of its moral human measures and limitations is from the beginning perfect. In the yet imperfect, but growing faith, the word is true, The children of this world are wiser in their generation than the children of light. As a mere matter of prudence, Abram appeared to act prudently. He told no untruth, although he did not tell the whole truth. His word was, at all events, of doubtful import, and therefore, through his anxious forecast, was morally hazardous. But the necessity of the time, the difficulty of his position, and his confidence that God would make his relations clear at the proper time, serve to excuse it. It was not intended to effect a final deception: his God would unloose the knot. In his faith Abram was a blameless type of believers, but not in his application of his faith to the moral problems of life. Still, even in this regard, he unfolds more and more his heroic greatness. We must distinguish clearly between a momentary, fanatical, exaggerated confidence in God, and the tempting of God with a selfish purpose (see the history of Thamar, Rahab). Baumgarten is not correct when he says: Abram abandons his wife, but not so Jehovah. The modern stand-point is too prominent even in Delitzsch; He thus thinks that he will give the marriage-honor of his wife a sacrifice for his self-preservation; at all events, he is prepared to do this. Abram knew from the first, that the promise of blessing from Jehovah was connected with his person. Hence the instinct of self-preservation is lost in the higher impulse for the preservation of the blessing. And if, in relation to this impulse, he placed his marriage in a subordinate position, this occurred certainly from his confidence in the wonderful protection of Jehovah, and the heroic conduct of Sarai. His syllogism was doubtless morally incorrect, but it rested upon an exaggeration of his faith, and not upon moral cowardice.18 Upon any opposing interpretation, the same conduct of the patriarchs could not possibly have been repeated a second and third time. Jehovah himself could not have recognized any tempting of God, nor any moral baseness, in his conduct; but indeed concerns himself in the leading of Abrams faith (as in the life of Stilling), while he prepares for the presumptuous and erroneous syllogism of his faith its deserved rebuke. In a similar way Calvin recognizes the good end of Abram, but at the same time remarks that he failed in the choice of his means.
13. That the Bible speaks in this frank and simple way of the female beauty, as it does generally of beauty in life, and the world, shows how free it is from the gloomy, morose, monkish asceticism, while, however, it does not conceal the perils of beauty.
14. The Pharaoh of this early period, and more simple life, had already his courtiers, flatterers, and harem. How soon the misuse of princely power has been developed with the power itself! In this case, too, as it often occurs, the prince is better than his court. Pharaoh treats the patriarch with honor, humanity, and a magnanimity which must have put him to shame.
15. As we find recorded in Genesis the beginning of polygamy, of despotism, of the harem, and even of unnatural sexual crimes, so also we have here the first corporeal punishment of these sexual sins in the house of Pharaoh. We are not told, indeed, what was the particular kind of punishment, but it is represented as sent for these sins of Pharaoh.
16. Delitzsch holds, that the silence of Abram under the reproof of Pharaoh, is a confession of his guilt. Ashamed and penitent, he condemns himself. It would be very difficult, on this interpretation, to explain the twofold repetition of this act in the life of Abram and of Isaac. We may not transfer our judgment of the case to the stage of the moral development of Abram.
17. The history of Sarai, in whose person God guards the future mother of Israel from profanation, is at the same time a sign of the fact, that God preserves the sacred marriage in the midst of the corruption of the world.
18. Among the rich possessions which fell to Abram in Egypt, more through the protection and blessing of God, than his own prudence, was most probably the Egyptian maid, Hagar, who afterwards exerted so important an influence upon his course of life. Eliezer, of Damascus, and Hagar, from Egypt, are undesigned testimonies to the genuine historical character of the account of his migration from Mesopotamia to Canaan, and from Canaan to Egypt.
19. Abrams return from Egypt at this time, was already in some sense a return home, and a type of the Exodus of his descendants from Egypt.19
20. The significance of the wonderful land of Egypt for the history of the kingdom of God. Its connection with Canaan, and its opposition. How often it moves down to Egypt (Egypt lay lower than Canaan), and from thence moves back again! There the Hamitic spirit blooms, here the Semitic (Ziegler); there are enigmas, here mysteries; there miracles of death, here of life; there the Pharaohs, here spiritual princes.
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL
See the Doctrinal and Ethical paragraphs.Jehovah. 1. The profound significance of the name; 2. its eternal value and importance.Calling of Abram.Three first proofs of his faith: 1. He must go out from his country and his fathers house, into a strange land; 2. he finds in Palestine no continuing city, and soon suffers from famine; 3. he must go further to Egypt, in danger of his life, marriage, and hope.20Abram at his altars a preacher of repentance for the Canaanites.His pilgrimage.The companions of his faith.The providence of God over the lives of believers.The infallible faith of Abram, and his errors in the applications of his faith, or of his life: 1. That infallibility does not prevent these errors; 2. but it prevents their dangerous consequences, and at last removes them.The consecration of Canaan.The blessings of faith.
Starke: Wurtemberg Bible: Gen 12:1. The call from the condition of sin, or true conversion, springs not from ones own strength, etc., but only from the grace of God.Cramer: Whoever will be a follower of God, must separate himself from the world and its wickedness, must leave all consolation and help in the creature, and place his confidence only and alone in the Lord.If we follow the call of God, we are always in the right way.The promises of God are yea and amen.
Gen 12:3. Whoever wishes and does good to the saints, will receive good again, but whoever wishes and does them injury, must meet with calamity.
Gen 12:4-5. The strength of faith can do away with time, and present future things as if present.21Upon Gen 12:13. Since Abram was continually dependent upon the grace of God, he must feel his weakness, which betrays him into manifold acts of insincerity and sins. For, 1. he acted from fear, when he should still have looked to God; 2. he gave out that Sarai was his sister, when she was his wife; 3. he had great guilt in the sin of Pharaoh; 4. he thought to secure his own safety, while he placed Sarai and her chastity in the greatest peril.Even in the greatest saints, there are many and various defects and transgressions.God leads his own out of temptation, even when they have fallen.Osiander: God avenges the injustice and disgrace, which are inflicted upon his elect.Lisco: Abram obeyed because he trusted God; the two together constitute his faith.22Wherever Abram comes, in his nomadic life and wanderings, he works for the honor of God.
Gen 12:13. The failures of this chosen man of God appear, upon a closer survey, as sins of weakness, which, on the one hand, do not destroy his gracious standing with God, but on the other render necessary in him a purifying, providential training. The providence of God watches over his elect.Gerlach: In the simple, vivid narrative of the life of Abram, every step is full of importance.
Gen 12:3 is the expression of the more perfect covenant-relationship and communion. His friends are the friends of God, his enemies the enemies of God. God will himself reward every kindness shown to him, and avenge every injury (in word and deed), Psa 105:13-15.
Gen 12:13. In the deception which Abram uses, as in the later instances of Jacob and Moses, we see a weakness and impurity of faith which did not yet rely perfectly upon the help of God in his own way and time, but selfishly and eagerly grasped after it. It is not without reproof.
Calwer Handbuch: The command of God follows the promise (Gen 12:3). This advances upwards through six steps, until, at the most advanced, the Messiah appears, who should spring from the descendants of Abram. I will make thee a great nation, natural and spiritualand still his wife was unfruitfulwill bless theeand still he did not possess a footbreadth of landwill make thy name greatand yet he must be a stranger in a strange land.In thee shall be blessed,23 etc. This promise was repeated to him seven times: the third promise of the Messiah.The word of God never excuses the imperfections of believers.Bunsen: Abram is the eternal model of all exiles, and the true father of the pilgrim-fathers of the seventeenth century (of the pilgrims of faith of all times, Hebrews 11).And make thy name great. The Arabians, after Isa 41:8, call Abram the friend of God.Schrder: For a long time, as is evident from examples in the family of Abram, God had permitted the truth and its marred image to stand side by side. There must come at the last a moment of perfect separation, a moment of declared distinction between truth and falsehood. This moment also actually came.Luther: It is cheering, therefore, and full of consolation, when we thus consider how the church began and has increased.With him it is so arranged that he cannot remove his foot from his native ground, without planting it upon an entirely distinct regionthe region of faith.Krummacher: The East still resounds with the name of Abram.
Gen 12:3. Abram becomes to many a savor of death unto death (2Co 2:16), although he himself should not curse. That is the prerogative of God, he should only be a blessing.Blessing and making blessed is the destination of all the elect.Baumgarten: Gen 12:10. Famine in the land of promise is a severe test for Abram. For the land is promised to him as a good which should compensate all his self-denial.
Gen 12:13. In fact, there are found in the oldest histories frequently, here and there, the seeds of the later more developed boasted cunning and prudence.Passavant: (Abram and his children). Abram was great before God. How so? Through faith. Faith does it. Go out of thy land. The father-land is dear to us. But now it avails, etc.He went out with his God.Schwenke: Hours with the Bible. Does not the call come to thee also: Go out?And go in faith? A life in faith is a continual provinga permanent test.Heuser: (The Leadings of Abram.) Abram in his pilgrimage: 1. The goal for which he strove; 2. the promises which secured its attainment; 3. the dangers under which he stood; 4. the divine service which he rendered.Taube: The calling of Abram, a type of our calling to the kingdom of God: 1. As to its demands; 2. as to its gracious promises.24W. Hofmann: It is through Abram that we receive all the sacred knowledge until we reach back to paradise; all that afterwards was preserved for us by Moses came through his mind and heart.It was the believing look to the past, which fitted Abram to look on into the future. Delitzsch: The facts (Abram in Egypt) are related to us, not so much for the dishonor of Abram, as for the honor of Jehovah.25
Footnotes:
[1][Hengstenberg holds that after the sin with the golden calf, God threatened the people that the Maleach Jehovah, the uncreated angel, should no longer go with them, but a lower, subordinate, created angel; but that in answer to the prayer of Moses he again permits the uncreated angel to accompany them.A. G.]
[2][The statement and defence, by Keil, of the ordinary view held by the Church, is admirable, and completely satisfactory. As it is now within the reach of the English reader, it is not necessary to quote it here. Those who would see this subject thoroughly and exhaustively treated, may consult Hengstenbergs Christology, 2d ed., pp. 121-143 of vol. i. and 3186 of the 2d part of vol. iii.A. G.]
[3][ the reproachesblasphemous curses of menin distinction from the judicial curse of God. Keil.A. G.]
[4][We must not miss here the fundamental meaning of the in, while we include its instrumental sense, through. Abram is not only the channel but the source of blessing for all. Keil.A. G.] [The families refers to the division of the one human family into a number of families or races. (See Gen 10:5; Gen 20:31). The blessing of Abram will bind into unity the now dissevered parts of the race, and transform that curse which now rests upon all the earth on account of sin, into a blessing for the whole human race. Keil.A. G.] [The Old Testament is as broad and catholic in its spirit as the New Testament. Murphy, pp. 262, 263.A. G.]
[5][But according to Act 7:4, his father was dead. Terah died when he was 205 years old, and as Abram left Haran when he was 75 years old, he must have been born when Terah was 130 years old, and thus have been the younger son of Terah.A. G.]
[6][Not only gotten as secular property but had made obedient to the law of the true God. Wordsworth.A. G.]
[7][See Jacobus: Notes on Genesis, vol. i. pp. 227, 228.A. G.]
[8][The author of Genesis evinces in this clause a knowledge of the Canaanites, and presupposes their character to be known in such a way as a late writer could not do. Jacobus, p. 228.A. G.]
[9][Abram is the first person to whom the Lord is said to have appeared, and this is the first place at which the Lord is said to have appeared to Abram, and at this place Christ, the Lord of glory, first revealed himself as the Messiah (Joh 4:26; to the Samaritan woman (the type of the Gentile Church). Wordsworth, p. 66A. G.]
[10][He thus also took possession of the land in the name of his covenant God. See Bush, 364; Jacobus, 229.A. G.]
[11][Jacob gave his name to the place twice (Gen 28:19; Gen 35:15). As the name was not first given in the second instance, so it may not have been in the first. Accordingly we meet with it as an existing name in Abrams time, without being constrained to account for it by supposing the present narrative to have been, composed in its present form after the time of Jacobs visit. On the other hand, we may regard it as an interesting trace of early piety having been present in the land even before the arrival of Abram. Murphy.A. G.]
[12][He had left his house at Haran, and now dwelt in tents as in a strange country (Heb 11:9). Wordsworth.A. G.]
[13][ from the Coptic Ouro with the masculine article pi or p, Pouro, king. The dynasty and residence of the king cannot be certainly determined. But it is worthy of notice that there is no trace here of the later Egyptian contempt for the nomadic life and occupation; a fact which speaks decidedly for the antiquity and historical character of the narrative. Kurtz.A. G.]
[14][V. 19. So I might have taken, Heb. And I took. The construction of the Hebrew does not require the supposition that she actually became his wife. Our version, though not literal, gives no doubt the correct sense. If the present narrative admitted of any doubt, the doubt is removed by a reference to the parallel case, Gen 20:6.A. G.]
[15] [There is no discrepancy between Moses and St. Stephen. St. Stephens design was, when he pleaded before the Jewish Sanhedrim, to show that Gods revelations were not limited to Jerusalem and Judea, but that he had first spoken to the father of Abram in an idolatrous land, Ur of the Chaldees.
But Moses dwells specially on Abrams call from Haran, because Abrams obedience to that call was the proof of his faith. Wordsworth.
There is no improbability in the supposition that the call was repeated. And this supposition would not only reconcile the words of Stephen and of Moses, but may explain the fifth verse: And they went forth to go into the land of Canaan, and into the land of Canaan they came. Abram had left his home in obedience to the original call of God, but had not reached the land in which he was to dwell. Now, upon the second call, he not only sets forth, but continues in his migrations until he reaches Canaan, to which he was directed.A. G.]
[16] [With the closing word of the promse, in thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed, the final goal of all history is proclaimed, for there is nothing beyond the blessing of all the families of the earth. Thus the whole fulness of the divine purpose in reference to the salvation, is stated in the call of Abram, and connected with him in the closest manner. For the does not designate any relation whatever of Abram to the general blessing, but designates him as the organic means or instrument through which blessing should come. Baumgarten.A. G.]
[The Apostle Paul expounds the promise (Gal 3:16), showing: 1. that by its express terms, it was made to extend to the Gentiles; and, 2. that by the term seed is meant Christ Jesus. The promise looks to the world-wide benefits of redemption which should come through Christ, the seed of Abram. Jacobus, p. 225.A. G.]
[17][See Hengstenbergs Beitrge, iii. p. 526 ff.A. G.]
[18][We are not to be harsh or censorious in our judgments upon the acts of these eminent saints. But neither are we called upon to defend their acts; and if the view of Lange does not satisfy every one, it is well to bear in mind that the Scripture records these acts without expressing distinctly any moral judgment upon them. It impliedly condemns. The Scripture, however, contains clearly the great principles of moral truth and duty, and then oftentimes leaves the reader to draw the inference as to the moral quality of the acts which it records. And its faithfulness in not concealing what may be of questionable morality, in the lives of the greatest saints shows the honesty and accuracy of the historian. Wordsworth says well: the weaknesses of the patriarchs strengthen our faith in the Pentateuch.A. G.]
[19][The same necessity conducts both him and his descendants to Egypt. They both encounter similar dangers in that landthe same mighty arm delivers both, and leads them back enriched with the treasures of that wealthy country. Kurtz.A. G.]
[20][There does not seem to he sufficient ground for the conjecture of Murphy, that Abram was now pursuing his own course, and venturing beyond the limits of the land of promise, without waiting patiently for the divine counsel; and that he went with a vague suspicion that he was doing wrong. There is reason to believe, that all the movements of the patriarch were not only under divine control, but were a part of Gods plan for the testing and developing of his faith. It was a sore trial to leave the land promised to him, so soon after he had entered it. See also paragraph 20, above.A. G.]
[21][Gen 12:7. Wherever he had a tent, God had an altar, and an altar sanctified by prayer. Henry.A. G.]
[22][Faith receives the promise, and leads to obedience.A. G.]
[23][The promise receives its first fulfilment in Abram, then in the Jews, more perfectly when the Son of God became incarnate, the seed of Abram, then further in the church and the preaching of the gospel, but finally and fully when Christ shall complete his church, and come to take her to himself.A. G.]
[24][Abram also is an illustrious example to all who hear the call of God. His obedience is prompt and submissive. He neither delays nor questions, but went out not knowing whither he went, Heb 11:8.A. G.]
[25][Hengstenberg says: The object of the writer is not Abrams glorification, but the glorification of Jehovah.A. G.]
Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange
CONTENTS
The History of Abram, just glanced at in the close of the preceding Chapter, the Ho1y Ghost enters upon in this Chapter more particularly. The account of God’s first call of Abram; his gracious manifestations unto him; the removal of the Patriarch in consequence thereof, from his native country, to go into Canaan; his going down into Egypt, with the events which followed. These form the subject of the present Chapter
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:
Reader! Is not this call of God, to Abram, similar to the calls of his grace, in the present hour! Psa 65:10 ; 2Co 6:17-18 “Into the south:” i.e. the southern part of Canaan which lay north-east of Egypt.
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Gen 12:1
Abraham was the father of the faithful, and we have here the first recorded test to which his faith was put. The first and one of the greatest.
I. The Substance of God’s Call to Abraham.
1. He was called from rest to pilgrimage. From his country and kindred and father’s house, to undertake lifelong journeying. He was at an age at which he would fain rest. His wanderings seemed to be begun at the wrong end of his life. But it was then God said, ‘Get thee out’. It is as life advances that the idea of journeying, ‘getting out,’ comes home to men. The child rests in his home; but the outside world, with its responsibilities, self-direction and support, begins at last to open to him, and he must ‘get out’. So with resting among old friends, etc. We must one day ‘get out’. As years increase, all things seem in constant flow. Then at death. Above all, hear God’s voice telling you to set out on the Christian pilgrimage.
2. He was called from the familiar to the untried. The child’s familiarity with his environment is never attained to in after years. ‘New faces, other minds ‘meet men’s eyes and souls; and they know, however peaceful their lot may be, that they are not in the old, familiar home. But let us extend our idea of home. The lifelong invalid would feel from home in another room of the same house. Let God be our home, the great house in which we live and move about; then wherever He is, we shall feel at home. Most so when we leave the lower room altogether to be ‘at home with the Lord’ above.
3. He was called from sight to faith. From the portion he had in his country and in his father’s house, to wait at all times on the unseen God, and go to the land which He would show him. Let us willingly make this exchange. God is better than country, and kindred, and father’s house.
II. The Characteristics of God’s Call to Abraham.
1. It laid clearly before him all that he was to surrender. How full and attractive the picture is made to Abraham’s last sight of it; ‘thy country, kindred,’ etc. So, when from duty and loyalty to Christ, we make sacrifices, etc., the possessions will often seem peculiarly fascinating, just when we are to part with them.
2. It was uncompromising.- ‘Get thee out,’ with no promise or prospect of ever returning. The gifts of God are never repeated in exactly the same form. The pleasures of sin must be left ungrudgingly and for ever.
3. It was urgent. ‘Get thee out.’ Now. ‘Abraham departed, as the Lord had spoken to him.’ Let us give the same ready, instant obedience.
Gen 12:1-2
It was with these words that Johann Reuchlin summoned his grandnephew, Philip Melanchthon, to accept the Greek professorship at Wittenberg which was offered him, in the summer of 1518, by the Elector Frederick of Saxony. Melanchthon was at that time only twenty-one and had been studying and teaching for some years at the University of Tubingen. He wished for a change, and had written to Reuchlin that he was wasting his time in elementary work. He promised in a letter of 12 July to go wherever Reuchlin might send him and to work hard. Looking to the distant future, he hoped that the time would come when rest and literary leisure would be all the sweeter from the previous toil. On 24 July Reuchlin wrote the famous letter in which he quoted the passage from Genesis. ‘I will not address you in poetry,’ he said, ‘but will use the true promise which God made to faithful Abraham: “Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father’s house, unto a land that I will shew 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” (see Genesis xii.). So does my mind predict your future, so do I hope for you, my Philip, my work and my consolation. Come therefore with joyous and cheerful mind.’ After giving many practical directions for his grandnephew’s packing, journey, and family farewells, Reuchlin bade him not linger, but hasten. Evidently the shrewd scholar and man of business feared that if the Elector quitted Augsburg without having met his new professor, the negotiations which he himself had so cleverly arranged might fall to the ground. Dr. Karl Sell, commenting on this letter (which will be found in full in the Corpus Reformatorum, vol. i. pp. 32, 33), says that Melanchthon had no idea when he accepted the call of the nature of the task that lay before him in Wittenberg. ‘He set forth with no presentment of the future towards that great vocation which brought him so much suffering and which has given him his place in the world’s history.’ His longing for literary repose was never fulfilled, but Reuchlin’s prediction was realized in a way of which the writer never dreamed.
The First Missionary
Gen 12:1-3
I. How strange that call must have seemed to Abraham. It was not like the call which sends forth missionaries now. It was a command to strike out into a new and untried path. It was very indefinite as to the immediate future. He was to go to Canaan and live there. But we are not told that he preached to the people, or endeavoured to convert them to his own faith. We can look back upon Abraham’s work and its fruits, upon God’s promise and fulfilment, and we can see how the call of Abraham was a great step in God’s purpose to train a race of men who should be missionaries to humanity.
II. In the New Testament the missionary call is renewed, only it is made more sweeping. It is no longer to one country or nation but to all humanity. How far has this promise been fulfilled? It is one of the most encouraging signs of our own time that there is a real revival of missionary interest, a realization of our duty to preach the Gospel to the heathen and an attempt to fulfil it
A. G. Mortimer, One Hundred Miniature Sermons, p. 321.
God Calls Abram
Gen 12:1-9
The same voice, says F. B. Meyer, has often spoken since. It called Elijah from Thisbe, and Amos from Tekoa; Peter from his fishing nets, and Matthew from his toll-booth; Cromwell from his farm in Huntingdon, and Luther from his cloister at Erfurt. The same voice, we may add, called the Pilgrim Fathers when on 6 September, 1620, they set sail from Plymouth in the ‘Mayflower,’ bound for the banks of the Hudson.
Note the three marks of the pilgrims given by Bunyan: (1) their dress was strange, (2) few could understand what they said, (3) they set very light by the wares of Vanity Fair.
References. XII. S. Wilberforce, Sermons, p. 165. XII. 1-3. J. Aspinall, Parish Sermons (1st Series), p. 126. F. D. Maurice, Patriarchs and Law Givers of the Old Testament, p. 68. XII. 1-7. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xlviii. No. 2523. XII. 1-9. A. Maclaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture, p. 66.
Abraham the Cosmopolitan
Gen 12:2
Abraham is to dream of a land beyond the years. The most mature of all the Gospels declares that he anticipated the Christian Era.
I. He is born too soon. The father of a vast multitude, he is himself a lonely figure about his surroundings, unappreciated by his age. He has conceived an idea to which his age is a stranger, an idea the working out of which itself involves sacrifice.
II. Abraham is not the man of a village seeking a metropolis, he is the man of a metropolis seeking to extend a village. The dream which burst upon the soul of Abraham was the hope of being a secular missionary, a colonist of waste places.
III. This portrait of Abraham is the earliest attempt to represent a cosmopolitan man a man seeking to make the world a recipient of his own blessing. He is the forerunner of that great missionary band which, whether in the sphere of religion or of culture, have been the pioneers of a new era to lands that were outside the pale. But for that very reason it was a curtailment of his sphere among contemporaries. It exposed him to social ostracism. It separated him from his age. The path selected by Abraham was a path which the world of his day did not deem heroic.
IV. The life of Abraham begins with an experience which, in germ, is identical with that of Jesus. On the threshold of his ministry there is an analogy between the first three trials of Abraham and the three temptations of Jesus.
( a ) He is first assailed by famine; the bodily nature is made on the very threshold to protest against the enterprise.
( b ) Then comes the temptation, not to abandon, but to accelerate it by an exercise of physical power. Nor does Abraham come forth scatheless from the trial.
( c ) But the third temptation is destined to redeem him. There comes the call to an act of choice between worldly possessions, in which he selects the apparently barren one.
V. Abraham is a cosmopolitan at the beginning, and an individual at the end. The man who at the opening of the day has only an eye for multitudes, subsides at evening into the family circle. The starry dome is exchanged for the precincts of the tent. The sacrificial character remains, but its sphere is altered; it ceases to be a sacrifice for the nations, it becomes a surrender to the hearth.
G. Matheson, The Representative Men of the Bible, p. 110.
References. XII. 2. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xliii. No. 2523. J. Vaughan, Fifty Sermons, p. 293. J. H. Evans, Thursday Penny Pulpit, vol. x. p. 113. XII. 5. A. Maclaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture Genesis, p. 77. H. J. Wilmot-Buxton, Common Life Religion, p. 134. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xiv. No. 843; ibid. vol. xxxiv. No. 2011.
Gen 12:6-9
Up to the chapter out of which this text is taken, the history of the Bible is rather taken up with the history of the human race in its more general and more universal aspect. It seems to stop at this particular chapter and to look upon the human race less in its larger and universal aspect than in the national aspect of the children of God. The character of the history of the people of God is manifested in the character of the person who founded that history, and with whom the national history begins. I need not remind you that nations catch and are infected with the spirit of their founder. The history of the Israelitish people is rather the history of saintliness, than what we understand by a secular or profane history, and it had its root and foundation in him who was called the Father of the Faithful.
I. Abraham’s Career. A most remarkable career was that of Abraham. He was trained by what? By a process of separation; the giving up this, and the foregoing that. That was the keynote of Abraham’s life; one time called to do this, another time called to forego that; the sign early laid upon him of the Cross. He leaves his home without a moment of delay, no hesitation about it, not even knowing where he was going. And there was vouchsafed to him for his encouragement a special manifestation, he was promised a land, a seed, and a blessing as his reward; great inheritance, abounding posterity, and a remarkable influence. He sets out on this journey toward the promised land, which he never regarded as his real resting-place or home. It is rather typical, not of heaven, but of the visible Church, and of the life of individual Christians in the world; and his experience was that his life must be more or less migratory and wandering till he reached his home. The Canaanite it is an expressive passage was still in the land, therefore it was not heaven. He pitched his tent as we might pitch a tent or marquee in our fields, as you see gipsies pitch them when-even they find a night’s lodging or resting-place; plain, homely, but enough for the purpose.
II. The Altar Built. And side by side with this simple dwelling-place, easily removed, ever reminding him that the call might come to take it up and go somewhere else, he built an altar, rude, rough in its way, and there it was that he called upon the Lord. He built it as a spontaneous act of gratitude that should tell the passers-by of mercies countless that he had received. It was rough and rude, and, simple as it was, it was not divorced violently from homely, common-day life. Now what lies at the bottom of this simple act of the Father of the Faithful? It was the expression of what, I believe, is a profound and unquenchable spiritual instinct that seeks after God. The instinct of man has led him to localize God, sometimes in a shrine, sometimes in a dark grave. But you know that impressions pass very quickly away from us, and feelings very soon evaporate. Religion it is not superstition, but religion as we call it, a comprehensive term is kept in mind and made more real to us by buildings like this church, which you never mistake for anything else; and by certain rites and ceremonies and forms, which are the channels approved by generations of men, in which devotion flows. I do not say that churchgoing is religion, but I think that religion would die out without our churches. The very architecture tells the passer-by that it is something dedicated to God and to His glory. And we still believe that the strength of this great nation really lies, not in her armaments and not in her standing armies, but in her godliness, in her national piety, in her righteousness, in her reverence for God’s holy day, in her devout regard for churches, and in that godliness which fetches its inspiration from all that we learn and hear and receive in these earthly temples.
References. XII. 6, 7. A. Maclaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture Genesis, p. 82. XII. 8. A. Maclaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture Genesis, p. 84. XII. J. Parker, Adam, Noah, and Abraham, p. 91. F. W. Robertson, Notes on Genesis, p. 33. R. S. Candlish, Book of Genesis, vol. i. p. 181. S. Leathes, Studies in Genesis, p. 96. XIII. 1. J. Parker, Adam, Noah, and Abraham, p. 91. XIII. 1-13. A. Maclaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture Genesis, p. 85.
Fuente: Expositor’s Dictionary of Text by Robertson
Abram’s Pilgrimage
Gen 12
It may surprise you to find, unless you have paid long attention to the matter, how impossible it is to understand some actions unless you know the motive out of which they arose. You would suppose that if you knew any action you would know something that was self-contained and self-explanatory; something, in short, about which there could be no mystery. That, however, is a very serious mistake. That which is apparent is in reality the least part of anything which is not merely super ficial and transitory. Whatever has any pith in it, any genuine life and force, is inspired and moved by hidden spiritual influences, over which even the actor himself has but partial control.
Take this expression ” the Lord had said unto Abram .” How? As a man would speak to a man? Audibly? What is this Divine voice to the sons of men? Suppose the answer should be, “the Lord came visibly before Abram, and spoke to him in plain Hebrew,” what then? Many difficulties would arise at once, but no difficulties which faith could not overcome. Suppose the answer should be “a spiritual revelation was made to Abram, no likeness was seen, no audible voice was heard, but his soul was made aware distinctly and certainly of the Divine purpose,” what then? Substantially the results would be the same, and it is with results we have to deal rather than with processes. Mozart says in his letters that, whenever he saw a grand mountain or a wonderful piece of scenery, it said to him “Turn me into music, play me on the organ”; and Mendelssohn says in his letters to his sister, “This is how I think of you today,” or “This is what I have to say to you today,” and then follows a bar or two of music which she is requested to play on the piano or the organ. So the mountain spoke to Mozart, and the organ spoke to Fanny Hensel, and why should we hesitate to say that the Lord spoke to Abram or that he is speaking to ourselves? He spoke to Adam, Enoch, Noah, Abram, Peter, Paul, John; has he ceased to speak unto the children of men? We now say that we have a notion, an impression, a conviction, or a feeling; and considering that our life is so shallow and cloudy, perhaps it is best to speak thus vaguely, but when we get right in soul we shall boldly say, “The Lord calls me; the Lord tells me; the Lord sends me.” It will be more filial, more tender, more Christian.
Truly some things that we see in life require more than ordinary influences to account for them, and this going out of Abram from “Ur of the Chaldees” is one of them. According to the account given in chap. xi., it would seem to have struck Terah that it would be a good thing to go to the land of Canaan, and that as soon as the idea struck him he and his family at once started. But, on second thoughts, that is an account of the movement which is extremely improbable. What did Terah know about Canaan? He had no friends there. Nobody had offered him a home there. The people who were there would very likely give him a rough reception. How, then, did he come to move in that direction? We have the answer in chap. 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 show thee.”
So, even a journey may be the outcome of an inspiration! “There’s a Divinity that shapes our ends, rough-hew them how we will.” I feel life to be most solemn when I think that inside of it all there is a Spirit that lays out one day’s work, that points out when the road is on the left and when it is on the right, and that tells one what words will best express one’s thought. Thus is God nigh at hand and not afar off. “The steps of a good man are ordered by the Lord.” And thus, too, are men misunderstood: they are called enthusiasts, and are said to be impulsive; they are not “safe” men: they are here today and gone tomorrow, and no proper register of their life can be made. Of course we are to distinguish between inspiration and delusion, and not to think that every noise is thunder. We are not to call a “maggot” a “revelation.” What we are to do is this: we have to live and move and have our being in God; to expect his coming, and long for it; to be patient and watchful; to keep our heart according to his word; and then we shall know his voice from the voice of a stranger, for “the secret of the Lord is with them that fear him.” If God be our supreme consciousness he will reveal his providence without cloud or doubtfulness. I think it can be proved that the men who have done things apparently against all reason have often been acting in the most reasonable manner, and that inspiration has often been mistaken for madness. I feel that all the while you are asking me to give you tests by which you may know what inspiration is, you have little or nothing to do with such tests, you have to be right, and then you will be sure to do right.
Possibly, Abram may have got more credit for this journey than he really deserves. It is true that he knew not “whither he went,” and by so much this is what is called “a leap in the dark”; but Abram knew two things: (1) he knew at whose bidding he was going, and (2) he knew what results were promised to his faith. There is much more than a command in the text; there is a promise, beautiful as a plentiful vine in autumn: ” I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shall be a blessing: and I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed. ” The man who would not go after that would have to justify his disobedience by very strong reasons. We can only move some weights by very long levers. To get a man to leave his “country, his kindred, and his father’s house,” you must propose or apply some very strong inducement. Now, it is worth while to take notice that from the very beginning God has never given a merely arbitrary command: he has never treated a man as a potter would treat a handful of clay: the royal and mighty command has always ended in the tenderness of a gracious promise. God has never moved a man merely for the sake of moving him; merely for the sake of showing his power: this we shall see in detail as we move through the wondrous pages, but I call attention to it now as strikingly illustrated in the case of Abram. Some of you yourselves may remember the words “Get thee out,” who have forgotten the accumulated and glorious blessing. Let us be just unto the Lord, and remember that he treats us as his sons and not as irresponsible machines.
We need this exhortation the more, as it is incorrectly supposed that we are to act blindly and unreasoningly in the spiritual life. The precise contrary is the reality of the case. “No man hath left father or mother, houses or land, for my sake,” says Christ, “but shall receive a hundredfold reward here and life everlasting beyond.” If the command is “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ,” the promise is “Thou shalt be saved.” If the Lord hath commanded men everywhere to repent, the promise is that he will “abundantly pardon.” If the command is “Sell what thou hast,” the promise is “Thou shalt have treasure in heaven.” So, all through, from end to end, the good of the creature is the object of the Creator.
Does it follow, then, that God gives “the reason why” in the case of every command? Certainly not. Probably he may give no reason at all, and where he does not give a reason he gives in reality the best reason of all. To give his reason would indeed be to propose discussion, but to give a promise is to show that the reason, though undisclosed, is all-sufficient, for in the case of the All-wise a promise is the harvest of which a reason would be but the bare seed. It is true, too, that we can understand a promise where we could not understand a reason: the reason is intellectual, metaphysical, or spiritual, too high or too recondite for our faculties; but a promise is practical, positive, literal, and if we have faith in the speaker we know that if the promise be so good the command which precedes it must be founded upon a reason equally valid. In reality we have nothing to do with the reasons upon which God’s commands are founded. If we meddle with hem we shall touch a fire that will burn us! We are to walk by faith, not by sight. To have faith in God is to comprehend all reasons in one act. I am not to take God in the details of his several commandments, but in the totality, the wholeness of his nature.
Away went Abram from Ur of the Chaldees (Ur of the people of Chesed), and on his way he received a renewal of the promise. Very beautiful was this! It showed that he was on the right road, and that God’s faithfulness followed him like an angel of defence. It is so with ourselves on the journey to the better Canaan, where the upper springs never dry, and the summer lies like an infinite blessing over the whole land.
Yet what are all God’s promises when set against the heart that is “deceitful above all things and desperately wicked”? When Abram got into Egypt he got into trouble. Just before going into the land he asked his wife to say she was his sister, lest he should lose his own life! Thus we see how strong a man may be and how weak! Abram could trust a whole destiny to the Lord, but not a particular circumstance in the process! We must meddle a little with the Lord’s plan. Just a little to show what managers we are, and how neatly we can turn the corners of life. And what foul finger-marks we leave upon God’s work when we touch it! I am not sure that we have met in all the pages we have gone through with anything more humbling than the rebuke given by Pharaoh to Abram, “And Pharaoh called Abram, and said, What is this that thou hast done unto me? why didst thou not tell me that she was thy wife? Why saidst thou, She is my sister? Now, therefore, behold thy wife, take her, and go thy way.” To be reproved by the heathen for telling lies! There is a lesson here to us who are Christians. When men of the world can justly blame men of the Church, how deep is the stain of guilt which has fixed itself in the very substance of our character:
And yet there is another lesson here which we need quite as much: the lesson of Divine forbearance with human infirmity. God did not cast off Abram, or send him back to Ur of the Chaldees a man disgraced and condemned. God forbid that I should make any excuse for sin; yet there are sins that come out of weakness rather than out of love of sin for its own sake. Abram’s sin arose rather from weakness than depravity. A great fear seized him. A sudden squall from the hills struck his little boat sharply, and for the time being he foolishly took his affairs into his own hands. “Let him that is without sin cast the first stone” at Abram! It was something after all, standing between Babylonian and Egyptian idolatry colossal and splendid to say, There is but one God and I put my faith in him! It was a new voice in the earth. It was the first note of Christian civilisation. Now it is common to avow this creed, but it went for something when a Chaldean shepherd declared it amidst polytheistic and sumptuous idolatries. “Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him for righteousness.” Amid all the stars that showered their glittering silver upon the Eastern night he saw one larger and brighter than all others “Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day, and he saw it and was glad.” Looking at Abram’s sin, and trying, possibly, what we may get out of it in excuse of our own, let us in justice remember that if we copy the sin we ought to endeavour to copy the faith. When we say Abram sinned, we ought also to say that Abram was the friend of God; and if we hide ourselves under the plea of his weakness, we ought also to strive after the holiness and sublimity of his faith.
Fuente: The People’s Bible by Joseph Parker
The Same-varied
Gen 12:1
God’s claim upon the individual life is here asserted. God detaches men from early associations, from objects of special care and love, and makes them strangers in the earth. The family idea is sacred, but the Divine will is, so to speak, more sacred still; when the God of the families of the earth calls men from their kindred and their father’s house, all tributary laws must be swallowed up by the great stream of the Divine Fatherhood. These calls, so shattering in their social effect, and so painful in their bearing upon the individual heart, are necessary to shake men out of the secondary positions into which they would settle themselves. All earthly parentage is but a reflection of God’s fatherly relation to mankind; and if we have idolised and abused that which is merely secondary and typical, we need such calls as these to remind us that over all there reigns, in gracious majesty and tender righteousness, the Maker, the Sovereign, and the Redeemer of our lives.
In this call we see an outline of the great providential system under which we live. God comes into a family and breaks it up; God sets the individual man upon a special course; God shows the land in which we are to dwell. Up to this point there is harshness in the startling demand. Abram is to go out, not knowing whither; and if he did know whither, still the fact that he was called to break up old and endeared associations is enough to fill him with sorrow and dismay. We must read further, if we would recover composure of faith in God’s goodness. The first verse is authoritative; but man cannot live a great life upon mere authority, even when the authority is known to be Divine. Men would starve on law. To law must be added grace, if the soul is to know all the joy and peace of life in God. Read the next verses, and say if there be in them one tone of severity.
Gen 12:2-3
2. 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:
3. And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.
Great lives are trained by great promises. The world has never been left without a great promise singing in its wondering and troubled heart something to rely upon: something to appeal to when difficulty was extreme. God never calls men for the purpose of making them less than they are, except when they have been dishonouring themselves by sin. This may be taken as a law: God’s calls are upward; they are calls towards fuller life, purer light, and sweeter joy. Men do not know their full capacity, except in the service of God: his presence in the soul is a life-expanding and life-glorifying presence. This is the claim that we set up on behalf of true religion the religion of Jesus Christ that it exalts human nature, it enriches the soul, it increases the substance and worth of manhood. To confound obedience with slavery is to overlook the argument which is founded upon the nature of God; to obey the little, the mean, the paltry is to be enslaved; to enter the cage of custom or passion is to be subject to bondage; but to accept the invitation of the Sun, and to poise ourselves in his gladdening presence is liberty and joy.
Look at this promise as throwing light upon the compensations of life. Abram is called to leave his country, his kindred, and his father’s house, and, so far, there is nothing but loss. Had the call ended here, the lot of Abram might have been considered hard; but when did God take anything from a man, without giving him manifold more in return? Suppose that the return has not been made immediately manifest, what then? Is today the limit of God’s working time? Has he no provinces beyond this little world? Does the door of the grave open upon nothing but infinite darkness and eternal silence? Yet, even confining the judgment within the hour of this life, it is true that God never touches the heart with a trial without intending to bring in upon it some grander gift, some tenderer benediction.
Look at this promise as showing the oneness of God with his people: “I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee.” The good man is not alone. Touch him, and you touch God. Help him, and your help is taken as if it were rendered to God himself. This may give us an idea of the sublime life to which we are called we live, and move, and have our being in God; we are temples; our life is an expression of Divine influence; in our voice there is an undertone of Divinity.
Look at this promise, as showing the influence of the present over the future: “In thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed.” This is a principle rather than an exception of true life. Every man should look upon himself as an instrument of possible blessing to the whole world. One family should be a blessing to all families within its influence. Of course, the true and full interpretation of the promise is to be found in the person and work of Jesus Christ, the Saviour and Brother of all who receive him by faith into their hearts; yet there are great secondary and collateral meanings of the promise, which ought not to be held in contempt. We should not be looking for the least, but for the greatest interpretations of life not to make our life as little and ineffective as possible, but to give it fulness, breadth, strength: to which the weary and the sorrowful may look with confidence and thankfulness. Christianity never reduces life to a minimum; it develops it, strengthens it in the direction of Jesus Christ’s infinite perfectness and beauty.
Gen 12:4-6
4. So Abram departed, as the Lord had spoken unto him; and Lot went with him: and Abram was seventy and five years old when he departed out of Haran.
5. And Abram took Sarai his wife, and Lot his brother’s son, and all their substance that they had gathered, and the souls that they had gotten in Haran; and they went forth to go into the land of Canaan; and into the land of Canaan they came.
6. And Abram passed through the land unto the place of Sichem, unto the plain of Moreh. And the Canaanite was then in the land.
There will always be central figures in society: men of commanding life, around whom other persons settle into secondary positions. We cannot all be Abrams; we cannot all have distinct names in the future. Yet, though we cannot have the greatness, we may have the goodness of Abram. But few men in any country touch the highest point of fame; thousands upon thousands, in all generations, come to honour and influence; yet, in a few months after their death, their names cease to have any interest but for the smallest circles. This reflection ought not to discourage virtue. Peace of heart is better than mere renown. To be known in heaven is the best fame. To have a place in the love of God is to enjoy the true exaltation. In the company now journeying towards Canaan, there is one figure that gives unity and meaning to the whole group, yet there is not one in all the band, whose life, judged by the Divine standard, is unimportant.
The one man, Abram, holds the promise; all the other persons in the company hold it secondarily. All men do not receive the direct revelation and vision of God; they are followers, not leaders; echoes, not voices. Personal supremacy, to be beneficent and enduring, should be the result of Divine election. Abram was supreme because God had called him. The salvation of the soul is undoubtedly an individual act; the soul must think, repent, believe, resolve for itself. No man can repent or believe for another; yet, in the working out of Divine plans, one man must follow another, and be content to shine with reflected light. It is so in statesmanship, in literature, and in civilisation generally. Take Abram away from this group, and the group becomes ridiculous. One man is called to stand nearer God than another, and to interpret the purposes of God to the world. There is an empty defiance which proclaims itself in the well-known terms, “I don’t pin my faith to any man’s sleeve”; “I think for myself”; there is nothing but vanity in such lofty pretensions, made, indeed, the more mischievous by the grain of truth which barely saves them from the charge of insanity. As a matter of fact, we do pin our faith to each other’s sleeve. Lot believes in Abram; the weak believe in the strong; we all follow our respective captains and leaders. Abram was the minister of God to all about him. Had his faith gone down, the whole company would have been disorganised; his followers were courageous in his courage, and hopeful in his hope. We think it a great honour to be set so high in the service of God; it is so, truly; yet it must be a burdensome responsibility, and often a pricking thorn, for those who follow can bring reproach and calumny to bear upon Abram and Moses and the chosen servants of God. There is a temptation for Lot to imagine himself as good as Abram, and in that imagining is the explanation of many of the petty torments which fall to the lot of men whom God has taken into his secret counsel.
The Abrams of society often have a difficult task. They cannot always explain themselves fully. Sometimes they cannot even vindicate themselves, nor can they account for circumstances which bear heavily against them. They live a separate life. They have secret intercourse with God. The translation of things heard in heaven is always difficult and often impossible.
Gen 12:7-9
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.
8. And he removed from thence unto a mountain on the east of Beth-el, and pitched his tent, having Beth-el on the west, and Hai on the east: and there he builded an altar unto the Lord, and called upon the name of the Lord.
9. And Abram journeyed, going on still toward the south.
We shall be much comforted in this pilgrim-life if we think of God’s relation to places, habitations, countries, and geographical positions. The wilderness and the garden are God’s; the fountain and the stream are directed in their course by the creating mind. Men are not here and there by haphazard. Cities are not founded by mere chance. Before the city there was a process of reasoning; before the process of reasoning there was Divine suggestion geography, as well as astronomy, is of God. “The earth is the Lord’s.” I would be where God wills; with his blessing the desert shall be pleasant as the fruitful field; without it, the fruitful field shall mock the appetite which it tempts, and the river shall become as blood in my mouth.
Abram set up his altar along the line of his march. Blessed are they whose way is known by marks of worship. The altar is the highest seal of ownership. God will not lightly forsake his temples. This setting up of the altar shows that our spiritual life ought to be attested by outward sign and profession. Abram had the promise in his heart, yet he did not live a merely contemplative life; he was not lost in religious musings and prophesyings he built his altar and set up his testimony in the midst of his people, and made them sharers of a common worship.
Gen 12:10-13
10. And there was a famine in the land: and Abram went down into Egypt to sojourn there; for the famine was grievous in the land.
11. And it came to pass, when he was come near to enter into Egypt, that he said unto Sarai his wife, Behold now, I know that thou art a fair woman to look upon:
12. Therefore it shall come to pass, when the Egyptians shall see thee, that they shall say, This is his wife: and they will kill me, but they will save thee alive.
13. Say, I pray thee, thou art my sister: that it may be well with me for thy sake; and my soul shall live because of thee.
The last three verses of the chapter are these:
Gen 12:18-20
18. And Pharaoh called Abram, and said, What is this that thou hast done unto me? Why didst thou not tell me that she was thy wife?
19. Why saidst thou, She is my sister? So I might have taken her to me to wife: now therefore behold thy wife, take her, and go thy way.
20. And Pharaoh commanded his men concerning him: and they sent him away, and his wife, and all that he had.
In this matter Pharaoh was a greater, a nobler man than Abram. Natural nobleness ought never to be underrated. Why begrudge to the heathen a nobleness which was as surely of God as our own Christian excellence? There are men today who make no profession of Christian faith: whose honour, straightforwardness, and generosity would put to shame many who claim a good standing in the Church. I make this statement without reservation; yet it must be explained that it is not because of Christianity, but for the want of it, that professors are humbled before men of the world; and it must be added, that men of natural elevation of temper and sentiment would attain a still intenser lustre by the possession of that life in Jesus Christ, without which all other life is either artificial or incomplete. Christianity does not equalise the character of all men, any more than the sun equalises the value of all trees. There are Christians who are barely saved from being devils, and if they are this with Christianity, what would they be without it? Christianity is not to be judged by the lowest, but by the highest. We should not judge the repute of a medical hospital by the attainments of a student who has been scarcely a month within its walls; it would be unfair to judge the master by the apprentice; why, then, seize upon an immature professor of the Christian religion, and judge Christianity by his imperfect and tottering character? We admire Pharaoh in the case before us; we like the clear, steady tone in which he remonstrates with the culprit; yet natural openness and honourableness of disposition must not be valued as a substitute for the renewed life which is wrought in men by God the Holy Ghost.
This incident shows that God calls men to special destinies, and that life is true and excellent in itself and in its influences only in so far as it is Divinely inspired and ruled. “Whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not all that he hath, he cannot be my disciple.” The great demand is made upon faith. Life is to be spiritual; not made up of things that can be counted and valued, but of ideas, convictions, impulses, and decisions that are Divine and imperishable. The world of faith is large, and rich, and brilliant. Those who live in it dominate over all lower worlds. They have their peculiar sorrows, yet they are strong enough to say, “Our light affliction, which is but for a moment, worketh for us a far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory; while we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal.” Have we received the call of God? Has God left us without command or promise? No! Every man of us has heard the command to repent and believe the gospel, and our destiny depends upon the answer we return. We are called to honour, glory, and immortality in Christ Jesus; let us awake and pursue our rugged but ever-upward way!
In view of this incident men may fitly ask themselves at whose call they are proceeding in life? No man is at liberty to stray away at the bidding of his fancy, upsetting the order of civilisation and inflicting discomfort upon all who are connected with him merely to gratify a whimsical curiosity. Society is founded upon order. Permanence is a condition of healthy growth. On the other hand, where men are called of God to go forth, it should be theirs instantly and gladly to obey, how dark soever or stormy the night into which they move. Life is a discipline. Shrewd men say they want to know whither they are going before they set out on a journey; but men of higher shrewdness, men of Christian faith, often go out into enterprise and difficulty without being able to see one step before them. The watchword of the noblest, truest souls is, “We walk by faith, not by sight”; faith has a wider dominion and a more splendid future. I call upon Christian young men to show the practical strength of faith. Don’t pick your trembling steps across the stones pioneers have laid for you; be your own pioneers, make your own ways, and show the originality and high daring of profound trust in God. I dare say you may be afraid of rashness you are partly right, yet it is possible you may hardly know what rashness is. It is certain that the world is deeply indebted to its rash men, its first travellers, its leading spirits. Prudence (in its ordinary but most inadequate sense) has done very little for the world, except to tease and hinder many of its masters and sovereigns; it would have kept back every mariner from the deep, and deterred every traveller from the desert it would have put out the fires of science, and clipped the wings of poetry it would have kept Abram at home, and found Moses a comfortable settlement in Egypt. Beware of imprudent prudence; it will lull you to sleep, and bring you to a nameless and worthless end. Make heaven your aim!
Fuente: The People’s Bible by Joseph Parker
XX
THE COVENANTS WITH ABRAHAM (PART ONE)
Gen 12:1-3
We now come to consider one of the most important subjects of religious history the covenants made with Abraham. The lessons in Genesis that bear directly upon the matter are in Gen 12:1-3 ; Gen 15:1-21 ; Gen 17:1-15 ; Gen 22:1-19 . All of these should be carefully studied in themselves and with their New Testament connections.
The investigation will show that there are either two distinct covenants, or what amounts practically to the same thing, two distinct lines of thought; one fleshly, the other spiritual, with equally distinct developments. Let us go over the whole matter step by step.
In general terms a covenant is an arrangement or agreement between two or more parties. Its terms are the stipulations or conditions which set forth the reciprocal relations and obligations of the parties entering into the agreement. The word “covenant” is frequently employed in both Testaments to express an agreement between men, or between God and men. It first appears in Gen 6:18 , where God says to Noah, “I will establish my covenant with thee.” As examples of a covenant between men we should study the covenant between Abraham and Abimelech (Gen 21:27-32 ); the covenant between David and Jonathan (1Sa 15:1-4 ; 1Sa 20:12-16 ), the covenant between David and the elders of Israel (1Ch 11:1-3 ). Figurative use of the word appears in Job’s covenant with his eyes (Job 31:1 ), Ephraim’s covenant with death and hell (Isa 28:15-18 ).
The root of the Hebrew word signifies to cut or divide, referring to the custom of cutting or dividing in two the animal sacrifice in order to ratification by the covenant-makers passing between the parts. As vivid examples of this consider: “And God said unto Abraham, Take me a heifer three years old, and a she-goat three years old, and a ram three years old, and a turtledove and a young pigeon. And he took him all these, and divided them in the midst, and laid each half over against the other; but the birds divided he not. . . . And it came to pass, that, when the sun went down, and it was dark, behold, a smoking furnace, and a flaming torch that passed between these pieces” (Gen 25:9-10 ; Gen 25:17 ). “And I will give the men that have transgressed my covenant, that had not performed the words of the covenant which they made before me, when they cut the calf in twain and passed between the parts thereof” (Jer 34:18 ). “Gather my saints together unto me, those that have made a covenant with me by sacrifice” (Psa 1:5 ).
This is of great importance in determining the Bible meaning of covenant. It shows that covenants were ratified by very vivid, religious services in which an appeal was made to God to witness the integrity and sincerity of the covenant makers and to judge the violators of it. In these religious ceremonies both parties took a most sacred oath to observe the stipulations of the agreement under penalty of divine judgment. For example: “I sware unto thee, and entered into a covenant with thee,” says Jehovah to Jerusalem (Eze 16:8 ). “And Jonathan caused David to swear again” (1Sa 20:17 ). “Swear unto me here by God that thou wilt not deal falsely with me,” says Abimelech to Abraham. And Abraham said, “I will swear.” “Wherefore he called that place Beersheba; because there they sware both of them” (Gen 21:23-24 ; Gen 21:31 ). Upon this point a New Testament statement is conclusive: “For when God made a promise to Abraham, since he could swear by none greater, he sware by himself, saying, Surely blessing will I bless thee, and multiplying I will multiply thee. And thus, having patiently endured, he obtained the promise. For men swear by the greater: and in every dispute of theirs the oath is final for confirmation. Wherein God, being minded to show more abundantly unto the heirs of the promise the immutability of his counsel, interposed with an oath; that by two immutable things, in which it is impossible for God to lie, we may have a strong encouragement, who have fled for refuge to lay hold on the hope set before us” (Heb 6:13-18 ). Because, therefore, of the oath and the sacrifice, to violate a covenant was regarded not only as most dishonorable but also a profane action, indicating great depravity and irreligion. The Romans charged the Carthaginians with habitual disregard of treaties so made, and pilloried them in history with the proverb, “Punic Faith.” But Paul in his letter to the Romans characterizes them, with other heathen, as “covenant breakers” (Rom 1:31 ). On the other hand, David in delineating a citizen of Zion, says, “He that sweareth to his own hurt and changeth not” (Psa 15:4 ).
Usually covenants were accompanied by some sign, token, or memorial. The rainbow was the token of the covenant with Noah. The seven ewe lambs were a token of the covenant with Abimelech, and Abraham also planted a tamarisk tree as a memorial. Jonathan gave David his own raiment as a token of their covenant. Circumcision was the sign of one of God’s covenants with Abraham. We have said that the first Bible use of the term is in Gen 6:18 . But this is not the first Bible record of the fact that a covenant was made. There were before this two covenants with Adam as the head of the race; one of works before the fall, and one of grace after the fall. The terms of the first covenant with Adam are clearly expressed in Gen 2:16-17 . A violation of terms by either party nullifies the covenant. This covenant was broken by Adam, as saith the prophet: “But they like Adam have transgressed the covenant” (Hos 6:7 ). A failure to be circumcised was a breach of the covenant of which it was not only a sign but a stipulation (Gen 17:14 ). The unchangeableness of the divine being was manifested in his keeping every covenant made with man (Psa 89:34-35 ). Having prepared the way by these general observations, we will not examine the four scriptures cited in Gen 12 ; Gen 15 ; Gen 17 ; Gen 22 .
The word, “covenant,” is not mentioned in Gen 12:1-4 . But Paul in the letter to the Galatians refers to a covenant of grace made with Abraham which was an anticipation of the gospel, and which he fixes by a date which exactly fits this paragraph in Gen 12 , and no other. The date is 430 years before the giving of the law on Mount Sinai. The anticipated gospel is in Gen 12:3 : “In thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed.” This very passage is quoted by the apostle Peter, and expressly called a covenant: “Ye are the sons of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with your fathers, saying to Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed” (Act 3:25 ). So that both Paul and Peter call this covenant of grace. This covenant of grace made with Abraham when seventy years old, and 430 years before the giving of the law, is confirmed with an oath when years afterward he offered up Isaac on the altar: “And the angel of Jehovah called unto Abraham a second time out of heaven, and said, By myself have I sworn, saith Jehovah, because thou hast done this thing, and has not withheld thy son, thine only son, that in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heavens, and as the sand which is upon the seashore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies; and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice” (Gen 22:15-18 ).
To this confirmation Paul thus refers: “Brethren, I speak after the manner of men: Though it be but a man’s covenant, yet when it hath been confirmed, no one maketh it void, or addeth thereto. Now to Abraham were the promises spoken, and to his seed. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ. Now this I say: A covenant confirmed beforehand by God, the law, which came four hundred and thirty years after, doth not disannul, so as to make the promise of none effect. For if the inheritance is of the law, it is no more of promise: but God hath granted it to Abraham by promise” (Gal 3:15-18 ). This language makes clear these points:
That the gospel covenant with Abraham in Act 7:2-3 , when Abraham was seventy years old, and restated in Gen 7:1-3 , when he was seventy-five years old.
That this covenant with Abraham is confirmed by the divine oath as recorded in Gen 22:15-18 . This is also the confirmation set forth in Heb 6:16-18 .
That this covenant was made 430 years before the giving of the law.
An examination of the grace covenant in Gen 12 , and of its confirmation in Gen 22 , shows that it has one distinguishing peculiarity, namely, its blessings for all the world. Let us next examine the record in Gen 15 .Gen 15:8 , Abraham asks God how he may know that he would inherit the land of Palestine. Whereupon follows an exact account of a covenant, and expressly called a covenant, whose terms are clear that God will give his lineal descendants, according to the flesh, this very land whose metes and bounds are clearly set forth. There is nothing here for the world at large. It is strictly a national covenant. Examine all its terms and see. Now if we examine the record in Gen 17 , we find again this national covenant and a sign is added, namely, circumcision.
So that we may say that two distinct covenants were made with Abraham:
The covenant of grace, Gen 7 , which was confirmed with an oath, Gen 22 , and that this covenant is so recognized by both Peter and Paul.
A national covenant (Gen 15 ), whose sign of circumcision was added (Gen 17 ). This national or circumcision covenant reappears in the law covenant at Mount Sinai. And this law covenant is expressly contrasted with the grace covenant in Paul’s letter to the Galatians. “For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, one by the handmaid, and one by the freewoman. Howbeit the son by the handmaid is born after the flesh; but the son by the freewoman is born through promise. Which things contain an allegory: for these women are two covenants; one from Mount Sinai, bearing children unto bondage, which is Hagar. Now this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia and answereth to Jerusalem that now is: for she is in bondage with her children. But the Jerusalem that is above is free, which is our mother. For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; Break forth and cry, thou that travailest not; For more are the children of the desolate than of her that hath the husband. Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are children of promise. But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, so also it is now. Howbeit what saith the Scripture? Cast out the handmaid and her son: for the son of the handmaid shall not inherit with the son of the freewoman. Wherefore, brethren, we are not children of a handmaid, but of the freewoman (Gal 4:22-31 ).
To settle this matter beyond controversy we have only to prove from the Scriptures that the circumcision, or national covenant, was passed over and merged into the Sinai covenant and the case will be complete. This will be shown later in the argument. So we have before us the Abrahamic covenants. There are distinctly two, widely differing in range and terms. The plurality of these covenants is thus expressed by Paul: “Who are Israelites; whose is the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises” (Rom 9:4 ).
The principal difference between the circumcision covenant and the Sinai or law covenant is that the latter is an enlargement of the former. One is seed; the other is fruit.
QUESTIONS 1. Where are the scriptures on the covenants with Abraham?
2. What two covenants made with him?
3. In general terms what is a covenant and what are the terms of a covenant? Give examples.
4. Etymologically, what does the word mean? Illustrate.
5. How were covenants ratified and what was the meaning of that action? Illustrate.
6. What New Testament proof of God’s oath to Abraham and what the purpose of it?
7. How was the violation of a covenant regarded, what was charge of the Romans against the Carthaginians and how did Paul characterize all of them?
8. What was the token of the several covenants, viz.: Between God and Noah; Abraham and Abimelech; Jonathan and David; God and Abraham?
9. What covenants had God made with the race prior to his covenant with Abraham and what nullified the covenant in each case?
10. Since the word “covenant” does not occur in Gen 12:1-4 , how do we know that this contains a covenant?
11. What covenant was this and what was the date?
12. How old was Abraham and when was this covenant confirmed with him?
13. What three points are made clear by Paul’s statement in Gal 3:15-18 ?
14. What covenant was made with Abraham in Gen 15 and what was its sign?
15. Restate the two covenants with Abraham, where found, the relation of the second to the Sinaitic covenant, and how contrasted with the grace covenant.
Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible
XXI
THE COVENANTS WITH ABRAHAM (PART TWO)
Gen 12:1-3
One’s understanding of these covenants affects all of his theological and church relations. If he confounds them, or reckons them as identical, he never gets out of the Old Testament for a plan of salvation, system or doctrines, idea of the church, nature, objects, and subjects of church ordinances. Hence it is easy for him to drift into ritualism, accept the doctrine of union of church and state and coercion of conscience by the magistrate. If he regards them as distinct, one to replace the other, he finds in the New Testament a plan of salvation, system of doctrine, idea of the church, number, nature, object, and subjects of church ordinances. He naturally rejects union of church and state, believes in liberty of conscience, opposes all hierarchies, advocates congregational form of church organizations and their independence of each other.
The covenants have been a battleground between Baptists and pedobaptists throughout their history. A man’s views on the covenants easily locate him in one or the other rank. While multitudes of books have been written, the strongest pedobaptist argument in favor of their construction of the covenants is a brief statement by that eminent Presbyterian divine, Dr. N. L. Rice. The substance of his argument is this:
(1) “The covenant with Abraham is the covenant of grace, therefore it did not belong to the Jewish dispensation and did not pass away with it.
(2) The covenant confessedly embraced believers and their infant children, and since it remains unchanged it embraces them still.
(3) All who were in the covenant had a right to its seal, and those embraced in it now have the same right. And since professed believers and their infant children did receive the seal of the covenant by expressed command of God, the same characters must receive it still.
(4) As circumcision was the first seal, and was administered to professed believers and their infant children, so baptism is now the seal and must be administered to the same characters. Or (1) the Abrahamic covenant was and is the covenant of grace; and the church of God, as a people in covenant with him, was organized on this covenant. (2) As the church was organized on this covenant, it embraced in its membership all who were embraced in the covenant, namely, professed believers and their infant children. (3) The Christian church stands on the same covenant and is identical with the Abrahamic church, and embraces the same characters in its membership, viz.: professed believers and their infant children. (4) All embraced in the covenant and in the church membership are entitled to the initiatory rite, and since professed believers and their infant children did receive circumcision, the first initiatory rite, the same characters, being still embraced in the same covenant, have a right to baptism, which is now the initiatory rite.”
To this very able statement of his case we submit the following reply: Dr. Rice assumes instead of proving his premises:
(1) He ignores the fact of two covenants with Abraham the covenant of grace and the covenant of circumcision, which he blends with great confusion of thought.
(2) As the covenant of grace made with Abraham was but a continuation and enlargement of previous covenants and promises reaching back to the fall of Adam, any church argument based on this covenant should no more commence with Abraham than with Noah or Seth, why not commence with Adam?
(3) Neither the covenant of grace nor the covenant of circumcision “confessedly embraced believers and their infant children.” Ishmael, the first descendant of Abraham who received the rite, was neither a believer nor an infant. The adult slaves of Abraham who received it at the same time were certainly not “infant children” of any believer, nor did the law require that they themselves be believers. They were circumcised because they were Abraham’s slaves, without any regard to age or personal faith. The law as to such subjects of circumcision was never changed.
So far as Abraham’s lineal descendants are concerned, on all millions of them, circumcision, if performed according to law, could never by any possibility be administered to a believer. The law requiring its performance when the subject was eight days old must be neglected or violated before a believer could have any chance to reach circumcision. By its own provisions of enforcement it perpetually excluded believers from its reception, just as infant baptism necessarily tends to drive believer’s baptism from the face of the earth. Dr. Rice’s plural, “believers,” is an impossibility; therefore, under the regular workings of the law, Abraham would be only one. So much for Abraham’s fleshly descendants.
In the case of a proselyte from the Gentiles who voluntarily became a Jew, he need not be a believer in the New Testament sense, and no descendant of his till the judgment day could reach circumcision by faith. We thus see what becomes of the doctor’s fundamental premise: “Believers and their infant children.”
(4) Dr. Rice makes an utterly unscriptural use of the word “seal.” To Abraham personally, unto him alone, is circumcision declared to be a seal, a seal of his faith which he had before he was circumcised. It could never be this to any of his descendants under a proper enforcement of the law. To them it might be a sign. The Bible never calls baptism a seal in any sense. New Testament believers are sealed by the Holy Spirit, not by water.
(5) Dr. Rice assumes the identity of the Christian church with what he is pleased to call the “Abrahamic church.” “The Abrahamic church” is too vague a term for such an important premise. It needs to be defined somewhat. The Christian church is a visible organization. The only visible Abrahamic organization is national Israel. Substitute “national Israel” for “Abrahamic church” in the premise, and the identity theory perishes by its own weight. You need not argue against it it falls to pieces if you look at it!
(6) Dr. Rice assumes that baptism came in the place of circumcision, which is at war with both Scripture and history. If he means only that there is some analogy between the place occupied in the Christian system by baptism and the place occupied in the Jewish system by circumcision, this is cheerfully granted, but all the force of the analogy is against infant baptism, thus: Circumcision was administered to Abraham’s fleshly seed; baptism must be administered to Abraham’s spiritual seed.
It is well just here to fix carefully in our minds the elements of the law of circumcision. Circumcision was administered,
(1) to Abraham’s natural seed;
(2) and to their slaves;
(3) but to males only;
(4) when eight days old;
(5) was by obligation a family rite;
(6) could be legally performed by man or woman;
(7) it obligated to keep the whole Sinaitic law, with which it was incorporated, as a means of justification and life, under a covenant of works;
(8) is guaranteed by an earthly domain for a possession.
With these elements before us, it will be easy to show why baptism did not come into its place, and what did come into its place, and how the analogy between baptism and circumcision is destructive to infant membership. This may be made manifest under the following heads:
(1) Both are “shadows.” A shadow cannot cast a shadow.
(2) Its antitype, regeneration, came in the place of circumcision.
(See Rom 2:28-29 ; Phi 3:3 ; Col 2:11 .)
(3) In the New Testament, the same people, if Jews, were baptized after being circumcised, as in the case of Jesus and his apostles, or were circumcised after baptism, as in the case of Timothy by Paul.
(4) The case in Act 15:1-30 , settles the question:
(a) The Judaizing teachers who tried to force circumcision on the baptized Gentiles at Antioch could not have understood that baptism was appointed to succeed circumcision;
(b) the apostles and elders at Jerusalem could not have so understood it either, for while the question was argued at length and exhaustively, no one referred to such a simple fact, which, if true, would have settled the whole controversy in a word. Their silence about it on this occasion was both inexcusable and criminal, if it were true.
(5) Utterly unlike circumcision, baptism is for Jew and Gentile, male and female, for believers, only, when they believe, without regard to age, is an ecclesiastical and not a family rite, is administered by special officers; as a mere memorial rite to the covenant of grace, it is in no sense essential to justification and life, and guarantees neither an earthly nor a heavenly Canaan.
(6) If baptism came in the place of circumcision, then it must be confined in its administration either to Abraham’s natural seed, or to his spiritual seed. If his natural seed only, that excludes the Gentile pedobaptists, as well as their children, and contradicts the Scriptures
(Mat 3:7-9 ). If to his spiritual seed, that excludes their infants for whose benefits the argument is made and establishes the true scriptural position baptism for believers only. (Compare Act 8:12 ; Act 8:37 ; Act 16:33-34 ; Act 18:8 .)
The next point necessary in this argument is to show that circumcision was passed over to Moses and became an integral part of the covenant of Sinai. The proof is this: In Gen 17 , God proposes an everlasting covenant with Abraham and his natural seed after him. The stipulation on God’s part was to give them the land of Canaan for an everlasting possession. The stipulation on their part was to keep the ordinance of circumcision and all that is involved. Any male not circumcised was cut off from the people and the inheritance. In Exo 4:24-26 , we learn that God sought to slay Moses because, on account of his wife’s objection, his child had not been circumcised. Moses was not relieved from the hazard until his wife, Zipporah, to save the husband’s life, yielded, though reluctantly, and circumcised the child.
Moses was now the appointed deliverer to lead the children of Israel into the land which God, according to his stipulation of the covenant, was to give them (Exo 6:4-8 ). Their final deliverance was accomplished by the Passover, which they were commanded to celebrate by a memorial feast. But no uncircumcised male was allowed to eat this feast (Exo 12:44-48 ). Thus Moses gave them circumcision in a national and perpetual statute. Then the nation was organized at Sinai and the covenant re-enacted and the law given; circumcision was incorporated in it as an essential feature of it (Lev 12:3 ). Thus, according to our Lord, Moses gave them circumcision as a national statute, and not as originating it, but as a requirement from the fathers when the original covenant was established (Joh 7:22-23 ). So it is testified that all who went out of Egypt to seek the land promised were circumcised (Jos 5:5 ). Again, when Joshua led them across the Jordan into the Promised Land, the Lord halted them at Gilgal until all born in the forty years of wanderings should be circumcised (Jos 5:6 ). They could not secure title to the land until their stipulation was fulfilled.
Thus we see circumcision made an essential feature of the Sinai covenant, since that is only an enlargement of the original covenant of circumcision. The proof becomes conclusive when we consider the relation of circumcision to the Sinai law. This is set forth by Paul: “For circumcision indeed profiteth, if thou be a doer of the law; but if thou be a transgressor of the law, thy circumcision is become uncircumcision” (Rom 2:25 ). “Behold, I, Paul, say unto you, that, if ye receive circumcision, Christ will profit you nothing. Yea, I testify again to every man that receiveth circumcision that he is a debtor to do the whole law” (Gal 5:2-3 ).
This Sinai covenant was strictly a covenant of works. It promised life solely on the condition of exact, implicit, and complete obedience to all its mandates. So testify the Scriptures: “Ye shall therefore keep my statutes, and mine ordinances; which if a man do, he shall live in them; I am Jehovah” (Lev 18:5 ). “For Moses writeth that the man that doeth the righteousness which is of the law shall live thereby” (Rom 5:5 ). “For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he is become guilty of all. For he that said, Do not commit adultery, said also, Do not kill. Now if thou dost not commit adultery, but killest, thou art become a transgressor of the law” (Jas 2:10-11 ).
On this very account there could be no life by it. It gendered to bondage and was a yoke of bondage, which their fathers were unable to bear (Gal 4:24 ; Gal 5:1 ; Act 15:10 ).
Their circumcision covenant said, “Do and live.”
The grace covenant said, “Believe and live.”
The clearest exhibition, perhaps, in the Bible of the contrast between this covenant and the covenant of grace made with Abraham, appears in Paul’s allegory (Gal 4:21-31 ). Just here dates become very important. That you may for yourself compare the respective dates of the covenant of circumcision and the covenant of grace we submit the following orderly statement: Paul says (Gal 3:17 ) that it preceded the law by 430 years. Reckoning back from the giving of the law, we have, first, the stay of the Israelites in Egypt 210 years, Second/Jacob was then 130 years old. Third, when Jacob was born Isaac was sixty years old. Fourth, the covenant of Act 7:2-3 , and Gen 12:1-4 , was thirty years old before the birth of Isaac, making exactly 430 years. Or Abraham was seventy years old when the covenant of grace was made with him (Act 7:2-3 ; Gen 12:1-4 ), which was thirty years before Isaac’s birth (Gen 21:5 ; Gen 25:26 ); Jacob was 130 when he entered Egypt (Gen 47:9 ), accordingly, their stay in Egypt was 210 years. So 30, 60, 130 and 210 is 430. But the covenant of circumcision was twenty-nine years later, when Abraham was ninety-nine years old (Gen 27:1-14 ). There is a great distinction in the law of descent between the two covenants; one national or fleshly, the other spiritual or supernatural.
QUESTIONS 1. How does one’s understanding of these covenants affect his theology and idea of the church?
2. What is the substance of N. L. Rice’s argument to prove that the church commenced with Abraham and that infants are members of it?
3. How does the expositor answer it?
4. What are the elements of the law of circumcision?
5. Show why baptism did not come in its place, what does come in its place, and how the analogy between baptism and circumcision destroys infant baptism.
6. Give Scripture proof that circumcision was passed over to Moses and became an integral part of the Sinaitic covenant,
7. What is the relation of circumcision to the Sinaitic law?
8. What did these covenants say respectively?
9. How does Paul get his 430 years of Gal 3:17 , and when was the covenant of circumcision given?
10. What New Testament allegory contrasts this covenant sharply with the covenant of grace?
11. What is the great distinction in the law of descent between the two covenants?
Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible
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 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:
Ver. 1. Now the Lord had said to Abram. ] But was not this to command him to do that which was against nature? No, but only against corrupt nature, which must be denied, and mortified, or there is no heaven to be had. Father and friends must be hated (that is, not loved, as “Esau have I hated”), where they hang in our light, or stand in our way to keep us from Christ. Mat 10:37
Get thee out of thy country.
And from thy kindred, and father’s house.] Who set out fair with Abram – as did likewise Orphah with Ruth – but settled in Haran, which was also in Chaldea, not far from Ur, and would go no farther, after the old man’s death. There they had feathered their nests, gathered substance, and got souls, that is servants; Gen 12:4 and, therefore, there they would set up their staff, and afterwards turned again to idolatry. Gen 31:30 ; Gen 31:53 Jos 24:2 Many follow God as Samson did his parents, till he light upon a honeycomb; or as a dog doth his master, till he meet with carrion; and then turn him up. Demas forsook God, and embracing this present world, became afterwards a priest in an idol-temple, as Dorotheus tells us.
Unto a land that I will show thee.
“ Pigris ubi nulla campis
Arbor aestiva recreatur aura:
Quod latus mundi nebulae malusque
Iupiter urget .”
Genesis
AN EXAMPLE OF FAITH
Gen 12:1 – Gen 12:9 I
1. The divine voice of command and promise.-God’s servants have to be separated from home and kindred, and all surroundings. The command to Abram was no mere arbitrary test of obedience. God could not have done what He meant with him, unless He had got him by himself. So Isa 51:2 put his finger on the essential when he says, ‘I called him alone.’ God’s communications are made to solitary souls, and His voice to us always summons us to forsake friends and companions, and to go apart with God. No man gets speech of God in a crowd. If you desired to fill a person with electricity, you used to put him on a stool with glass legs, to keep him from earthly contact. If the quickening impulse from the great magnet is to charge the soul, that soul must be isolated. ‘He that loveth father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me.’
The vagueness of the command is significant. Abram did not know ‘whither he went.’ He is not told that Canaan is the land, till he has reached Canaan. A true obedience is content to have orders enough for present duty. Ships are sometimes sent out with sealed instructions, to be opened when they reach latitude and longitude so-and-so. That is how we are all sent out. Our knowledge goes no farther ahead than is needful to guide our next step. If we ‘go out’ as He bids us, He will show us what to do next.
‘I do not ask to see
The distant scene; one step enough for me.’
2. The obedience of faith.-We have here a wonderful example of prompt, unquestioning obedience to a bare word. We do not know how the divine command was conveyed to Abram. We simply read, ‘The Lord said’; and if we contrast this with Gen 12:7 , ‘The Lord appeared . . .and said,’ it will seem probable that there was no outward sign of the divine will. The patriarch knew that he was following a divine command, and not his own purpose; but there seems to have been no appeal to sense to authenticate the inward voice. He stands, then, on a high level, setting the example of faith as unconditional acceptance of, and obedience to, God’s bare word.
Observe that faith, which is the reliance on a person, and therefore trust in his word, passes into both forms of confidence in that word as promise, and obedience to that word as command. We cannot cut faith in halves, and exercise the one aspect without the other. Some people’s faith says that it delights in God’s promises, but it does not delight in His commandments. That is no faith at all. Whoever takes God at His word, will take all His words. There is no faith without obedience; there is no obedience without faith.
We have already said enough about the separation which was effected by Abram’s journey; but we may just notice that the departure from his father’s house was but the necessary result of the gulf between them and him, which had been opened by his faith. They were idolaters; he worshipped one God. That drove them farther apart than the distance between Sichem and Haran. When sympathy in religion was at an end, the breach of all other ties was best. So to-day, whether there be outward separation or no, depends on circumstances; but every true Christian is parted from the dearest who is not a Christian, by an abyss wider than any outward distance can make. The law for us is Abram’s law, ‘Get thee out.’ Either our faith will separate us from the world, or the world will separate us from our faith and our God.
The companionship of Lot, who attaches himself to Abram, teaches that religion, in its true possessors, exercises an attractive influence over even common natures, and may win them to a loftier life. Some weak eyes may discern more glory in the sunshine tinting a poor bit of mist into ruddy light than in the beam which is too bright to look at. A faithful Abram will draw Lot after him.
‘They went forth to go into the land of Canaan; and into the land of Canaan they came.’ Compare this singular expression with Gen 11:31 , where we have Terah’s emigration from Ur described in the same terms, with the all-important difference in the end, ‘They came’ not into Canaan, but ‘unto Haran, and dwelt there.’ Many begin the course; one finishes it. Terah’s journeying was only in search of pasture and an abode. So he dropped his wider scheme when the narrower served his purpose. It was an easy matter to go from Ur to Haran. Both were on the same bank of the Euphrates. But to cross the broad, deep, rapid river was a different thing, and meant an irrevocable cutting loose from the past life. Only the man of faith did that. There are plenty of half-and-half Christians, who go along merrily from Ur to Haran; but when they see the wide stream in front, and realise how completely the other side is separated from all that is familiar, they take another thought, and conclude they have come far enough, and Haran will serve their turn.
Again, the phrase teaches us the certain issue of patient pilgrimage and persistent purpose. There is no mystery in getting to the journey’s end. ‘One foot up, and the other foot down,’ continued long enough, will bring to the goal of the longest march. It looks a weary journey, and we wonder if we shall ever get thither. But the magic of ‘one step at a time’ does it. The guide is also the upholder of our way. ‘Every one of them appeareth before God in Zion.’
3. The life in the land.-The first characteristic of it is its continual wandering. This is the feature which the Epistle to the Hebrews marks as significant. There was no reason but his own choice why Abram should continue to journey, and prefer to pitch his tent now under the terebinth tree of Moreh, now by Hebron, rather than to enter some of the cities of the land. He dwelt in tents because he looked for the city. The clear vision of the future detached him, as it will always detach men, from close participation in the present. It is not because we are mortal, and death is near at the furthest, that the Christian is to sit loose to this world, but because he lives by the hope of the inheritance. He must choose to be a pilgrim, and keep himself apart in feeling and aims from this present. The great lesson from the wandering life of Abram is, ‘Set your affection on things above.’ Cultivate the sense of belonging to another polity than that in the midst of which you dwell. The Canaanites christened Abram ‘The Hebrew’ Gen 14:13, which may be translated ‘The man from the other side.’ That is the name which all true Christians should deserve. They should bear their foreign extraction in their faces, and never be naturalised subjects here. Life is wholesomer in the tent under the spreading tree, with the fresh air blowing about us and clear sky above, than in the Canaanite city.
Observe, too, that Abram’s life was permeated with worship. Wherever he pitches his tent, he builds an altar. So he fed his faith, and kept up his communion with God. The only condition on which the pilgrim life is possible, and the temptations of the world cease to draw our hearts, is that all life shall be filled with the consciousness of the divine presence, our homes altars, and ourselves joyful thankofferings. Then every abode is blessed. The undefended tent is a safe fortress, in which dwelling we need not envy those who dwell in palaces. Common tasks will then be fresh, full of interest, because we see God in them, and offer them up to Him. The wandering life will be a life of walking with God, and progressive knowledge of Him; and over all the roughnesses and the sorrows and the trivialities of it will be spread ‘the light that never was on sea or land, the consecration’ of God’s presence, and the peacefulness of communion with Him.
Again, we may notice that the life of obedience was followed by fuller manifestations of God, and of His will. God ‘appeared’ when Abram was in the land. Is it not always true that obedience is blessed by closer vision and more knowledge? To him that hath shall be given; and he who has followed the unseen Guide through dimly discerned paths to an invisible goal, will be gladdened when he reaches the true Canaan, by the sight of Him whom, having not seen, he loved. Even here on earth obedience is the path to fuller knowledge; and when the pilgrims who have left all and followed the Captain of salvation through a deeper, darker stream than Abram crossed, have touched the other side, God will appear to them, and say, as the enraptured eye gazes amazed on the goodly land, ‘Arise, walk through the land in the length of it and in the breadth of it; for I will give it unto thee.’
Continue to Part II – ABRAM AND THE LIFE OF FAITH
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Gen 12:1-3
1Now the Lord said to Abram,
“Go forth from your country,
And from your relatives
And from your father’s house,
To the land which I will show you;
2And I will make you a great nation,
And I will bless you,
And make your name great;
And so you shall be a blessing;
3And I will bless those who bless you,
And the one who curses you I will curse.
And in you all the families of the earth will be blessed.”
Gen 12:1-3 It is often hard to tell the difference between Hebrew poetry and “elevated” prose. Notice how the English translations see the genre in the different verses.
NASB/NKJVJPSOANRSVTEV/NJB/REB/NIV
Poetry1-31 3
Prose1a2-31-31-2
Obviously there are no textual markers, just the opinions of the translation committees.
These verses are repeated in the next few chapters with slight modifications and explanations, but this context is the great initial promise of God used by Paul in Romans 4 (i.e., Gen 15:6). YHWH will act through Abram and his/His seed to reveal Himself to the whole world. Covenant (see Special Topic at Gen 13:15) becomes the key concept of the Bible. The sovereign God initiates it and sets the agenda, but He has mandated that humans must respond appropriately and continually!
Gen 12:1 “Now” “Now” and “had said” are both placed in this verse by translators who believe that these verses refer to a previous call of God at Ur (cf. Gen 15:7; Neh 9:7; Act 7:2).
“LORD” This is YHWH, the covenant name of God (cf. Exo 3:14). Notice this call is based on God’s gracious invitation, not Abram’s worth (cf. Gen 12:10 ff). God always takes the initiative (cf. Joh 6:44; Joh 6:65; Eph 2:8-9).
SPECIAL TOPIC: NAMES FOR DEITY
“the LORD said” This strongly implies specific verbal communication, not a revelation through a dream or vision, though that must remain a possibility. Gen 12:7 implies a physical appearance similar to Gen 3:8-12; Gen 4:9-15; Gen 6:13-22; Gen 8:15-19; Gen 9:1-17.
“Abram” On the possible meanings of the name see the note at Gen 11:26.
Abram is not depicted as a special person. His family are polytheistic, probably worshipers of the moon god/goddess. As a matter of fact, Abram is disobedient in
1. not leaving his family
2. leaving Canaan for Egypt
3. getting his wife to lie in order to save him (twice)
4. lying to Pharaoh and Abimelech in order to save his life
Only in Gen 22:15-18 does his faith shine through, even though it is alluded to in Gen 15:6.
“Go forth from your country” The VERB (BDB 229, KB 246, Qal IMPERATIVE) means “to go.” The marginal note of NASB asserts it implies “go for yourself.” It is assumed to relate to all three clauses of Gen 12:1 b,c,d. To what country does this refer, Ur or Haran? Notice that Gen 11:31 speaks of Terah leaving Ur for Canaan, but settling in Haran. Ur and Haran were both centers for moon worship and Terah and his family, because of the supposed meanings of their names (however, the meaning of the family name is uncertain), may have been involved in the worship of the moon god/goddess Sin, Nana (cf. Jos 24:2). This is why he was willing to move.
For Abram to leave his family and their birth land would be a public acknowledgment that he was leaving all inheritance claims behind. This break with his family may have also denoted a break with the family gods. This is why Terah and Lot accompanying him was forbidden by God and, therefore, so surprising. Was it an act of disobedience to YHWH’s call or was it a way to fulfill family expectations (i.e., care for parents) and at the same time, obey YHWH? As usual the literary genre of “historical narrative” (see several relevant appendices) does not specifically answer these kinds of questions. One must look at the whole narrative and “connect the dots.”
“from your relatives” YHWH’s call was conditional on Abram’s response. Abram did not fulfill his part (go from your relatives and from your father’s house) immediately. Obedience is crucial (cf. Gen 18:19; Gen 22:18).
“from your father’s house” Act 7:4 says Terah died in Haran before Abram left, but combining Gen 11:26 and Gen 12:4 and relating this with Gen 11:32, it seems Terah lived sixty years after Abram left. Possibly Gen 11:26 is the key. Abram may have been listed as the first child not because of age, but because of prominence. It seems Abram’s culturally expected family duties were the biggest hindrance to God’s call.
“To the land which I will show you” From Gen 11:31 we know this to be Canaan. Canaan is promised to
1. Abraham – Gen 12:1; Gen 15:18-21
2. Isaac – Gen 26:3-5
3. Jacob – Gen 28:13-15; Gen 35:9-12
4. Israel – Gen 15:16; Exo 6:4; Exo 6:8; Deu 4:38; Deu 4:40; Deu 5:31; Deu 19:10; Deu 20:16; Deu 21:23; Jos 1:2-3; Jos 1:6; Jos 1:11; Jos 1:13; Jos 1:15; Jos 2:9; Jos 2:24; Jos 18:3; Jos 21:43; Jos 24:13
Abram’s faith is characterized in Heb 11:8. This promise of a special homeland becomes the focus of the OT (i.e., Israel was given a land by YHWH).
Gen 12:2 “I will make you a great nation” The word for nation (BDB 156) implies a homeland. It also implies many descendants (i.e., Gen 22:17). It may even denote a new nation not mentioned in Genesis 10.
Gen 12:2 has three COHORTATIVE statements of YHWH’s promised actions.
1. “I will make you a great nation” – BDB 793, KB 889, Qal IMPERFECT used in a COHORTATIVE sense
2. “I will bless you” – BDB 138, KB 159 Piel IMPERFECT used in a COHORTATIVE sense
3. “I will make your name great” – BDB 152, KB 178, Piel COHORTATIVE
This promise of “a seed” will become the focused hope of one special seed/descendant, the Messiah, who will bring all nations to YHWH. Abraham is but one act in the full drama of redemption!
It is also theologically significant that original creation was blessed for growth (cf. Gen 1:28; Gen 9:1; Gen 9:7), but sin affected YHWH’s desire. Now He starts again, but with one man, one family, one nation to develop into a redeemed people from all nations (a reversal of the Tower of Babel; they, too, wanted “a name” for themselves, Gen 11:4). This passage is both a promised blessing and a conditional promise. However, the focus is on the undeserved blessing (grace act, Gen 15:7-21; Gen 28:13-15) by YHWH. This blessing/promise is conditional (cf. Gen 12:1) on obedience (supreme example is Genesis 22) and from Gen 15:5, faith. It becomes a paradigm for how to relate to God (cf. Romans 4; Galatians 3).
“make your name great” The rabbis see this in the sense of pronouncing a blessing by his name. It implies that all people will know and respect him.
“you shall be a blessing” This is a Qal IMPERATIVE amidst COHORTATIVES. “To be a blessing” implies an action on Abram’s part. YHWH’s blessing was to enable Abram to be a blessing and from Gen 12:3, a universal blessing.
Gen 12:3 “I will bless those who bless you” YHWH’s blessing will come through Abram’s blessing. YHWH chooses to act, but in particular ways.
The VERBS in Gen 12:3 form a pattern.
1. YHWH blesses – BDB 138, KB 159, Piel COHORTATIVE
2. those who bless Abram – BDB 138, KB 159, Piel PARTICIPLE
3. bless those who curse Abram – BDB 886, KB 1103, Piel PARTICIPLE
4. YHWH curses them – BDB 886, KB 1103, Qal IMPERFECT used in a COHORTATIVE sense
“the one who curses you I will curse” There are two Hebrew words here for “curse.” The first means “to speak evil of” (BDB 886, KB 1103, cf. Gen 8:21; Gen 16:4-5; Exo 21:17; Exo 22:28; Lev 19:14; Lev 20:9 [twice]; Gen 24:11; Gen 24:14-15; Gen 24:23; Deu 23:4) and the second is the judicial curse of God (BDB 76, KB 91, cf. Gen 3:14; Gen 3:17; Gen 4:11; Gen 5:29; Gen 9:25; Gen 27:29 [twice]; Gen 49:7; Exo 22:28; Num 5:18-19; Num 5:22; Num 5:24 [twice],27; Gen 22:6 [twice],12; Gen 23:7; Gen 24:9 [twice]; Deu 27:15-26; Deu 28:16-19). Those who revile Abraham cut themselves off from YHWH and therein is the curse. YHWH reveals Himself primarily through Abram and his family (note Melchizedek, Job, Jethro).
NASB, NKJV,
NRSV, Peshitta”and in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed”
NRSV footnote,
JPSOA”by you all the families of the earth shall bless themselves”
TEVand through you I will bless all the nations”TEV footnote
“All the nations will ask me to bless them as I have blessed you”
NJBand all clans on earth will bless themselves by you”
LXX”and in you shall all the tribes of the earth be blessed”
REB”All the peoples on earth will wish to be blessed as you are blessed”
REB footnote”All the peoples on earth will be blessed because of you”
The Niphal PERFECT (BDB 138, KB 159) stem is usually PASSIVE (LXX, NASB, “shall be blessed,” cf. Gen 18:18; Gen 28:14), but in Gen 22:18; Gen 26:4 the Hithpael PERFECT stem is used, which is REFLEXIVE (“bless themselves”). It is possible that the Hithpael denotes a continuing action through time. It is significant that God includes all nations in His promise to Abram, which is significant in light of the universal rebellion of chapter 11. God chose Abraham to choose all humans made in His image (cf. Psa 22:27; Psa 66:4; Psa 86:9; Isa 66:23; Isa 49:6; Act 3:25; Gal 3:8)! Also see note at Gen 22:18.
This is really an important passage. It shows clearly God’s purpose of using Abram to reach all the world. The universal promise of Gen 3:15 is being implemented, even amidst the purposeful rebellion of Noah’s children (i.e., Genesis 11). It is not only to those who show favor to Abram, but to those who will show favor to Abram’s seed (i.e., the Messiah, cf. Gal 3:16). There was/is a universal purpose in YHWH’s choice of one to bring prophesied redemption through the special “One” of his descendants. In the big picture, this is not a text about an attitude toward Jews, but a faith response to the Jewish “promised One.”
SPECIAL TOPIC: YHWH’s ETERNAL REDEMPTIVE PLAN
SPECIAL TOPIC: MESSIAH
LORD = Jehovah, “The God of Glory” of Act 7:2, Figure of speech Enallage = The Glorious God, in contrast with idols (Jos 24:2).
Get thee out = Go for thyself, i.e. whatever others may do. Death had broken the link of nature’s tie, which hindered Abram’s obedience.
kindred. Leaving Nahor and his family (except Lot), Gen 24:4, Gen 24:10-15; Gen 25:20; Gen 28:7-10.
shew. See Heb 11:8.
Chapter 12
Now the LORD had said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy family ( Gen 12:1 ),
So Abraham really wasn’t totally obedient at this point. And this to me is interesting, because Abraham is always held as the model of faith in the New Testament, the model of a man who believed and trusted God. He’s the prime example of the man who believes. And so many times when we read about faith and the exploits of faith, we think, “But I’m so weak and I’ve blown it so many times, surely I can’t do it”. It’s good to know that Abraham wasn’t perfect nor was his faith perfect. It’s good to know that you don’t have to be perfect and your faith doesn’t have to be perfect for God to honor you.
So God said, “Get away from your family”. He took his dad with him from the Ur of the Chaldees to Haran. That was an incomplete obedience. Stopping at Haran was incomplete obedience to God. So even men noted as men of faith have their moments. And just because you slipped back and have your moments doesn’t mean that God won’t honor you and honor your faith, or that God doesn’t love you and wants to still work in a powerful way in your life, just because you blow it and you stop at Haran. It doesn’t mean that the call of God is going to be removed and there’s no chance for you to go on and fulfill that which God has laid upon your life and your heart to do.
Many people have stopped at Haran, but the time came for him to move on, which he did. Maybe the time has come for you to move on from your Haran. “The Lord said, Get thee out of thy country, from thy father’s family.”
from your father’s house, to a land that I will show you ( Gen 12:1 ):
So by the very virtue of the fact that Terah went with him, it could be the old man was saying, “Oh no, don’t leave. I want to go with you, son”. Or it could be Abraham was saying, “Okay, dad, all right”, you know. And he could have been weak in this area. But then his dad began to drag him down and slow him down, until his father died spiritually following after the pagan practices, and Abraham moved on.
I will make of thee [God said] a great nation ( Gen 12:2 ),
Now God is establishing covenant with Abraham. “Get away from your family, your father’s house, to a land that I will show you. I’ll make you a great nation”.
I will bless you, I will make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing ( Gen 12:2 ):
All of these promises God fulfilled to Abraham. He made of him a great nation. God has blessed him and made the name of Abraham great. It’s honored and respected. “And thou shalt be a blessing.”
And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse them that curse thee: and in thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed ( Gen 12:3 ).
And from that is the promise that the Messiah would come from Abraham. “In thee all the families of the earth.” Not just the Jews but all the families of the earth will be blessed from Abraham’s progeny, even Jesus Christ.
So Abram departed, as the LORD had spoken unto him; and Lot went with him: and Abram was seventy-five years old when he departed out of Haran. And Abram took Sarai his wife, and Lot his brother’s son, and all their substance that they had gathered, and the souls that they had gotten in Haran; and they went forth to go to the land of Canaan; and into the land of Canaan they came ( Gen 12:4-5 ).
Four hundred-mile journey, which in those days, with all of the animals and everything else, must have taken quite a long time indeed.
And Abram passed through the land unto the place of Shechem, unto the plain of Moreh. And the Canaanites [or the descendants or Canaan] were then in the land. And the LORD appeared unto Abram, and said, Unto thy seed will I give this land: and there he built an altar unto the LORD, who appeared unto him ( Gen 12:6-7 ).
Now the promise of giving the land to Abraham’s seed at this point would also include the Palestinians, because the Arabs also were descendants of Abraham through Ishmael. So at this point, the land is promised not just to the Jews but also to thy seed, which would include the Arabs, Palestinians. But later on, when God repeats it to Jacob, it excludes the Arabs.
And he removed from thence unto a mountain on the east of Bethel, and he pitched his tent, having Bethel on the west, and Hai [or Ai] on the east ( Gen 12:8 ):
Now when Joshua came in later to conquer the land, he came up from Jericho and conquered Ai and then onto Bethel. Abraham now has a favorite spot there near Bethel in between Bethel and Ai. It’s the highest part of the land in that particular area. It gives you just a fabulous view. It’s about ten miles north of Jerusalem and about twenty miles or so from Shechem. But from there you can see down into the Jordan valley, you can see up towards the area of Samaria, you can see Jerusalem and the area south. You can look over towards the Mediterranean. It just is a beautiful vantage-point in that mountainous area between Bethel and Ai. And when Abraham came to this area, he built an altar. “And the LORD appeared unto Abram, and said, Unto thy seed I give this land.”
he built an altar unto the LORD, and called on the name of the LORD. And Abram journeyed, going on down now to the south. And there was a famine in the land: so Abram went down into Egypt to sojourn there; for the famine was grievous in the land ( Gen 12:8-10 ).
So there was a drought in the-of course, he went on south towards Beersheba. There is always a drought down there. The place is really dry. It’s ‘deserty’.
And it came to pass, when he was come near to Egypt, that he said to Sarai his wife ( Gen 12:11 ),
Now here’s our great man of faith, our example.
Behold now, I know that you are a beautiful woman to look upon ( Gen 12:11 ):
Hey, that’s saying a lot to your wife when she’s sixty-five years old. But because of the longevity, at sixty-five you were still really, you know, in your prime of youth in a sense of beauty. Abraham lived to be over one hundred and sixty. So at sixty-five you’re really not that old yet in those times. But it does, you know, when you think of sixty-five years old and talking about her great beauty, it does sound to be very interesting. “I know that you are a beautiful woman to look upon.”
Therefore when it comes to pass, when the Egyptians will see you, they will say, This is his wife: and they will kill me, and keep you alive ( Gen 12:12 ).
They’ll take you into their harem. Now this was a common practice among the Egyptian kings is to just, if a man, if he saw a beautiful woman, he’d kill her husband and take her as his wife. And so he said,
I pray that you’ll tell them that you are my sister: that it might be well with me for thy sake; and my soul shall live because of thee ( Gen 12:13 ).
Hey, this is our great man of faith, Abraham. You see, even great men of faith have their weaknesses and their moments. Now that encourages me for some silly reason because I also have my moments of weaknesses. But I have the concept that when I get weak, God just says, “All right, that’s it. You had your chance”. You know, wipe out, but not so. God continued to honor Abraham. God continued to bless Abraham. He wasn’t perfect.
God doesn’t use perfect people because they don’t exist. So don’t worry that you’re not perfect. Don’t think that God is going to reject you because you’re not perfect. Don’t think that God can’t use you because you’re not perfect. God blessed Abraham. God used Abraham though he had his lapses of faith, just like we have our lapses of faith.
So it came to pass, that, when Abram was come to Egypt, the Egyptians beheld the woman that she was very beautiful. And the princes also of Pharaoh saw her, and they commended her before the Pharaoh: and the woman was taken into the Pharaoh’s house. And he entreated Abram [or he treated Abraham] well for her sake: and he had sheep, and oxen, and asses, and menservants, maidservants, she asses, camels. And the LORD plagued Pharaoh and his house with great plagues because of Sarai Abram’s wife. And the Pharaoh called Abram, and said, What have you done to me? Why didn’t you tell me that she was your wife? Why did you say, She is my sister? I might have taken her to be my wife: now behold your wife, take her, go your way. And Pharaoh commanded his men concerning him: and they sent him away, and his wife, and all that he had ( Gen 12:14-20 ).
So he came under then a special protective edict of the Pharaoh so that he would not fall prey to the men in order that they might take Sarai his wife.
So an introduction now to Abraham. We’re beginning now to follow and we will from now on follow Abraham as we come on down towards Christ, as the Bible now is the developing of the nation and from the nation the coming forth of the Savior of the world.
So next week we’ll continue on beginning with chapter thirteen. Shall we stand? God bless you and enrich your heart and your mind in the things of the Spirit, giving you understanding of His Word. And may God increase your faith and your knowledge and understanding of Him. God go with you and bless you and watch over you and keep you in all your ways, strengthening you and ministering to you through His love. In Jesus’ name. “
We will read two or three passages in the Book of Genesis concerning God blessing his servant Abraham. Turn first to the twelfth chapter.
Gen 12:1. Now the lord had said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy fathers house, unto a land that I will shew thee:
It was Gods intention to keep his truth and his pure worship alive in the world by committing it to the charge of one man, and the nation that should spring from him. In the infinite sovereignty of his grace, he chose Abraham,passing by all the rest of mankind,and elected him to be the depository of the heavenly light, that through him it might be preserved in the world until the days when it should be more widely scattered. It seemed essential to this end that Abraham should come right out from his fellow-countrymen, and be separate unto Jehovah, so the Lord said to him, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy fathers house, unto a land that I will shew thee.
Gen 12:2-3. 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 families of the earth be blessed.
There, you see, was the missionary character of the seed of Abraham, if they had but recognized it. God did not bless them for themselves alone, but for all nations: In thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.
Gen 12:4. So Abram departed, as the LORD had spoken unto him; and Lot went with him: and Abram was seventy and five years old when he departed out of Haran.
He had already attained a fine old age, but he had another century of life before him, which he could not then foresee, or expect. If, at his age, he had said, Lord, I am too old to travel, too old to leave my country, and to begin to live a wandering life, we could not have wondered; but he did not talk in that fashion. He was commanded to go and we read, So Abram departed, as the Lord had spoken unto him.
Gen 12:5-6. And Abram took Sarai his wife, and Lot his brothers son, and all their substance that they had gathered, and the souls that they had gotten in Haran; and they went forth to go into the land of Canaan; and into the land of Canaan they came. And Abram passed through the land unto the place of Sichem, unto the plain of Moreh. And the Canaanite was then in the land.
Fierce and powerful nations possessed the country; it did not seem a very likely place to be the heritage of a peace-loving man like Abraham. God does not always fulfill his promises to his people at once; else, where would be the room for faith? This life of ours is to be a life of faith, and it will be well rewarded in the end. Abraham had not a foot of land to call his own, except that cave of Machpelah which he bought of the sons of Heth for a burying-place for his beloved Sarah.
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.
Thus, you see, Abraham began his separated life with a blessing from the Lord his God.
Further on in his history he received a still larger blessing when he returned from his victory over the kings.
This exposition consisted of readings from Gen 12:1-7; Gen 14:17-24; and Gen 22:15-18.
At this point begins the actual historic movement toward the coming of the Redeemer. One man was called to the realization of the true principle of life. The call was personal and purposeful. Abram was commanded to sever the ties of all past associations and to go forth, governed wholly by the will of God. The personal element is clearly marked in the words, “Get thee out . . . I will show thee . . . I will make of thee . . . I will bless thee.” It was none the less a purposeful call. The personal going was to result in the creation of a nation through which all the nations of the earth were to be blessed.
Abram’s obedience was immediate. Arrived in the land, God appeared to him again and declared that that land was to be given to his seed. All the appearances of the hour were against the possibility of the fulfilment of that promise, for “the Canaanite was then in the land.” Faith conquered in spite of appearances as Abram pitched his tent, a sign of possession, and built his altar, a symbol of allegiance
Once more we confront human failure in Abram’s deflection from the life of faith. In the presence of famine he attempted to secure his own safety by going into Egypt. As the result of this we have the startling picture of the chosen mother of the promised Seed in the harem of Pharaoh. God however guards the larger issue of His purpose against the mistakes of the instrument, and by plaguing Pharaoh’s house brought about the deliverance of Abram.
It is ever a humbling thing when a man of faith who stands for the principle and purpose of God is rebuked by someone outside the covenant for lack of loyalty to truth. Yet this is exactly what happened in the case of Abram.
Gods Call and Promise to Abram
Gen 12:1-9
Gods commands are always associated with promises. Count the shalls and wills here. He does not give His reasons, but He is lavish of His promises. The keynote of Abrams life was Separation. Step by step, until country, kindred, Lot, worldly alliances and fleshly expedients were one by one cast aside and he stood alone with God! Though he knew not whither he went, the father of the faithful obeyed, and crossed the wide and perilous deserts. It was this absolute and unquestioning obedience that endeared him to God. Let us ever obey and step out, though it seems as though there were nought but seething mist. We shall find it solidify under the tread of faith. Read Rom 4:16; Heb 11:8. Notice the combination of the Tent and Altar. The tent-life is natural to the man whose portion is God; and where he pitches his tent he will rear his altar.
Gen 12:1, etc.
I. In the call of Abram we see an outline of the great providential system under which we live.
II. Great lives are trained by great promises. The promise to Abram (1) throws light on the compensations of life; (2) it shows the oneness of God with His people; (3) it shows the influence of the present over the future.
III. There will always be central figures in society, men of commanding life, around whom other persons settle into secondary positions. This one man, Abram, holds the promise; all the other persons in the company hold it secondarily.
IV. Abram set up his altar along the line of his march.
V. The incident in Gen 12:10-12 shows what the best of men are when they betake themselves to their own devices. As the minister of God, Abram is great and noble; as the architect of his own fortune, he is cowardly, selfish, and false.
VI. (Gen 12:18-20). Natural nobleness ought never to be underrated. In this matter Pharaoh was a greater, a nobler man than Abram.
VII. The whole incident shows that God calls men to special destinies, and that life is true and excellent in itself and in its influences only in so far as it is divinely inspired and ruled.
Parker, vol. i., p. 192.
Gen 12:1
I. All the life of Abraham was a special training for a special end. Chosen, as are all God’s instruments, because he was capable of being made that which the Lord purposed to make him, there was that in him which the good Spirit of the Lord formed, through the incidents of his life of wandering, into a character of eminent and single-hearted faithfulness.
II. This work was done not for his own sake exclusively. He was to be “a father of many generations.” The seed of Abraham was to be kept separate from the heathen world around it, even until from it was produced the “Desire of all nations”; and this character of Abraham was stamped thus deeply upon him, that it might be handed on through him to his children and his children’s children after him.
III. And so to a wonderful degree it was; marking that Jewish people, amongst all their sins and rebellions, with such a peculiar strength and nobleness of character; and coming out in all its glory, in successive generations, in judge and seer and prophet and king, as they at all realised the pattern of their great progenitor, and walked the earth as strangers and pilgrims, but walked it with God, the God of Abraham and their God.
S. Wilberforce, Sermons, p. 165.
References: Gen 12:1.-J. Van Oosterzee, The Year of Salvation, vol. ii., p. 337; J. B. Mozley, Ruling Ideas in Early Ages, p. 1; Parker, vol. i., p. 186.
Gen 12:1-3
(with Gen 9:1-9)
No one has ever doubted that the words in Gen 9:1-7 are a Divine blessing upon the human race.
I. There is something especially appropriate in this language to the inhabitants of a restored earth. Compare it with the simple records of the garden life of Adam, and you perceive that you are entering upon a more advanced stage in human history. Two steps in advance have been taken: (1) Every man is now his brother’s keeper. Every man is shedding his own blood when he sheds his brother’s blood. The words “every man’s brother” expanded the principle of the family to a higher power. They declared that the race was a family; they intimated that society was to be built up on the recognition of an actual relationship among the different members of it; (2) a higher dignity is put upon life than it had before, whether it dwells in a man or only in an inferior creature.
II. This is the first occasion on which we meet with the phrase “covenant.” Man was a party to the covenant in the sense that he might believe or disbelieve the sign which was said to bear that Divine testimony. All his future acts would depend on this difference, because they would depend upon the question whether he worshipped a being in whom he trusted, or one whom he regarded as an enemy. Man lives by faith; and till faith is called forth in him he is still but an animal with the capacities of a spirit.
III. The history of Abram is the grand illustration of this truth. Every unfaithful man of the race of Abram, every unfaithful man anywhere, would be a god; he would not claim the right of knowing God and being like Him. Therefore all such were tempted to make gods of their own, and to forget the living God. Abram’s faith consisted in not doing this-in acknowledging the Lord to be God. He believed God’s promise. He counted it the highest blessing and glory, not that he should be blessed, but that he should be the channel of blessing to multitudes unknown.
F. D. Maurice, The Patriarchs and Law-Givers of the Old Testament, p. 68. Reference: xii 1-3.-Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxix., p. 394.
Gen 12:1-4
I. At some time in our lives a call from God sends its trumpet tone through each of our souls, as it did when Abraham heard it, and he went forth with the future stretching broad and far before him.
II. God’s call to Abraham was: (1) a call to closer communion with Himself; (2) a call which led him to break with his past; (3) a call into loneliness.
III. The reason why so many of us, who are good and honourable men, never become men of great use and example and higher thought and true devotion, is that we dare not be singular. We dare not leave our kindred or our set. We will not leave our traditional views and sentiments, and we cannot leave our secret sins. God speaks, and we close our eyes and turn away our heads, and our hearts answer, “I will not come.” How long will all this last? Will it last until another solemn voice shall speak to us, and at the call of death we say, “I come”?
W. Page-Roberts, Liberalism in Religion, p. 178.
Gen 12:2
When God called Abraham, and, in Abraham, the Jewish nation, He cradled them in blessings. This is the way in which He always begins with a man. If ever, to man or nation, He speaks otherwise, it is because they have made Him do so.
I. Many of us account religion rather as a possession to be held, or a privilege to be enjoyed, than as a life which we are to spread, a kingdom we are bound to extend. Consequently our religion has grown too passive. It would be healthier and happier if we were to cast into it more action.
II. Wherever Abraham went he shed blessings round him, not only by his prayers and influence, but by the actual charm of his presence. As Abraham was a blessing to the Jews, still more were the Jews a blessing to the world.
III. Then came the climax. He who so blesses with His blood, He who did nothing but bless, He was of the seed of Abraham.
IV. As joined to the mystical body of Christ, we are Abraham’s seed, and one of the promises to which we are admitted is this, “Thou shalt be a blessing.” The sense of a positive appointment, of a destiny to do a thing, is the most powerful motive of which the human mind is capable. Whoever desires to be a blessing must be a man of faith, prayer, and love.
J. Vaughan, Fifty Sermons, 1874, p. 293.
References: Gen 12:2.-J. H. Evans, Thursday Penny Pulpit, vol. x., p. 113; Homiletic Magazine, vol. vii., p. 205.
Gen 12:3
I. A double stream of narrative runs through the first four books of the Pentateuch. One of these may be called the Priestly narrative-the other, the Prophetical narrative. The text sets before us one of the characteristic features of the Prophetical narrative-that consciousness of the ideal destiny of Israel which developed afterwards into the definite hope commonly called Messianic. Unfettered by the political and material limitations of his age, the narrator discerns in dim outline the far-off goal of Israel’s history, and enables his reader to discern it with him. We have first the familiar Protevangelion of the third chapter, where hope already steps in to alleviate the effects of the fall. Then comes the blessing given to Shem, and then the promise of our text.
II. What is the source of this conception of the ideal destiny of Israel which dominates so many points of the Old Testament? Israel was the people of Jehovah. They knew that the God of heaven and earth had really become their God, and had separated them to Himself as a peculiar people. Israel is the people of God: here is the fruitful germ of their whole future. The earliest records of the Old Testament are inspired by the consciousness of a noble ideal, which, so far from proving itself an illusion, was more or less completely realised. We may notice some of the more salient aspects of its development: (1) The establishment of the monarchy forms an epoch in Israelitish history. The monarchy created in Israel a sense of unity, and gave a new impulse to national feeling. (2) The great prophets amplify in different directions the thought of Israel’s ideal future. (3) In the great prophecy of Israel’s restoration, which occupies the last twenty-seven chapters of Isaiah, we find the nation no longer viewed as an aggregate of isolated members, but grasped as a whole, dramatised as an individual, who stands before us realising in his own person his people’s purposes and aims. In his work as prophet he endures contumely and opposition, and though innocent himself, he sacrifices his life for others. Such is the personality upon whom, in the mind of Isaiah, the future alike of Israel and the world depends. In Christ as King and Christ as Prophet, the Founder and Head of a new social state, the hope of Israel, which but for His advent had been as an illusion or a dream, finds its consummation and its reward.
S. R. Driver, Oxford University Herald, Oct. 31st, 1885.
“All the families of the earth.”
St. Paul finds the key to the constitution and the order of the human home in the spiritual sphere. Christian philosophy is inevitably transcendental-that is, it believes that earthly things are made after heavenly patterns, and that the “things seen and temporal” can only be fully understood by letting the light fall on them from the things which are not seen and eternal.
It was the redemption of the home when Christ’s redeeming love to the world was made the pattern of its love. That home is the highest in which love reigns most perfectly.
I. The home is the instrument of a double education. Its function is to develop the Divine image in parent and in child. The sentence on man after the fall was disciplinary, while on the tempter it was penal. The sentence on the tempter was utter and final degradation, while on man it was literally a sentence to a reformatory school. In sorrow, toil and tears, he was to learn how the devil had cheated him, in the hope that when he had learnt that lesson his heart might be open to the instruction of God once more.
II. As the first step to the fulfilment of his purpose in restoring man to his own image, God set “the solitary in families,” He laid the foundation of the home as the fundamental human institution, the foundation of all true order, the spring of all true development in human society. Out of the home State and Church were to grow; by the home they were both to be established. And so God took the dual head of the first human home, the father and mother, and made them as gods to their children, and He set them there to study the pain and the burden of the godhead as well as the power and the joy. This was the only way by which man could gain the knowledge of the mind and heart of God.
J.Baldwin Brown, The Christian World Pulpit, vol. xvii., p. 341,
From the text we learn three things: (1) there was to be a seed, a natural seed, including a spiritual seed, and this again including an individual seed. (2) The seed of Abraham is to have a relation to all the families of the earth. As Abraham was not a head of all mankind, like Adam or Noah, it was necessary to emphasize the universality of the blessing. (3) The benefit conveyed by the seed is here characterised by the word blessed. Blessing is like mercy in this: that it sums up in one word the whole salvation of which the Bible is the gospel. It involves redemption and regeneration, both of which are necessary to salvation.
J. G. Murphy, The Book of Daniel, p. 12. Reference: Gen 12:3.-Expositor, 2nd Series, vol. viii., p. 200.
Gen 12:4-5
(with Act 16:10)
I. Taken together, these texts may be paraphrased geographically, by saying that they contain a direction to the Law and the Gospel to move westwards, like the sun. The forefather of the Jews was ordered to quit his home for a land that looked westwards; the Apostle of the Gentiles was ordered to commence travelling westwards, turning his back on the east. One text limited the earlier dispensation to a single branch of the Semitic race; the other threw open the later dispensation to all the families of the earth. As we cast our eyes upwards along the stream of time to the call of Abraham, we are met on all sides by decisive tokens of a worldwide purpose. Abraham was called 430 years before the law was given; but could any place have been selected more felicitously for its programme than the country to which Abraham moved? Palestine was, by desert, river, and mountain, as closed to the east as it lay open by sea to the west; and thus was as fitted for a nation that was to be kept separate for ages in utter exclusiveness and isolation, as it was also ready to become the starting-point at another time of a system with cosmopolitan aims, and designed especially to spread in the west. That system had hardly been inaugurated before it commenced moving of itself, slowly and majestically, to a destination traced for it by no human hand.
II. The inspired writers themselves never dreamt of the Gospel turning out, as it has done, an essential maritime power. Instead of the Gospel diverging eastwards to convert the east, the east poured westwards in countless hosts after the Gospel. Nation after nation burst over Europe with the vehemence of a cyclone, and shattered in pieces the whole fabric of the Roman empire. All the new comers became followers of Christ. The most striking part of the Gospel programme is yet to come-namely, the conversion of the Jews. The Jews have been compelled to wait as long for their conversion as the Gentiles did for their call; yet both events were foretold with the 6ame clearness at the beginning of each dispensation. The conversion of the Jews, whenever it occurs, will be like the transformation scene of the old English play, a scene of overpowering brilliancy, the beginning of the end.
E. S. Ffoulkes, Oxford and Cambridge Undergraduates’ Journal, Oct. 26th, 1876. Reference: Gen 12:4.-Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. vi., p. 89.
Gen 12:6
This is one of the most comforting verses in the Bible. It is so simple and yet so sure. It tells us that the end is certain if the beginning is right.
I. The text is written from heaven’s side of the question. It is the history-put in short-of all the saints who ever went to glory. They took a long journey, and at last they got safely home. The rest-how it was, why it was, all that makes up the interval-is the grace of God.
II. There were difficulties by the way: why are we not told of them? Because from the mountain top the way by which we have travelled looks level and easy. Things that were great at the time seem so small from that height that we do not care to see them.
III. What is it really to set out? It is to recognise and answer God’s call. The great secret of life is to have a strong aim. All through his life Abraham had one single object in view. It was Canaan. The record of each antediluvian patriarch was, “He lived so many years, and he died.” That is one side of the picture, but there is another: “They went forth to go into the land of Canaan, and into the land of Canaan they came.”
J. Vaughan, Sermons, Eleventh Series, p. 221. Reference: Gen 12:5.-Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xiv., No. 843.
Gen 12:10
Went down from one civilisation to another, went down from one society to another, went down from one religion to another. Man is a traveller-not in one sense, but in all senses; and he is always travelling. We have to go out into the world; the question is, How are we going?
I. A widened world always tries a man’s first faith and first ways of doing things; he gets the true perspective as he moves through widening space. Abraham went down from Ur of the Chaldees with a very narrow policy, and when he came into great Egypt he encountered the new civilisation with a lie. When a young man comes from comparative quietness and leisure to the bustle and strife of a great city, he must expect to have his faith rudely and constantly attacked. Christianity has to fight for every inch of its progress.
II. The great thing to be kept in mind is, that we have to enter into a hundred new worlds. We do not enter into the world once for all: within the world there are a thousand other worlds. We need guidance and preparation in view of the new worlds and Egypts into which we have to go. There has been only one man in this world who could safely go into every circle and society which this world contains. Jesus Christ was His name. With the spirit of Christ you can go anywhere and everywhere, and you can give all languages a new accent and a new meaning, and lift up all the relations of life into a nobler significance.
Parker, The Fountain, June 9th, 1881.
I. Egypt was to Abraham, to the Jewish people, to the whole course of the Old Testament, what the world with all its interests and pursuits and enjoyments is to us. It was the parent of civilisation, of learning, of royal power, of vast armies. From first to last this marvellous country, with all its manifold interests, is regarded as the home and refuge of the chosen race. By the stress laid on Egypt the Bible tells us that we may lawfully use the world and its enjoyments, that the world is acknowledged by true religion, as well as by our own natural instincts, to be a beautiful, a glorious, and, in this respect, a good and useful world. What was permitted as an innocent refreshment to Abraham, what was enjoined as a sacred duty on Moses and Apollos, what was consecrated by the presence of Christ our Saviour, we too may enjoy and admire and use. Power and learning and civilisation and art may all minister now, as they did then, to the advancement of the welfare of man and the glory of God.
II. The meeting of Abraham and Pharaoh, the contact of Egypt with the Bible, remind us forcibly that there is something better and higher even than the most glorious or the most luxurious or the most powerful and interesting sights and scenes of the world. The character and name of Abraham, as compared with that of the mighty country and the mighty people in the midst of which we thus for an instant find him, exemplify, in the simplest yet strongest colours, the grand truth that ‘Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.’ To be in the world, but not of it; to use it without abusing it,-this is the duty which we find it so hard to follow; but it is the very duty which Abraham first, and our Lord afterwards, have set before us.
A P. Stanley, Sermons in the East, p. 1.
Genesis 12, etc.
I. Notice first the call of Abraham. (1) The call was addressed to him suddenly; (2) it required him to forsake his country and his kindred, while giving him no hope of return; (3) it sent him on a long and difficult journey, to a country lying more than three hundred miles away. Yet Abraham obeyed in willing submission to the command of God.
II. Notice Abraham’s conquest over the kings. This is the first battle recorded in the word of God. It was after his rescue of Lot that Abraham was met by the mysterious Melchizedek. An awful shade of supernaturalism still rests upon this man, to whom some of the attributes of the Godhead seem to be ascribed, and who is always named with God and with God’s Son. There are two lessons deducible from Abraham’s conquests: (1) that military skill and experience are often easily vanquished by untaught valour, when that is at once inspired by impulse, guided by wisdom, and connected with a good cause; (2) that Christian duty varies at different times and in different circumstances.
III. Notice the covenants which were established between Abraham and God. From them we learn: (1) God’s infinite condescension; (2) our duty of entering into covenant with God in Christ.
From the history of Abraham we see that God’s intention was: (1) to secure to Himself one great accession from the idolatrous camp; (2) to send Abraham as a forerunner and a first step into the land which God had selected as His peculiar property; (3) to create a family link of connection between God and a distinct race of people for long ages. Abraham was to be the microcosm to the coming macrocosm of the Jewish people, as they and their polity again were to be the microcosm to the sublimer macrocosm of Christianity.
G. Gilfillan, Alpha and Omega, vol. i., p. 308.
References: Gen 12-Parker, vol. i., p. 192; F. W. Robertson, Notes on Genesis, p. 33; R. S. Candlish, Book of Genesis, vol. i., p. 181; S. Leathes, Studies in Genesis, p. 96. Gen 13:4.-Parker, vol. i., p. 362
CHAPTER 12 The First Events in Abrams Life
1. The call and the promise (Gen 12:1-3)
2. Abrams obedience (Gen 12:4-6)
3. The second communication of Jehovah (Gen 12:7-9)
4. Abram in Egypt and first denial of Sarai (Gen 12:10-20)
We come now to a new beginning, the Abrahamic covenant. It marks the beginning of that wonderful race, the seed of Abraham, the people of Israel. Abrahams name is mentioned 74 times in the New Testament. How closely his history is interwoven into New Testament doctrine. This may be learned by consulting the following passages: Joh 8:56; Act 7:2; Rom 4:1-16; Gal 3:6-18; Heb 11:8-19; Jam 2:21-23. What a satanic lie it is to brand the existence of this great man of God as a myth! Such is often done in Christian (?) schools and pulpits. We give a few hints on this chapter:
The sovereign grace of God in the call of Abram. Shem had the promise of the Name. Jehovah was to reveal Himself in Shem. We learned from the eleventh chapter that the line of Shem had run into decay and was departing from God. In the midst of this ruin in which Abram was involved, he became the object of divine election and Jehovah in His grace manifested Himself to Abram and called him.
The delay at Haran. The God of Glory appeared unto our father Abraham, when he was in Mesopotamia, before he dwelt in Charran. Then came he out of the land of the Chaldeans, and dwelt at Charran; and from thence, when his father was dead, he removed him into this land, wherein ye now dwell (Act 7:2-4). The call came to Abram in Mesopotamia. They left their country and dwelt in Haran. Here Abram tarried till his father Terah died. The delay in going to the land to which God had called him was on account of Terah. Typically, Terah stands for the flesh, the ties of nature. This is always in the way to carry out fully the call of God and enter into full and blessed realization of Gods calling. While delaying in Haran (Haran means parched), God did not reveal Himself anew to Abram.
Death set Abram free, and by death freed from the ties of nature he journeyed on to the land of Canaan. The death of Terah, the liberating factor in Abrams experience, is typical of the death of the Lord Jesus Christ. We have died in Him. The cross of Christ has set us free.
Abram was sanctified unto obedience. Sanctified means separated. The call of God meant separation for Abram. Get thee out of thy country and from thy kindred, and from thy fathers house. Now there was no further delay. Abram departed, as the Lord had spoken to him. The calling involved obedience which was readily yielded. All this is typical of the individual believer.
It was by faith. What faith is stands here fully manifested. By faith Abraham, when he was called out into a place which he should after receive for an inheritance, obeyed; and he went out, not knowing whither he went (Heb 11:8). He took Gods infallible Word and left all; walked by faith and not by sight; he hoped for things he saw not. Faith ever finds its most precious resting place upon the naked Word of God.
The promises. And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will also 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 families of the earth be blessed (Gen.12: 2 and 3). And all God promised to Abram He hath kept. Every word has been literally fulfilled. Nations upon nations who hated Abrahams seed, his natural descendants, have found to their great sorrow how true Abrahams God is. These promises still hold good. To the seed of Abraham belong still the promises (Rom 9:4). The nations of the earth, all the families are unconsciously waiting to be blessed by Abrahams seed. Salvation is still of the Jews.
Abram worships. He built an altar unto Jehovah, who appeared unto him. Again he built an altar, with Bethel on the west and Ai on the east, and there he called upon the name of Jehovah. The revelation of Jehovah produces worship. The basis of worship is a conscious and precious relation with Jehovah. Abram knew Jehovahs grace toward him, therefore he worshipped Him and called upon His name.
Abrams failure was the result of leaving Bethel and going down to Egypt (typical of the world).
Now the Lord
The Fourth Dispensation: Promise. For Abraham, and his descendants it is evident that the Abrahamic Covenant (See Scofield “Gen 15:18”) made a great change. They became distinctively the heirs of promise. That covenant is wholly gracious and unconditional. The descendants of Abraham had but to abide in their own land to inherit every blessing. In Egypt they lost their blessings, but not their covenant. The Dispensation of Promise ended when Israel rashly accepted the law Exo 19:8. Grace had prepared a deliverer (Moses), provided a sacrifice for the guilty, and by divine power brought them out of bondage Exo 19:4 but at Sinai they exchanged grace for law. The Dispensation of Promise extends from Gen 12:1 to Exo 19:8, and was exclusively Israelitish. The dispensation must be distinguished from the covenant. The former is a mode of testing; the latter is everlasting because unconditional. The law did not abrogate the Abrahamic Covenant Gal 3:15-18 but was an intermediate disciplinary dealing “till the Seed should come to whom the promise was made”; Gal 3:19-29; Gal 4:1-7. Only the dispensation, as a testing of Israel, ended at the giving of the law.
See, for the other six dispensations: (See Scofield “Gen 8:21”).
INNOCENCE (Gen 1:28) CONSCIENCE (Gen 3:23) HUMAN GOVERNMENT (Gen 8:21) LAW (Exo 19:8) GRACE (Joh 1:17) KINGDOM (Eph 1:10)
had: Gen 11:31, Gen 11:32, Gen 15:7, Neh 9:7, Isa 41:9, Isa 51:2, Eze 33:24
Get: Jos 24:2, Jos 24:3, Psa 45:10, Psa 45:11, Luk 14:26-33, Act 7:2-6, 2Co 6:17, Heb 11:8, Rev 18:4
Reciprocal: Gen 9:26 – the Lord Gen 15:2 – what Gen 17:1 – the Lord Gen 20:13 – God Gen 24:4 – to my kindred Gen 24:7 – took Gen 24:38 – But Gen 26:2 – dwell Gen 26:3 – unto thee Gen 28:4 – the blessing Gen 40:5 – General Exo 3:6 – I am Exo 3:18 – met Exo 12:40 – four hundred Num 10:30 – General Neh 9:8 – foundest Son 2:10 – Rise Isa 41:2 – Who raised Mat 20:5 – and did Mar 10:29 – There Act 7:3 – Get Act 13:17 – God Heb 1:1 – at
THE PILGRIM FATHER
Now the Lord had said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy fathers house, unto a land that I will shew thee.
Gen 12:1
Abraham was the father of the faithful, and we have here the first recorded test to which his faith was put. The first and one of the greatest.
I. The Substance of Gods call to Abraham.(a) He was called from rest to pilgrimage.From his country and kindred and fathers house, to undertake lifelong journeying. He was at an age at which he would fain rest. His wanderings seemed to be begun at the wrong end of his life. But it was then God said, Get thee out. It is as life advances that the idea of journeying, getting out, comes home to men. The child rests in his home; but the outside world, with its responsibilities, self-direction and support, begins at last to open to him, and he must get out. So with resting among old friends, etc. We must one day get out. As years increase, all things seem in constant flow. Then at death. Above all, hear Gods voice telling you to set out on the Christian pilgrimage.
(b) He was called from the familiar to the untried.The childs familiarity with his environment is never attained to in after years. New faces, other minds meet mens eyes and souls; and they know, however peaceful their lot may be, that they are not in the old, familiar home. But let us extend our idea of home. The lifelong invalid would feel from home in another room of the same home. Let God be our home, the great house in which we live and move about; then wherever He is, we shall feel at home. Most so when we leave the lower room altogether to be at home with the Lord above.
(c) He was called from sight to faith.From the portion he had in his country and in his fathers house, to wait at all times on the unseen God, and go to the land which He would show him. Let us willingly make this exchange. God is better than country, and kindred, and fathers house.
II. The Characteristics of Gods Call to Abraham.(a) It laid clearly before him all that he was to surrender.How full and attractive the picture is made to Abrahams last sight of it; thy country, kindred, etc. So, when from duty and loyalty to Christ, we make sacrifices, etc., the possessions will often seem peculiarly fascinating, just when we are to part with them.
(b) It was uncompromising.Get thee out, with no promise or prospect of ever returning. The gifts of God are never repeated in exactly the same form. The pleasures of sin must be left ungrudgingly and for ever.
(c) It was urgent.Get thee out. Now. Abraham departed, as the Lord had spoken to him. Let us give the same ready, instant obedience.
Illustration
Only a few generations after the awful warning of the Flood, the earth had again become corrupt. But it was not corrupt in quite the same sense. Before the Flood it was sensually corrupt; after the Flood it became religiously corrupt; violence was the earlier sin, idolatry the later. So Gods dealings differed. Idolatry put in peril the primary truths of His revelation to men, upon which the moral well-being of the human race rested. God therefore took measures for preserving these imperilled truths; and His plan was, to select a man, whose characteristic quality was religious faith, and make him, and his race, treasure-keepers for humanity, until the fulness of times should come. God wanted some one to take care of the two truths of His unity, and His spirituality; and our lesson tells us how He called Abram to this work, and how well fitted he was to undertake it. Abram kept these two great truths safe for us.
Abram’s Departure
Gen 12:1-4
INTRODUCTORY WORDS
1. God spoke, of old, in the Person of Christ. In today’s study the Lord spoke to Abram. During Abram’s life, he had several interviews from Heaven. It was Jehovah, the Lord Jesus, who spake with him.
The Lord spoke unto Jacob on two memorable occasions. On each of these occasions, Jacob was given gracious promises, concerning the things to come.
The Lord appeared unto Moses and instructed him relative to his delivering the people from Egypt.
After the death of Moses, the Lord appeared to Joshua and encouraged his heart.
The Lord manifested Himself to Manoah’s wife, and, afterward, to Manoah himself, telling both of the birth of Samson. Thus it was that God of old spoke in Person to His people.
2. God spoke in. dreams and in visions of the night. There is a striking statement in the Book of Job, which says, “God speaketh once, yea twice, yet man perceiveth it not. In a dream, in a vision of the night, when deep sleep faileth upon men, in slumberings upon the bed; then he openeth the ears of men, and sealeth their instruction.” Through dreams God spoke very definitely unto Nebuchadnezzar, and more particularly unto Daniel. God may still speak in this manner.
3. God spake unto us in Jesus Christ, during our Lord’s earthly ministry. Christ definitely said that the very words which He spoke were the words of the Father. It will become us to remember this truth, Christ was the revelation, not only of the Father’s works, and will, but also of His words. It is thus that, in Christ, we see the Father, and learn to know Him.
4. God speaks unto us in His Word. The Bible contains God’s message to men. This we call the revealed will of God. It is true that whatever God may reveal unto us in any other way, such a revelation will never be contrary to His written words.
5. God speaks unto us in the still small voice of our inner consciousness. He still gives to saints a conviction of heart as to what they should do. We become assured that we have obtained His Divine leadership, when, in obedience to His will, we have “rest” in our spirit.
6. God speaks unto us in His judgments. The storm bore a tremendous message to Jonah. It even made him confess: “I know that for my sake this great tempest is upon you.” Doubtless, all of us have heard the voice of God in His judgments.
I. GET THEE OUT (Gen 12:1)
1. A call to give up lands and country. God said unto Abram, “Get thee out of thy country,” When we think of the depths involved in this command, we think not only of our “fatherland,” but we think of everything that appertains unto us in the way of possessions.
The giving of a tenth unto God does not mean that the nine-tenths belong unto us, apart from Divine control. All that we are and have is His, and everything should be held subservient to His will.
2. A call to give up kindred. God said unto Abram, “Get thee out * * from thy kindred, and from thy father’s house.”
Jesus Christ said, “He that loveth father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me,” We must be willing to place our dearest friend or relative upon the altar of our sacrifice.
3. A call to give up plans. Abram, no doubt, had his own plans, which had, perhaps, inadvertently grown up in his mind, and which had become a part of his very being. He builded air castles the same as we build them. Let us all place our plans upon the altar and yield up our dreams, whenever it is God’s call.
II. GET THEE UNTO (Gen 12:1)
God never orders us out, until He is ready to lead us in. “Whatever He asks us to give up, He has something better in His hand to impart. Let us study some of the good things which God had in mind for Abram.
1. He was called into a new revelation of God’s will. This was no small matter. God spoke unto Abram as one speaks unto a friend, face to face. God took Abram into His confidence, as well as into His fellowship. He told Abram His purposes, and revealed unto him His plans. He explained unto Abram the things which He was about to do. This was a supreme joy to this father of his race.
2. He was called into new possessions. He gave up his “land,” but into his hand God delivered another land, far richer and far greater than the one which he yielded.
When he “went out,” he received a land which still belongs to him and to his children; a land which is theirs by the decrees of God, and which they can never lose through the vicissitudes of life.
The. deeds to that land are safeguarded in the archives of Glory. Even as we write, after an elapse of more than three thousand years, we find Abram’s seed about to enter into their full Palestinian possessions.
III. I WILL BLESS THEE (Gen 12:2)
1. A personal blessing. Some one may say that it did Abram, personally, very little good for his seed to inherit the land. That he, himself, got but little returns for leaving his father’s house. Not so. God told Abram, “I will bless THEE.” Abram, himself, was not only a partaker of God’s blessing during his earthly sojourn, but he, personally, is still a partaker of every blessing, which God vouchsafes to his seed.
2. A great name. God said, “I will make thy name great.” The name of Abram has been honored and revered throughout all generations. At this moment, his name still stands out among men above the name of any ancient king or potentate. His name ranks in honor with that of Moses, and Elijah, and David, and Daniel. It far outclasses the glory of any of the other mighty men outside of God’s holy Seers who lived in the ages past.
3. A great nation. What nation is like unto the nation which has sprung from the loins of Abram? Unto this day, the Jews remain a mighty people. This is true in spite of the fact that for the time being their national integrity has been broken off. Because of their sins they have been scattered to the ends of the earth. In spite of all this, they are still a nation despised among all the nations, and yet a distinct, unamalgamated nationality.
Not only are they distinctively national, while they are indisputably international-but they are also great. The Jews hold the financial status of the whole world in their hands. They are kings in commerce, in education, and in political prowess.
IV. I WILL MAKE THEE A BLESSING (Gen 12:2)
1. The law of getting and giving. God said, “I will bless thee, * * and thou shalt be a blessing.” In saying this, God uttered a spiritual law that pervades all those who hold close relationship with Him.
The Lord never intended for us to “get” and “cling” to anything. He wants us to get and give. Our hand must be unclinched and open.
There is a verse which reads, “Let him labour, that he may have to give.”
Jesus Christ said, “The glory which Thou gavest Me, I have given them.” Shall we receive from His hand of all good and perfect gifts, and then refuse to give as He has given? He who withholds his bounty and his blessing from another, will become greatly impoverished.
2. The extent and blessing of a single individual life. When we stop to think of how far the reach of Abram’s life has gone, we are amazed. It seems to us that no one on the earth, at this hour, fails to receive some direct or at least reflex influence from Abram’s life.
That life-the life of Abram, will not cease its benefactions until its waves reach the shores of the eternal ages to come. Even there, its story, the story of that one, blessed life, will thrill all Heaven with song and rejoicing.
V. I WILL BLESS THEM THAT BLESS THEE, AND CURSE HIM THAT CURSETH THEE (Gen 12:3)
1. We have before us a God-guarded life. God seemed to take Abram in His arms and say,-“No one can set upon you to hurt you. He that would bless you, will be blessed; but he that would curse you will be cursed.” It was this sense of protection that must have brought to Abram a marvelous sense of security.
God knows His sheep and He goeth before them. He guards them from the wolves which would devour. When the hireling fleeth, He comes to the rescue.
2. We have before us a God-guarded nation. The children of Abram are sheltered under the same pledge and promise which was given to their father. During all the centuries of their vicissitudes, as they have been driven from pillar to post, God has been with them.
We believe it is literally true that the nation which has cursed Israel and trodden her underfoot mercilessly, has been cursed; while the nation which has opened her arms and heart to the Jews, has been blessed.
VI. SO ABRAM DEPARTED (Gen 12:4)
1. A faith without sight. The true believer walks in this quality of faith. Abram went out not knowing whither he went. While he did not know the way, he knew the Guide. While he did not know the end of his journey, he knew that his journey would end in joy.
Is it not true that all of us who know and love the Lord, are marching with songs of joy and gladness toward a Country which we have never seen, and a land of which we have never known? Unto this hour, God has told us but very little of the eternal ages which lie hid from our eyes in the aeons to come. We know just this, that the exceeding riches of His grace will be made manifest in His great forevermore. Thus, we also journey with the faith of our father Abraham, unto a Land that He will show us.
2. A faith with works. Abram believed God, and he went out not knowing whither he went. How the words ring out, “So Abram departed”!
Faith is a living, pulsing, vibrant expression of trust. Faith believes and obeys. The lame, the halt, the maimed, the blind believed God, acted upon their faith, and were healed. Faith is the eye that looks, the hand that takes, the foot that walks. That is the faith that gets the blessing.
VII. GET THEE OUT * * AND I WILL (Gen 12:1-2)
1. In the realm of grace everything is apart from works. Grace operates upon the unworthy. It begins where our worth ends. It is by grace that we have been saved, and not of works, lest any man should boast.
2. Grace, however, operates in conjunction with faith. The faith which makes grace active is a faith that launches out in sacrifice, and service, and faithful living. Grace finds us with nothing at all to recommend us; however, immediately that grace touches us, a faith is implanted in the heart, a faith that is the gift of God. That faith is the faith which obeys.
3. God’s additional blessings are conditional blessings. After grace has implanted faith in the heart, God stands aloof and says to His child, “Get thee out * * and I will.” We truly believe that many Christians are shorn of God’s best in their lives, simply because they are unwilling to walk by faith; they are afraid to go where God tells them to go, to be what God wants them to be, to say what God wants them to say, and to do what God wants them to do.
As we close we wish to make a vital suggestion. The Lord is coming one of these days, and He will bring. His rewards with Him. Those rewards, in their sweep and sway, will depend entirely upon the extent of our obedience of faith.
AN ILLUSTRATION
“‘John Cassian makes mention of one, who willingly fetched water near two miles every day for a whole year together, to pour it upon a dead, dry stick, at the command of his superior, when no reason else could be given for it. And of another it is recorded, that he professed that if he were enjoined by his superior to put to sea in a ship which had neither mast, tackling, nor any other furniture, he would do it; and when he was asked how he could do this without hazard of his discretion, he answered, The wisdom must be in him that hath power to command, not in him that hath power to obey.’ These are instances of implicit obedience to a poor fallible human authority, and are by no means to be imitated. But when it is God who gives the command, we cannot carry a blind obedience too far, since there can be no room for questioning the wisdom and goodness of any of His precepts. At Christ’s command it is wise to let down the net at the very spot where we have toiled in vain all the night If God bids us, we can sweeten water with salt, and destroy poison with meat, yea, we may walk the waves of the sea, or the flames of a furnace. Well said the Virgin, ‘Whatsoever He saith unto you, do it.’ My heart, I charge thee follow thy Lord’s command without a moment’s question, though He bid thee go forward into the Red Sea, or onward into a howling wilderness.”
ABRAMS CALL AND HIS RESPONSE
How does the King James Version indicate an earlier date for the call of Abram than that which chapter 12 narrates? How is this corroborated by Act 7:2? Stephen, speaking of this call, indicates that God was seen to Abraham, as if some visible manifestation was vouchsafed to him at the beginning. In what form this may have been we do not know, but sufficiently clear to have shown the patriarch the distinction between gods of wood and stone and the only true God.
What seven promises are given Abram to encourage his faith (Gen 12:2-3)? Gods authority could find fit expression only in a nation bound together under institutions of His own appointment, since many scattered family altars could not bear an adequate witness for His unity. Notice again that for Abram to become great and his offspring to develop into a great nation cooperation would be required on the part of his and their neighbors. To secure this, God lays this curse and blessing upon their enemies and friends.
Have you located Shechem? How is Abram comforted at this place (Gen 12:7)? What additional promise is now given him? This gift to his seed of the land should be strongly emphasized. It was, and is, Jehovahs land. Ezekiel speaks of it as the middle, or navel, of the earth (Gen 38:12 RV), and it is peculiarly situated geographically, commercially and politically, but especially historically and prophetically. It has been given to Israel as her possession forever, but not her ownership, as we shall learn by and by (Lev 25:23). Moreover, so closely is Jehovahs purpose of redemption associated with the land as well as the people of Israel that when they are separated from it, as we shall see, they are separated from Him, and the lapse of time in their history is not considered until they are returned to their land again. In a word, they can never dwell elsewhere and be His people or fulfill their calling.
QUESTIONS
1.How would you identify the three previous experiments with the race?
2.How would you distinguish between the sin of men before and following the flood?
3.What was the threefold purpose in the call of Abram and the nation of Israel?
4.How should the knowledge of this influence us?
5.How far has this purpose yet been realized?
6.Will it be entirely realized, and if so, when and how?
7.How might Abrams conduct in Gen 12:19 be explained?
8.What outside proof have we of the historicity of these chapters?
9.What is Gods peculiar relation to the land as well as the people of Israel?
10.Draw an outline map of Abrams journey from [Jr to Haran and Shechem.
God Called Abram a Second Time
In Gen 12:1-20 , after Terah’s death, God called Abram a second time. In conjunction with this call, He made some promises. Because the call included both a command and a promise, it constituted a covenant ( Gen 15:18 ). Abram was told to leave his country, kindred and father’s house (12:1). As the command got more specific, the sacrifices Abram had to make got increasingly difficult. Abram was called to go to a place God had not yet revealed to him ( Heb 11:8 ).
Abram was promised prosperity and the Lord’s care for himself. The promise was threefold: 1) God would make of Abram a great nation; 2) God would make Abram’s name great, which may include the land of promise (see 12:7); and 3) God would make Abram a blessing, which is the promise of the Messiah.
Gen 12:1. We have here the call whereby Abram was removed from, the land of his nativity into the land of promise. This call was designed both to try his faith and obedience, and also to set him and his family apart for God, in order that the universal prevalence of idolatry might be prevented, and a remnant reserved for God, among whom his true worship might be maintained, his oracles preserved, and his ordinances established till the coming of the Messiah. God seems also, by sending him into Canaan, a country given up to the most gross, cruel, and barbarous idolatry, even the sacrificing of their own children to their idols, to have intended that he, and the other patriarchs descended from him, should be witnesses for God to these nations before their destruction; which is the plan God has generally, if not always, pursued; seldom, if ever, destroying a people for their wickedness, till he has sent his truth, in one form or another, and his witnesses among them.
Concerning the circumstances of this call, we may receive further information from Stephens speech, Act 7:2, where we are told, 1st, That the God of glory appeared to him, to give him this call, and that in such displays of his glory as left Abram no room to doubt. 2d, That this call was given him in Mesopotamia; and that, in obedience to this call, he came out of the land of the Chaldeans, and dwelt in Charran or Haran about five years: and from thence, when his father was dead, by a fresh command, he removed him into the land of Canaan. Get thee out of thy country Now, by this precept, he was tried whether he loved God better than he loved his native soil, and dearest friends: and whether he could willingly leave all to go along with God. His country was become idolatrous, his kindred and his fathers house were a constant temptation to him, and he could not continue with them without danger of being infected by them; therefore God said, Get thee out. Hereby also he was tried whether he could trust God farther than he saw him; for he must leave his own country to go to a land that God would show him; he doth not say, it is a land that I will give thee: nor doth he tell him what land it was, or what kind of land; but he must follow God with an implicit faith, and take Gods word for it in general, that he should be no loser by leaving his country to follow God.
Gen 12:1. Had said. The God of glory appeared to Abraham, and enjoined him to leave his idolatrous country. Jos 24:2. Act 7:3.
Gen 12:2. I will make of thee a great nation, yea many nations. All these are princely benedictions, conferring sovereignty, and adding a curse on the head of him who dare to rebel. Gen 27:29.
Gen 12:6. The Canaanite was then in the land. Abraham did not wander like other patriarchs to a vacant country, but to a land already occupied by the children of Canaan. Africa was their lot, as descendants of Ham; but they had stopped on the road in the best of all lands.
Gen 12:7. The Lord appeared to Abram; the Messiah, as Angel, realized his personal presence. The religion of the whole primitive world is founded on the appearances of God, or Messiah, the Angel to man. In the tenth conference of the Danish missionaries with a brahmin, when they pressed him with the different figures of his idols, he replied; Our God has appeared eleven times, and in one place he is made as he appeared at one time, and in another place as he appeared at another time.The Egyptians have the same traditions of their Osiris. The Greeks in the Iliad of Homer, and in the Theogony of Hesiod, and in their poets, abound with the same traditions. Our Gothic fathers, in the poem Voluspa, amused their long evenings with runes or mysteries of religion. These runes formed the Edda, or code of instruction to posterity. All antiquity is coincident with the assertion of St. Paul, that God at sundry times and in divers manners spake in times past to the fathers. Heb 1:1.Thy seed. St. Paul, who read the scriptures with an eagles eye, says, that God spake in the singular number, not of many but of One; that is, of Christ. This was the first promise, and highest favour of God to man; to Abraham, to Judah, and to David. Chap. Genesis 49 :2 Samuel 7. The Messiah was from the beginning the hope, the rock and protection of his saints, in all the weary years of their pilgrimage. They kept him ever before their eyes as the dawn of future day.
Gen 12:8. And there (in Sichem) he built an altar to the Lord, and by faith took possession of the land, and near the place where the Hebrews crossed the Jordan.
Gen 12:10. Egypt. The famine compelled Abraham to seek shelter there. Josephus quotes an ancient author to say, that he taught the Egyptians Astrology and Arithmetic. These sciences passed from Chaldea into Egypt, and from Egypt into Greece.
Gen 12:13. My sister. She was his uncle Nahors daughter; but that circumstance is scarce a mitigation of Abrahams fault. The fear of man bringeth a snare, and often leadeth into sin. He doubted of Gods promised protection; but it was at a time when sorely pressed with famine.
CHAPTER 12
The Jews are uniform in asserting, that Abraham suffered persecution for disputing with the Chaldeans concerning the being and perfections of God, and against idolatry. He being, in fact, almost the only man who fully adhered to the covenant made with Adam, and renewed with Noah, God was pleased to call him to be the father of the promised Seed, and very much to leave the gentiles to their own way, and to their corrupt devotion.
REFLECTIONS.
The call of Abraham forms one of the most important events in the annals of the church. God who had saved the family of Noah from the wickedness of the old world, now separated the Hebrew family from those who served other gods beyond the Euphrates: else it is likely that they also would have been borne away with the prevailing torrent of carnal charms, ever attendant on idol-worship. The Almighty had higher designations in the call of this patriarch. These were to show the world the superior happiness of a nation which remain in the covenant, and in the pure worship of God; to open a way for the conversion of proselytes; to call a people to preserve his oracles, the glory of the ritual law, and to prepare the way for the coming and kingdom of the Messiah, the diffusion of the gospel law, and the conversion of the gentile world.
Every sinner, in a moral view, is called like Abraham to leave his country, his kindred, and his fathers house. When our friends and relatives fear not God, he says, come out from among them, be ye separate, and touch not the unclean thing, and I will receive you.
Like this patriarch we are all called to seek a heavenly Canaan, not yet seen indeed, but promised. God will show it unto us on our approach: and this high and holy calling is rational, for the fashion of this world passeth away. God supported his weak faith by a suitable series of promises, that he should be the father of the promised Seed, of a great nation, and in fact, the father of the faithful in all ages of the church. Just so does God support the christian pilgrim. He will establish with him and his children the exceeding great and precious promises of the New Covenant; he will bless all his friends and benefactors, and curse and confound all his impenitent foes.
The world would no doubt exclaim against Abrahams folly, and augur his ruin; and they are apt to do the same concerning men who enter on a religious course, and seek the happiness of heaven. But let the faithfulness of God to Abraham encourage us to persevere.
He received these promises in uncircumcision, but he believed God, and it was reckoned to him for righteousness. Venture then sinner on this promised Saviour, and you shall now be accepted as righteous by faith only, for faith is the first condition of the covenant. On embracing Christ you are justified by his blood, and accepted in his person. You are then accounted righteous through Christ, and have a full title to eternal life.
Abrahams faith was afterwards made perfect by works. View him leaving his country, venturing among strangers, and resting on the promises alone. He neither built a city, nor returned in the time of famine and persecution; but fixed his heart, his stedfast heart on a better country. Brethren, let us follow his example, and let us not fail to bring our families with us as he did; for the promises are made to us and our children.
Genesis 12
The book of Genesis is, for the most part, taken up with the history of seven men, namely, Abel, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph. There is, I doubt not, a specific line of truth brought out in connection with each of those men. Thus, for example, In Abel me have the great foundation truth of man’s coming to God, in the way of atonement – atonement apprehended by faith. In Enoch, we have the proper portion and hope of the heavenly family; while Noah presents to us the destiny of the earthly family. Enoch was taken to heaven before the judgement came; Noah was carried through the judgement into a restored earth Thus, in each, we have a distinct character of truth, and, as a consequence, a distinct phase of faith. My reader can pursue the subject fully, in connection with Hebrews 11; and I feel assured he will find much interest and profit, in so doing. We shall now proceed with our immediate theme, namely, the call of Abraham.
By comparing Gen. 12: 1, Gen. 11: 31, with Acts 7: 2-4, we learn a truth of immense practical value to the soul. “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 show thee. (Gen. 12: 1) Such was the communication made to Abraham – a communication of the most definite character, designed of God to act upon Abraham’s heart and conscience. “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 a land that I shall show thee. Then went he forth out of the land of the Chaldeans, and dwelt in Charran, (or Haran;) and from thence, when his father was dead, he removed him into this land wherein ye now dwell.” (Acts 7: 2-4) The result of this communication is given in 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 the land of Canaan: and they came unto Haran, and dwelt there…… and Terah died in Haran.”
From all these passages taken together, we learn that ties of nature hindered the full response of Abraham’s soul to the call of God. Though called to Canaan, he, nevertheless, tarried at Haran, till nature’s was snapped by death, and then, with unimpeded step he made his way to the place to which “the God glory” had called him. This is full of meaning. influences of nature are ever hostile to the full and practical power of “the calling of God.” We are sadly prone to take lower ground than that which the divine call would set before us. It needs great simplicity and integrity of faith to enable the soul to rise to the height of God’s thoughts, and to make our own of that which He reveals.
The apostle’s prayer (Eph. 1: 15-22) demonstrates how fully he, by the Holy Ghost, entered into the difficulty with which the Church would ever have to contend in seeking to apprehend “the hope of God’s calling and the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints;” because, evidently, if we fail to apprehend the calling, we cannot walk worthy” thereof. I must know where I am called to go, before I can go thither. Had Abraham’s soul been fully under the power of the truth” that God’s calling was to Canaan, and that too, lay “his inheritance,” he could not have remained in Charran. And so with us. If we are led by the Holy Ghost into the understanding of the truth, that we are called with a heavenly calling; that our home, our portion, our hope, our inheritance, are all above, where Christ sitteth at God’s right hand,” we could never be satisfied to maintain a standing, seek a name, or lay up an inheritance, on the earth. The two things are incompatible: this is the true way to look at the matter. The heavenly calling is not an empty dogma, a powerless theory, nor a crude speculation. It is either a divine reality, or it is absolutely nothing. Was Abraham’s call to Canaan a speculation? Was it a mere theory about which he might talk or argue, while, at the same time, he continued in Charran? Assuredly not. It was a truth, a divine truth, a powerfully practical truth. He was called to Canaan, and God could not, possibly, sanction his stopping short thereof. Thus it was with Abraham, and thus it is with us. If we would enjoy the divine sanction and the divine presence, me must be seeking, by faith, to act upon the divine call. That is to say, we must seek to reach, in experience, in practice, and moral character, the point to which God has called us, and that point is full fellowship with His own Son – fellowship with Him in His rejection below, fellowship with Him in His acceptance above.
But, as in Abraham’s case, it was death that broke the link by which nature bound him to Charran; so, in our case, it is death which breaks the link by which nature ties us down to this present world. We must realise the truth that we have died in Christ, our head and representative – that our place in nature, and in the world, is amongst the things that were – that the cross of Christ is to us what the Red sea was to Israel, namely, that which separates us, for ever, from the land of death and judgement. Thus only shall we be able to walk, in any measure, “worthy of the calling wherewith we are called” – our high, our holy, our heavenly calling – our “calling of God in Christ Jesus.”
And, here, I would dwell, for a little, on the cross of Christ in its two grand, fundamental phases, or in other words, the cross as the basis of our worship and our peace and our testimony, our relation with God, and our relation with the world. If, as a convicted sinner, I look at the cross of the Lord Jesus Christ I behold in it the everlasting foundation of my peace, I see my “sin” put away, as to the root or principle thereof, and I see my “sins” borne. I see God to be in very deed, “for me,” and that, moreover, in the very condition in which my convicted conscience tells me I am. The cross unfolds God as the sinner’s Friend. It reveals Him in that most wondrous character, as the righteous Justifier of the most ungodly sinner. Creation never could do this. Providence never could do this. Therein I may see God’s power, His majesty, and wisdom: but what if all these things should be ranged against me? Looked at, in themselves, abstractly they would be so, for I am a sinner; and power, majesty, and wisdom, could not put away my sin, nor justify God in receiving me.
The introduction of the cross, however, changes the aspect of things entirely. There I find God dealing with sin in such a manner us to glorify Himself infinitely. There I see the magnificent display and perfect harmony of all the divine attributes. I see love, and such love as captivates and assures my heart, and weans it, in proportion as I realise it, from every other object. I see wisdom, and such wisdom as baffles devils and astonishes angels. I see power, and such power as bears down all opposition. I see holiness, and such holiness as repulses sin to the very furthest point of the moral universe, and gives the most intense expression of God’s abhorrence thereof, that could possibly be given. I see grace, and such grace as sets the sinner in the very presence of God – yes, puts him into His bosom. Where could I see all these things but in the cross? Nowhere else. Look where you please, and you cannot find aught that so blessedly combines those two great points, namely, “glory to God in the highest,” and “on earth peace.”
How precious, therefore, is the cross, in this its first phase, as the basis of the sinner’s peace, the basis of his worship, and the basis of his eternal relationship with the God who in there so blessedly and so gloriously revealed? How precious to God, as furnishing Him with a righteous ground on which to go in the full display of all His matchless perfections, and in His most gracious dealings with the sinner! So precious is it to God that, as a recent writer has well remarked, ALL that He has said – all that He has done, from the very beginning, indicates that it was ever uppermost in His heart. And no wonder! His dear and well-beloved Son was to hang there, between heaven and earth, the object of all the shame and suffering that men and devils could heap upon Him, because He loved to do His Father’s will, and redeem the children of His grace. It will be the grand centre of attraction, as the fullest expression of His love, throughout eternity.”
Then, as the basis of our practical discipleship and testimony, the cross demands our most profound consideration. In this aspect of it, I need hardly say, it is as perfect as in the former. The same cross which connects me with God, has separated me from the world. A dead man is, evidently, done with the world; and the believer, having died in Christ, is done with the world; and, having risen with Christ, is connected with God, in the power of a new life, a new nature. Being thus inseparably linked with Christ, he, of necessity, participates in His acceptance with God, and in rejection by the world. The two things go together. The former makes him a worshipper and a citizen in heaven, the latter makes him a witness and a stranger on earth. That brings him inside the veil; this puts him outside the camp. The one is as perfect as the other. If the cross has come between me and sins, it has just as really come between me and the world. In the former case, it puts me into the place of peace with God; in the latter; it puts me into the place of hostility with the world, i.e., in a moral point of view; though, in another sense, it makes me the patient, humble witness of that precious, unfathomable, eternal grace which is set forth in the cross.
Now the believer should clearly understand, and rightly distinguish between, both the above phases the of cross of Christ. He should not profess to enjoy the one while he refuses to enter into the other. If his ear is open to hear Christ’s voice within the veil, it will be open also to hear His voice outside the camp. he enters into the atonement which the cross has accomplished, he should also realise the rejection which it necessarily involves. The former flows out of the part which God had in the cross; the latter, out of the part which man had therein. It is our happy privilege, not only to be done with our sins, but to be done with the world also. ALL this is involved in the doctrine of the cross. Well, therefore, might the apostle say, “God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by which the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world.” Paul looked upon the world as a thing which ought to be nailed to the cross; and the world, in having crucified Christ, had crucified all who belonged to Him. Hence there is a double crucifixion, as regards the believer and the world; and were this fully entered into, it would prove the utter impossibility of ever amalgamating the two. Beloved reader, let us deeply, honestly, and prayerfully ponder these things; and may the Holy Ghost give us the ability to enter into the full practical power of both the phases of the cross of Christ.
We shall, now, return to our theme.
We are not told how long Abraham tarried at Haran; yet God graciously waited on His servant until, freed from nature’s clog, he could fully obey His command. There was, however, no accommodation of that command to the circumstances of nature. This would never do. God loves His servants too well to deprive them of the full blessedness of entire obedience. There was no fresh revelation to Abraham’s soul during the time of his sojourn in Haran. It is well to see this. We must act up to the light already communicated, and then God will give us more. “To him that hath shall more be given.” This is God’s principle. Still, we must remember, that God will never drag us along the path of true-hearted discipleship. This would greatly lack the moral excellency which characterises all the ways of God. He does not drag, but draw, us along the path which leads to ineffable blessedness in Himself; and if we do not see that it is for our real advantage to break through all the barriers of nature, in order to respond to God’s call, we forsake our own mercies. But, alas! our hearts little enter into this. We begin to calculate about the sacrifices, the hindrances, and the difficulties, instead of bounding along the path, in eagerness of soul, as knowing and loving the One whose call has sounded in our ears.
There is much true blessing to the soul in every step of obedience, for obedience is the fruit of faith; and faith puts us into living association and communion with God Himself. Looking at obedience, in this light, we can easily see how distinctly it is marked off, in every feature of it, from legality. This latter sets a man, with the entire burden of his sins on him, to serve God, by keeping the law; hence, the soul is kept in constant torture, and, so far from running in the path of obedience, it has not even taken the very first step. True obedience, on the contrary, is simply the manifestation or outflow of a new nature, communicated in grace. To this new nature God graciously imparts precepts for its guidance; and it is perfectly certain that the divine nature, guided by the divine precepts, can never, by any possibility, resolve itself into legality. What constitutes legality is the old nature taking up God’s precepts and assaying to carry them out. To attempt to regulate man’s fallen nature, by God’s pure and Holy law, is as useless and absurd as anything can be. How could fallen nature breathe an atmosphere so pure? Impossible. Both the atmosphere and the nature must be divine.
But not only does the blessed God impart a divine nature to the believer, and guide that nature by His heavenly precepts, He also sets before it suited hopes and expectations. Thus, in Abraham’s case, The God of glory appeared unto him.” And for what purpose? To set before His soul’s vision an attractive object – “a land that I will show thee.” This was not compulsion, but attraction. God’s land was, in the judgement of the new nature – the judgement of faith far better than Ur, or Charran: and albeit, he had not seen the land, yet inasmuch as it was God’s land, faith judged it to be worth having, and, not only worth having, but, also, fully worth the surrender of present things. Hence, we read, “by faith Abraham, when he was called to go out into a place which he should after receive as an inheritance, obeyed, and he went out, not knowing whither he went.” That is to say, “he walked by faith, not by sight.” Though he had not seen with his eyes, he believed with his heart, and faith became the great moving spring in his soul. Faith rests on a far more solid ground than the evidence of our senses, and that is, the word of God. Our senses may deceive us, but Gods word never can.
Now, the entire truth of the divine nature, together with the precepts which guide, and the hopes which animate it – the whole of the divine doctrine respecting these things, is completely thrown overboard by the system of legalism. The legalist teaches that we must surrender earth in order to get heaven. But how can fallen nature surrender that to which it is allied? How can it be attracted by that in which it sees no charms? Heaven has no charms for nature; yea, it is the very last place it would like to be found in. Nature has no taste for heaven, its occupations, or its occupants. Were it possible for nature to find itself there, it would be miserable. Thus, then, nature has no ability to surrender earth, and no desire to get heaven. True, – it would be glad to escape hell and its ineffable torment, gloom, and misery. But the desire to escape hell, and the desire to get heaven, spring from two very different sources. The former may exist in the old nature; the latter can only be found in the new. Were there no “lake of fire,” and no “worm” in hell, nature would not so shrink from it. The same principle holds good in reference to all of nature’s pursuits and desires. The legalist teaches that we must give up sin before we can get righteousness. But nature cannot give up sin; and as to righteousness, it absolutely hates it. True, it would like a certain amount of religion; but it is only with the idea that religion will preserve it from hell fire. It does not love religion because of its introducing the soul to the present enjoyment of God and His ways.
How different from all this miserable system of Legalism, in every phase thereof, is “the gospel of the glory of the blessed God!” This gospel reveals God Himself coming down in perfect grace, and putting away sin by the sacrifice of the cross; putting it away, in the most absolute manner, on the ground of eternal righteousness, inasmuch as Christ suffered for it, having been made sin for us. And not only is God seen putting away sin, but also imparting a new life, even the risen life of His own risen, exalted, and glorified Son, which life every true believer possesses, in virtue of being linked, in God’s eternal counsels, with Him who was nailed to the cross, but is now on the throne of the Majesty in the heavens. This nature, as we have remarked, He graciously guides by the precepts of His holy word, applied in power by the Holy Ghost. He also animates it by the presentation of indestructible hopes. He reveals, in the distance, “the hope of glory” – “a city which hath foundations” – “a better country, that is an heavenly” – “the many mansions” of the Father’s house, on high – “golden harps” – “green palms,” and “white robes” – “a kingdom which cannot be moved” – everlasting association with Himself, in those regions of bliss and light, where sorrow and darkness can never enter – the unspeakable privilege of being led, throughout the countless ages of eternity, “beside the still waters, and through the green pastures” of redeeming love. How different is all this from the legalist’s notion? Instead of calling upon me to educate and manage, by the dogmas of systematic religion, an irremediably corrupt nature, in order that thereby I may surrender an earth that I love, and attain to a heaven which I hate, He, in infinite grace, and on the ground of Christ’s accomplished sacrifice, bestows upon me a nature which can enjoy heaven, and a heaven for that nature to enjoy; and, not only a heaven, but Himself the unfailing spring of all heavens joy.
Such is God’s most excellent way. Thus He dealt with Abraham. Thus He dealt with Saul of Tarsus. Thus He deals with us. The God of glory showed Abraham a better country than Ur or Charran. He Saul of Tarsus a glory so bright, that it closed his eyes to all earth’s brightest glories, and caused him to count them all “but dung,” that He might win that Blessed One who had appeared to him, and whose voice spoken to his inmost soul. He saw a heavenly Christ in glory; and, throughout the remainder of his course, notwithstanding the weakness of the earthen vessel, that heavenly Christ and that heavenly glory engrossed his whole soul.
“And Abram passed through the land unto the place of Sichem, unto the plain of Moreh. And the Canaanite was then in the land.” The presence of the Canaanite in God’s land would, necessarily, prove a trial to Abraham. It would be a demand upon his faith and hope, an exercise of heart, a trial of patience. He had left Ur and Charran behind, and come into the country of which “the God of glory” had spoken to him, and there he finds “the Canaanite.” But there, too, he finds the Lord. “And the Lord appeared unto Abram, and said, Unto thy seed will give this land.” The connection between the two statements is beautiful and touching. “The Canaanite was then in the land,” and lest Abraham’s eye should rest upon the Canaanite, the present possessor of the land, Jehovah appears to him as the One who was going to give the land to him and to his seed for ever. Thus Abraham was taken up with the Lord, and not with the Canaanite. This is a full of instruction for us. The Canaanite in the land is the expression of the power of Satan; but, instead of being occupied with Satan’s power to keep us out of the inheritance, we are called to apprehend Christ’s power to bring us in. “We wrestle, not with flesh and blood,……but with spiritual wickedness in the heavenlies.” The very sphere into which we are called is the sphere of our conflict. Should this terrify us? By no means. We have Christ there – a victorious Christ, in whom we are “more than conquerors.” Hence, instead of indulging “a spirit of fear,” we cultivate a spirit of worship. “And there builded he an altar unto the Lord, who appeared unto him.” “And he removed from thence unto a mountain on the east of Bethel, and Pitched his tent.” The altar and the tent give us the two great features of Abraham’s character. A worshipper of God, a stranger in the world – most blessed characteristics! Having nothing on earth – having our all our all in God. Abraham had not so much as to set his foot upon;” but he had God to enjoy, and that was enough.
However, faith has its trials, as well as its answers. It is not to be imagined that the man of faith, having pushed out from the shore of circumstances, finds it all smooth and easy sailing. By no means. Again and again, he is called to encounter rough seas and stormy skies; but it is all graciously designed to lead him into deeper and more matured experience of what God is to the heart that confides in Him. Were the sky always without a cloud, and the ocean without a ripple, the believer would not know so well the God with whom he has to do; for, alas! we know how prone the heart is to mistake the peace of circumstances for the peace of God. When everything is going on smoothly and pleasantly, our property safe, our business prosperous, our children and servants carrying themselves agreeably, our residence comfortable, our health excellent, everything, in short, just to our mind, how apt we are to mistake the peace which reposes upon such circumstances, for that peace which flows from the realised presence of Christ. The Lord knows this; and, therefore, He comes in, in one way or another, and stirs up the nest, that is, if we are found nestling in circumstances, instead of in Himself.
But, again, we are frequently led to judge of the rightness of a path by its exemption from trial, and vice versa. This is a great mistake. The path of obedience may often be found most trying to flesh and blood. Thus, in Abraham’s case, he was not only called to encounter the Canaanite, in the place to which God had called him, but there was also “a famine in the land.” Should he, therefore, have concluded that he was not in his right place? Assuredly not. That would have been to judge according to the sight of his eyes, the very thing which faith never does. No doubt it was a deep trial to the heart, an inexplicable puzzle to nature; but to faith it was all plain and easy. When Paul was called into Macedonia, almost the first thing he had to encounter was the prison at Philippi. This, to a heart out of communion, would have seemed a death-blow to the entire mission. But Paul never questioned the rightness of his position. He was enabled to “sing praises” in the midst of it all, assured that everything was just as it should be: and so it was; for in the prison of Philippi was one of God’s vessels of mercy, who could not, humanly speaking, have heard the gospel, had not the preachers of it been thrust into the very place where he was. The devil was made, in spite of himself, the instrument of sending the gospel to the ears of one of God’s elect.
Now, Abraham should have reasoned in the same way, in reference to the famine. He was in the very place in which God had set him; and, evidently, he received no direction to leave it. True, the famine was there; and, moreover, Egypt was at hand, offering deliverance from pressure; still the path of God’s servant was plain. It is better to starve in Canaan, if it should be so, than live in luxury in Egypt. It is better far to suffer in God’s path, than be at ease in Satan’s. It is better to be poor with Christ, than rich without Him. Abraham had sheep, and oxen, and he asses, and men servants, and maid servants, and she asses, and camels.” Substantial proofs, the natural heart would, doubtless, say, of the rightness of his step, in going down to Egypt. But, ah! he had no altar – no communion. Egypt was not the place of God’s presence. He lost more than he gained by going thither. This is ever the case. Nothing can ever make up for the loss of our communion with God. Exemption from temporary pressure, and the accession of the greatest wealth, are but poor equivalents for what one loses by diverging a hair’s breadth from the straight path of obedience. How many of us can add our amen to this? How many, in order to avoid the trial and exercise connected with God’s path, have slipped aside into the current of this present evil world, and thereby brought leanness and barrenness, heaviness and gloom, into their souls? It may be they have, to use the common phrase, “made money,” increased their store, obtained the world’s favour, been” entreated well” by its Pharaohs, gotten a name and a position amongst men; but are these a proper equivalent for joy in God, communion liberty of heart, a pure, uncondemning conscience, a thankful, worshipping spirit, vigorous testimony, and effectual service? Alas! for the man that can think so. And yet all the above incomparable blessings have been often sold for a little ease, a little influence, a little money.
Christian reader, let us watch against the tendency to slip aside from the narrow, yet safe, the sometimes rough, yet always pleasant, path of simple, wholehearted obedience. Let us keep guard – jealous, careful guard, over “faith and a pure conscience,” for which nothing can compensate. Should trial come, let us, instead of turning aside into Egypt, wait on God; and thus the trial, instead of proving an occasion of stumbling, will prove an opportunity for obedience. Let us, when tempted to slip into the course of the world, remember Him: who gave Himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil world, according to the will of God, and our Father.” (Gal. 1: 4) If such was His love for us, and such His sense of the true character of this present world, that He gave Himself, in order to deliver us from it, shall we deny Him by plunging again into that from which His cross has for ever delivered us? May God Almighty forbid! May He keep us in the hollow of His hand, and under the shadow of His wings, until we see Jesus as He is, and be like Him, and with Him for ever.
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.
THE CALL OF ABRAM
The Lord had before told Abram to leave his country, his kindred and his father’s house, and go to a land He would show him. This call took place while he was still in Ur of the Chaldees (Act 7:2-4). God declared that He would make of Abram a great nation, that he would be a blessing (v.2). More than this, God would bless those who blessed Abram and curse those who cursed him. Further still, in Abram all the families of the earth would be blessed (v.3). This is above all a prophecy concerning Christ, the Seed of Abram, through whom blessing is to come to the entire world.
In Isa 51:2 God speaking of Abraham says, “I called him alone.” He had not called Terah nor Lot, yet we have read that “Terah took Abram … and Lot” (ch.11:31). It appears evident that Abram told his father that God had called him, and his father, rather than have his son leave him, decided to go also. Abram too allowed his father to take the lead, which was not faith on Abram’s part. How easily we too may be led by nature to go only halfway in the path of obedience to God!
Abram remembered that God had spoken to him before he came to Haran, and there was no need of God’s speaking to him again until he had obeyed his first instructions. Yet only when God had removed his father by death was Abram prepared to go further than Haran, cross the Euphrates River and journey to Canaan. He departed “as the Lord had spoken to him.” Lot “went with him,” evidently moved by some attachment to his uncle, not by personal energy of faith. Abram’s age at this time was 75 years. With his wife Sarai, Lot, the servants he had acquired, and his possessions, Abram began the trip. This time, when they “set out for the land of Canaan,” rather than going part way, “they came to the land of Canaan.” With the man of faith leading the intended object was attained.
Canaan is a picture of the heavenly inheritance to which all Christians are called now, as in Eph 2:6 we are told that God “has raised us up together, and made us sit together in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus.” This is not future, but present. The proper position of the believer is heavenly, not earthly, and he is called to enter into the enjoyment of heavenly things now, just as Abram was called to sojourn in the land of his inheritance.
Abram’s first milestone in the land was Shechem and “the oaks of Moreh,” The meaning of Shechem is “shoulder” and Moreh “teacher.” Shoulder speaks of bearing responsibility. This is an initial step of real value for the child of God. Too many of us would rather avoid responsibility, but if we willingly accept the place of bearing a responsible witness for the Lord Jesus, we shall find good results in being well taught, as Moreh – “teacher” implies. We shall not be properly taught if we do not willingly accept the responsibility teaching brings with it.
Also we are told “the Canaanites were then in the land.” Canaanite means “trafficker,” reminding us that there are those professing Christianity who merely use it as merchandise, and this becomes a real trial of faith to those who desire to walk with God. But in spite of the Canaanites, Abram would both accept proper responsibility and would learn from God. Let us also not use the Canaanites as an excuse for failing to apply ourselves to obeying fully the word of God and learning that word in a living, vital way.
ABRAM’S FIRST ALTAR
At this time the Lord appeared again to Abram, the first time of so doing since His first calling him. When we have proven ourselves willing to take responsibility for a walk with God and to learn His word, then God will certainly encourage us with the blessing of His presence. He tells Abram that He will give that land to his descendants. Then Abram builds his first altar. The altar characterizes the positive side of Abram’s history all through. This speaks of his relationship to God, for the altar is typical of Christ, whose sacrifice establishes the believer in righteousness before the eyes of God. Verse 8 of his tent, which indicates his relationship to the world, his not settling down, but passing as a pilgrim through a strange land. This may be a negative thing, but it accompanies the positive fact of his relationship to God in the altar. This first altar is the altar of submission and learning, a most important beginning of a path with God.
Abram moves on, going westward, and pitches his tent with Bethel to the west of him and Ai to the east. Ai means “ruins.” The man of faith realizes that what he has left behind is of no real value, just as Paul writes in Php 3:7-8 : “But what things were gain to me, these I have counted loss for Christ. Yet indeed I count all things loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them as rubbish, that I may gain Christ.” Paul had before greatly prided himself on his outstanding advantages and accomplishments, but when the glory of the Lord Jesus burst on his vision, those things became totally worthless to him.
HIS SECOND ALTAR
Therefore, Abram had his back toward Ai and his face toward Bethel, which means “the house of God.” He had left his father’s house, to find infinitely greater value in God’s house. The most important feature of the house of God is that God dwells there, yet God’s house involves all of God’s interests. Today the typical meaning of this for us is most significant, as is expressed in 1Ti 3:15, “the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.” God’s interests in the present dispensation of grace are centered in the church of God, which includes every redeemed child of God worldwide This therefore pictures the leaving behind of selfish aspirations and advantages, to find true joy and blessing in the things of God, and in unselfish love and consideration toward every member of the body of Christ, the church. Here Abram builds his second altar, which we may well designate as the altar of decision. All true decision for God is based upon the value of the person of Christ (the altar itself) and His great work of atonement, His sacrifice.
DECLINE AND FALTERING FAITH
Abram continues journey southward. The south speaks of favorable, pleasant circumstances (cf.Acts 27:13). Though we may have made a firm decision to leave our former life behind and choose God’s interests, yet there are still dangers to which we may be exposed. Pleasant, easy circumstances change, and we should realize that it is God who changes them, and therefore should seek the face of God as to every move we make. If we have been looking too much at circumstances, then when they change for the worse, as in Abram’s case of a famine in the land (v.10), we are in danger of seeking means of adjusting ourselves according to circumstances instead of more earnestly seeking the guidance of God.
Could God have sustained Abram in the land in spite of the famine? Certainly He could! But Abram forgot to consider this: he went down into Egypt, which was outside the land of promise. It is a type of the world in a little different form than Mesopotamia, where he had come from. Egypt’s idolatry may not have been so blatant as that of Ur of the Chaldees, but Egypt symbolizes the world in its independence of God. Its name means “double straits” because of its dependence on the river Nile to water the land on both sides. Its character is portrayed in Eze 29:3, where she is quoted as saying “My river is my own; I have made it for myself.”. Since the source of the river is far removed, she does not give God credit for having originated it.
DECEPTION
As they are about to enter Egypt, Abram, because of Sarai’s attractiveness, asks her to say that she is Abram’s sister rather than his wife (vs.11-13). How sadly we too may be guilty of deception because we are in the wrong place! Sarai speaks of the covenant of grace (Gal 4:22-28), and she was the property of Abram, the man of faith. Grace cannot belong to the ungodly world, though they may admire grace as a true and beautiful principle. But when believers get into wrong associations, they will always in some way deny their proper relationship with God, which is based entirely upon His grace in Christ Jesus. How much more safe and happy is the path of simple, unswerving faith!
Abram too was fearful of that which was not actually a danger all. He thought if he told the truth that he might be killed (v.12). Whatever might happen, we ought never to compromise the truth in any way, but one failure, however small it seems, is likely to lead to another that will be more serious.
The matter does not end with their falsifying their relationship. When Pharaoh, king of Egypt, learned of Sarai’s beauty and understands that she is an unmarried woman, he has her taken into his own house (v.15). Also he enriched Abram for Sarai’s sake, giving him sheep, oxen, donkeys, camels and servants (v.16). A believer who mingles with the world and compromises his testimony for Christ in this way may often prosper materially; but ought not this to have greatly troubled Abram’s conscience? Was he not also deeply disturbed by having his wife welcomed into the house of another man? Here were complications he had evidently not anticipated, and he found himself helpless to extricate himself.
But the Lord graciously intervened by sending great plagues on Pharaoh and his household (v.17). We are not told whether Pharaoh enquired as to why the plagues came, but he did find out that Sarai was Abram’s wife. Whether or not we are willing to confess the truth, God will certainly bring it out. This is a great mercy for the child of God.
Then Abram has to face Pharaoh about this matter (vs.18-19), but he has nothing to say when Pharaoh charges him with treating Pharaoh in an unjust, unfair way. This is another result of his failure to walk in faith: he deals unfairly with an unbeliever. Therefore God uses the unbeliever to reprove him. How wonderfully wise is our God and Father. Rather than reproving Abram Himself, He left this in the hands of the unbeliever whom Abram had wronged. This kind of experience would be humiliating for any believer. He also finds that his fears were groundless: Pharaoh had a proper respect for the marriage bond, as many unsaved people do today. This is a case of an unbeliever acting more honorably than a believer. There are many, though they do not accept Christianity, who do show respect for those who have genuine faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, and Pharaoh showed this respect for Abram in spite of his having to reprove him.
On the other hand, while Pharaoh gives Sarai back to Abram, he does not expect Abram to remain there. He tells him to “take her and go” (v.19), “and they sent him away, with his wife and all that he had” (v.20). By this time also, Abram would surely realize that Egypt was not the place for him. God had brought him to this point of realization, for it is only His working that brings about restoration.
12:1 Now the LORD had said unto Abram, {a} Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father’s house, unto {b} a land that I will shew thee:
(a) From the flood to this time were four hundred and twenty-three years.
(b) In appointing him no certain place, he proves so much more his faith and obedience.
The divine promises 12:1-9
"These verses are of fundamental importance for the theology of Genesis, for they serve to bind together the primeval history and the later patriarchal history and look beyond it to the subsequent history of the nation." [Note: Wenham, Genesis 1-15, p. 274.]
"Whereas chapters 1-11 generally portray man’s rebellion, chapters 12-50 detail God’s bringing man into a place of blessing." [Note: Ross, "Genesis," p. 25.]
". . . this is the central passage of the Book of Genesis." [Note: Ibid., p. 47.]
God’s revelation to Abram in these verses explains why his family left Ur (Gen 11:31).
". . . by placing the call of Abraham after the dispersion of the nations at Babylon (Gen 11:1-9), the author intends to picture Abraham’s call as God’s gift of salvation in the midst of judgment." [Note: Sailhamer, The Pentateuch . . ., p. 139.]
"The primeval history thus explains the significance of the patriarchal story: though apparently of little consequence in the world of their day, the patriarchs are in fact men through whom the world will be redeemed. The God who revealed himself to them was no mere tribal deity but the creator of the whole universe." [Note: Wenham, Genesis 1-15, pp. li-lii.]
The fourth dispensation, the dispensation of promise, extended from Abram’s call to the giving of the Mosaic Law at Mt. Sinai (Exodus 19-24). Man’s stewardship rested on God’s promises to Abram, which appear first in Gen 12:1-3 but receive confirmation and enlargement in Gen 13:14-17; Gen 15:1-7; Gen 17:1-8; Gen 17:15-19; Gen 22:16-18; Gen 26:2-5; Gen 26:24; Gen 28:13-15; Gen 31:13; and Gen 35:9-12. Individual blessing depended on individual obedience (Gen 12:1; Gen 22:18; Gen 26:5). God unconditionally promised blessing through Abram’s descendants to the nation of Israel (Gen 12:2; Gen 15:18-21; Gen 17:7-8), to the church through Christ (Gal 3:16; Gal 3:28-29), and to the Gentile nations (Gen 12:3). Individuals (e.g., Pharaoh, Gen 12:17; Abimelech, Gen 20:3; Gen 20:17) and nations (e.g., Egypt, chs. 47-50; Exodus 1-15) that proved favorable toward Abram’s seed would experience divine blessing, but those that proved hostile would experience divine cursing (Gen 12:3; cf. Mat 25:31-46). Christians are called upon to trust God as Abram did and so enter into the spiritual blessings of the Abrahamic Covenant, which covenant inaugurated the dispensation of promise (Rom 4:11; Rom 4:16; Rom 4:23-25; Gal 3:6-9). God’s promises to Abram and his descendants did not end with the giving of the Mosaic Law (Gal 3:17; cf. Exo 32:13; Exo 33:1-3; Lev 23:10; Lev 25:2; Lev 26:6; Deu 6:1-23; Deu 8:1-18; Jos 1:2; Jos 1:11; Jos 24:13; Act 7:17; Rom 9:4). However as a test of Israel’s stewardship of divine truth, the dispensation of promise was superseded, not annulled, by the dispensation of law (Exo 19:3-8).
God’s word 12:1-3
This section begins with a waw disjunctive in the Hebrew text translated "Now" in the NASB. It introduces an independent circumstantial clause (cf. Gen 1:2). Probably the revelation in view happened in Ur. The NIV captures this with the translation "The Lord had said to Abram." So the beginning of chapter 12 flashes back to something that happened in Ur even though chapter 11 ends with Abram in Haran. Stephen’s statement in Act 7:2 supports this interpretation. Stephen quoted the Septuagint translation of this verse in Act 7:3.
God called Abram to leave his homeland and to proceed to a different country. That Abram’s family chose to accompany him does not imply an act of disobedience on Abram’s part. God did not forbid others from accompanying Abram. The focus of God’s command was that Abram should uproot himself and follow His leading.
"One detail we do need to note here is the conditional element in the covenant program with Abram. It was not until after the death of his father (Gen 11:32) that Abram began to realize anything of the promise God had given to him, for only after his father’s death did God take him into the land (Gen 12:4) and there reaffirm the original promise to him (Gen 12:7).
"It is important, therefore, to observe the relationship of obedience to this covenant program. Whether or not God would institute a covenant program with Abram depended on Abram’s act of obedience in leaving the land. Once this act was accomplished, however, and Abram did obey God, God instituted an irrevocable, unconditional program." [Note: Pentecost, p. 60. See also Robert B. Chisholm Jr., "Evidence from Genesis," in A Case for Premillennialism: A New Consensus, p. 54.]
". . . in what sense is the Abrahamic covenant [ch. 15] unconditional? The point here, which has often been misunderstood, is that while the fulfillment of any particular generation of Israel depended on obedience to God, the ultimate possession of the land is promised unconditionally to Israel even though she does not deserve it. Scripture prophesies that a godly remnant of Israel will be the ultimate possessors of the land at the second coming (Eze 20:33-38)." [Note: Walvoord, p. 191.]
32
THE CALL OF ABRAHAM
Gen 11:27-32; Gen 12:1-5
WITH Abraham there opens a new chapter in the history of the race; a chapter of the profoundest significance. The consequences of Abrahams movements and beliefs have been limitless and enduring. All succeeding time has been influenced by him. And yet there is in his life a remarkable simplicity, and an entire absence of such events as impress contemporaries. Among all the forgotten millions of his own time he stands alone a recognisable and memorable figure. But around his figure there gathers no throng of armed followers; with his name, no vast territorial dominion, no new legislation, not even any work of literature or art is associated. The significance of his life was not military, nor legislative, nor literary, but religious. To him must be carried back the belief in one God. We find him born and brought up among idolaters; and although it is certain there were others besides himself who here and there upon earth had dimly arrived at the same belief as he, yet it is certainly from him the Monotheistic belief has been diffused. Since his day the world has never been without its explicit advocacy. It is his belief in the true God, in a God who manifested His existence and His nature by responding to this belief, it is this belief and the place he gave it as the regulating principle of all his movements and thoughts, that have given him his everlasting influence.
With Abraham there is also introduced the first step in a new method adopted by God in the training of men. The dispersion of men and the divergence of their languages are now seen to have been the necessary preliminary to this new step in the education of the world-the fencing round of one people till they should learn to know God and understand and exemplify His government. It is true, God reveals Himself to all men and governs all; but by selecting one race with special adaptations, and by giving to it a special training, God might more securely and more rapidly reveal Himself to all. Each nation has certain characteristics, a national character which grows by seclusion from the influences which are forming other races. There is a certain mental and moral individuality stamped upon every separate people. Nothing is more certainly retained; nothing more certainly handed down from generation to generation. It would therefore be a good practical means of conserving and deepening the knowledge of God, if it were made the national interest of a people to preserve it, and if it were closely identified with the national characteristics. This was the method adopted by God. He meant to combine allegiance to Himself with national advantages, and spiritual with national character, and separation in belief with a distinctly outlined and defensible territory.
This method, in common with all Divine methods, was in strict keeping with the natural evolution of history. The migration of Abraham occurred in the epoch of migrations. But although for centuries before Abraham new nations had been forming, none of them had belief in God as its formative principle. Wave upon wave of warriors, shepherds, colonists have left the prolific plains of Mesopotamia. Swarm after swarm has left that busy hive, pushing one another further and further west and east, but all have been urged by natural impulses, by hunger, commerce, love of adventure and conquest. By natural likings and dislikings, by policy, and by dint of force the multitudinous tribes of men were finding their places in the world, the weaker being driven to the hills, and being schooled there by hard living till their descendants came down and conquered their conquerors. All this went on without regard to any very high motives. As it was with the Goths who invaded Italy for her wealth, as it is now with those who people America and Africa because there is land or room enough, so it was then. But at last God selects one man and says, “I will make of thee a great nation.” The origin of this nation is not facile love of change nor lust of territory, but belief in God. Without this belief this people had not been. No other account can be given of its origin. Abraham is himself already the member of a tribe, well-off and likely to be well-off; he has no large family to provide for, but he is separated from his kindred and country, and led out to be himself a new beginning, and this because, as he himself throughout his life said, he heard Gods call and responded to it.
The city which claims the distinction of being Abrahams birthplace, or at least of giving its name to the district where he was born, is now represented by a few mounds of ruins rising out of the flat marshy ground on the western bank of the Euphrates, not far above the point where it joins its waters to those of the Tigris and glides on to the Persian gulf. In the time of Abraham, Ur was the capital city which gave its name to one of the most populous and fertile regions of the earth. The whole land of Accad, which ran up from the sea-coast to Upper Mesopotamia (or Shinar), seems to have been known as Ur-ma, the land of Ur. This land was of no great extent, being little if at all larger than Scotland, but it was the richest of Asia. The high civilisation which this land enjoyed even in the time of Abraham has been disclosed in the abundant and multifarious Babylonian remains which have recently been brought to light.
What induced Terah to abandon so prosperous a land can only be conjectured. It is possible that the idolatrous customs of the inhabitants may have had something to do with his movements. For while the ancient Babylonian records reveal a civilisation surprisingly advanced, and a social order in some respects admirable, they also make disclosures regarding the worship of the gods which must shock even those who are familiar with the immoralities frequently fostered by heathen religions. The city of Ur was not only the capital, it was the holy city of the Chaldeans. In its northern quarter rose high above the surrounding buildings the successive stages of the temple of the moon-god, culminating in a platform on which the priests could both accurately observe the motions of the stars and hold their night-watches in honour of their god. In the courts of this temple might be heard breaking the silence of midnight one of those magnificent hymns, still preserved, in which idolatry is seen in its most attractive dress, and in which the Lord of Ur is invoked in terms not unworthy of the living God. But in these same temple-courts Abraham may have seen the firstborn led to the altar, the fruit of the body sacrificed to atone for the sin of the soul; and here too he must have seen other sights even more shocking and repulsive. Here he was no doubt taught that strangely mixed religion which clung for generations to some members of his family. Certainly he was taught in common with the whole community to rest on the seventh day; as he was trained to look to the stars with reverence and to the moon as something more than the light which was set to rule the night.
Possibly then Terah may have been induced to move northwards by a desire to shake himself free from customs he disapproved. The Hebrews themselves seem always to have considered that his migration had a religious motive. “This people,” says one of their old writings, “is descended from the Chaldeans, and they sojourned heretofore in Mesopotamia because they would not follow the gods of their fathers which were in the land of Chaldea. For they left the way of their ancestors and worshipped the God of heaven, the God whom they knew; so they cast them out from the face of their gods, and they fled into Mesopotamia and sojourned there many days. Then their God commanded them to depart from the place where they sojourned and to go into the land of Canaan.” But if this is a true account of the origin of the movement northwards, it must have been Abraham rather than his father who was the moving spirit of it; for it is certainly Abraham and not Terah who stands as the significant figure inaugurating the new era.
If doubt rests on the moving cause of the migration from Ur, none rests on that which prompted Abraham to leave Charran and journey towards Canaan. He did so in obedience to what he believed to be a Divine command, and in faith on what he understood to be a Divine promise. How he became aware that a Divine command thus lay upon him we do not know. Nothing could persuade him that he was not commanded. Day by day he heard in his soul what he recognised as a Divine voice, saying: “Get thee out of thy country and from thy kindred and from thy fathers house, unto a land that I will show thee!” This was Gods first revelation of Himself to Abraham. Up to this time Abraham to all appearance had no knowledge of any God but the deities worshipped by his fathers in Chaldea. Now, he finds within himself impulses which he cannot resist and which he is conscious he ought not to resist. He believes it to be his duty to adopt a course which may look foolish and which he can justify only by saying that his conscience bids him. He recognises, apparently for the first time, that through his conscience there speaks to him a God Who is supreme. In dependence on this God he gathered his possessions together and departed.
So far, one may be tempted to say, no very unusual faith was required. Many a poor girl has followed a weakly brother or a dissipated father to Australia or the wild west of America; many a lad has gone to the deadly west coast of Africa with no such prospects as Abraham. For Abraham had the double prospect which makes migration desirable. Assure the colonist that he will find land and have strong sons to till and hold and leave it to, and you give him all the motive he requires. These were the promises made to Abraham-a land and a seed. Neither was there at this period much difficulty in believing that both promises would be fulfilled. The land he no doubt expected to find in some unoccupied territory. And as regards the children, he had not yet faced the condition that only through Sarah was this part of the promise to be fulfilled.
But the peculiarity in Abrahams abandonment of present certainties for the sake of a future and unseen good is, that it was prompted not by family affection or greed or an adventurous disposition, but by faith in a God Whom no one but himself recognised. It was the first step in a life-long adherence to an Invisible, Spiritual Supreme. It was that first step which committed him to life-long dependence upon and intercourse with One Who had authority to regulate his movements and power to bless him. From this time forth all that he sought in life was the fulfilment of Gods promise. He staked his future upon Gods existence and faithfulness. Had Abraham abandoned Charran at the command of a widely ruling monarch who promised him ample compensation, no record would have been made of so ordinary a transaction. But this was an entirely new thing and well worth recording, that a man should leave country and kindred and seek an unknown land under the impression that thus he was obeying the command of the unseen God. While others worshipped sun, moon, and stars, and recognised the Divine in their brilliance and power, in their exaltation above earth and control of earth and its life, Abraham saw that there was something greater than the order of nature and more worthy of worship, even the still small voice that spoke within his own conscience of right and wrong in human conduct, and that told him how his own life must be ordered. While all around him were bowing down to the heavenly host and sacrificing to them the highest things in human nature, he heard a voice falling from these shining ministers of Gods will, which said to him, “See thou do it not, for we are thy fellow-servants; worship thou God!” This was the triumph of the spiritual over the material; the acknowledgment that in God there is something greater than can be found in nature; that man finds his true affinity not in the things that are seen but in the unseen Spirit that is over all. It is this that gives to the figure of Abraham its simple grandeur and its permanent significance.
Under the simple statement “The Lord said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country,” there are probably hidden years of questioning and meditation. Gods revelation of Himself to Abram in all probability did not take the determinate form of articulate command without having passed through many preliminary stages of surmise and doubt and mental conflict. But once assured that God is calling him, Abraham responds quickly and resolutely. The revelation has come to a mind in which it will not be lost. As one of the few theologians who have paid attention to the method of revelation has said: “A Divine revelation does not dispense with a certain character and certain qualities of mind in the person who is the instrument of it. A man who throws off the chains of authority and association must be a man of extraordinary independence and strength of mind, although he does so in obedience to a Divine revelation; because no miracle, no sign or wonder which accompanies a revelation can by its simple stroke force human nature from the innate hold of custom and the adhesion to and fear of established opinion: can enable it to confront the frowns of men, and take up truth opposed to general prejudice, except there is in the man himself, who is the recipient of the revelation, a certain strength of mind and independence which concurs with the Divine intention.”
That Abrahams faith triumphed over exceptional difficulties and enabled him to do what no other motive would have been strong enough to accomplish, there is therefore no call to assert. During his after-life his faith was severely tried, but the mere abandonment of his country in the hope of gaining a better was the ordinary motive of his day. It was the ground of this hope, the belief in God, which made Abrahams conduct original and fruitful. That sufficient inducement was presented to him is only to say that God is reasonable. There is always sufficient inducement to obey God; because life is reasonable. No man was ever commanded or required to do anything which it was not for his advantage to do. Sin is a mistake. But so weak are we, so liable to be moved by the things present to us and by the desire for immediate gratification, that it never ceases to be wonderful and admirable when a sense of duty enables a man to forego present advantage and to believe that present loss is the needful preliminary of eternal gain.
Abrahams faith is chosen by the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews as an apt illustration of his definition of Faith, that it is “the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.” One property of faith is that it gives to things future, and which are as yet only hoped for, all the reality of actual present existence. Future things may be said to have no existence for those who do not believe in them. They are not taken into account. Men do not shape their conduct with any reference to them. But when a man believes in certain events that are to be, this faith of his lends to these future things the reality, the “substance” which things actually existing in the present have. They have the same weight with him, the same influence upon his conduct.
Without some power to realise the future and to take account of what is to be as well as of what already is, we could not carry on the common affairs of life. And success in life very greatly depends on foresight, or the power to see clearly what is to be and give it due weight. The man who has no foresight makes his plans, but being unable to apprehend the future his plans are disconcerted. Indeed it is one of the most valuable gifts a man can have, to be able to say with tolerable accuracy what is to happen and what is not; to be able to sift rumours, common talk, popular impressions, probabilities, chances, and to be able to feel sure what the future will really be; to be able to weigh the character and commercial prospects of the men he deals with, so as to see what must be the issue of their operations and whom he may trust. Many of our most serious mistakes in life arise from our inability to imagine the consequences of our actions and to forefeel how these consequences will affect us.
Now faith largely supplies the want of this imaginative foresight. It lends substance to things future. It believes the account given of the future by a trustworthy authority. In many ordinary matters all men are dependent on the testimony of others for their knowledge of the result of certain operations. The astronomer, the physiologist, the navigator, each has his department within which his predictions are accepted as authoritative. But for what is beyond the ken of science no faith in our fellow-men avails. Feeling that if there is a life beyond the grave, it must have important bearings on the present, we have yet no data by which to calculate what will then be, or only data so difficult to use that our calculations are but guesswork. But faith accepts the testimony of God as unhesitatingly as that of man and gives reality to the future He describes and promises. It believes that the life God calls us to is a better life, and it enters upon it. It believes that there is a world to come in which all things are new and all things eternal; and, so believing, it cannot but feel less anxious to cling to this worlds goods. That which embitters all loss and deepens sorrow is the feeling that this world is all; but faith makes eternity as real as time and gives substantial existence to that new and limitless future in which we shall have time to forget the sorrows and live past the losses of this present world.
The radical elements of greatness are identical from age to age, and the primal duties which no good man can evade do not vary as the world grows older. What we admire in Abraham we feel to be incumbent on ourselves. Indeed the uniform call of Christ to all His followers is even in form almost identical with that which stirred Abraham, and made him the father of the faithful. “Follow Me,” says our Lord, “and every one that forsaketh houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for My names sake, shall receive a hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life.” And there is something perennially edifying in the spectacle of a man who believes that God has a place and a use for him in the world, and who puts himself at Gods disposal; who enters upon life refusing to be bound by the circumstances of his upbringing, by the expectations of his friends, by prevailing customs, by prospect of gain and advancement among men; and resolved to listen to the highest voice of all, to discover what God has for him to do upon earth and where he is likely to find most of God; who virtually and with deepest sincerity says, Let God choose my destination: I have good land here, but if God wishes me elsewhere, elsewhere I go: who, in one word, believes in the call of God to himself, who admits it into the springs of his conduct, and recognises that for him also the highest life his conscience can suggest is the only life he can live, no matter how cumbrous and troublesome and expensive be the changes involved in entering it. Let the spectacle take hold of your imagination-the spectacle of a man believing that there is something more akin to himself and higher than the material life and the great laws that govern it, and going calmly and hopefully forward into the unknown, because he knows that God is with him, that in God is our true life, that man liveth not by bread only, but by every word that cometh out of the mouth of God.
Even thus then may we bring our faith to a true and reliable test. All men who have a confident expectation of future good make sacrifices or run risks to obtain it. Mercantile life proceeds on the understanding that such ventures are reasonable and will always be made. Men might if they liked spend their money on present pleasure, but they rarely do so. They prefer to put it into concerns or transactions from which they expect to reap large returns. They have faith, and as a necessary consequence they make ventures. So did these Hebrews-they ran a great risk, they gave up the sole means of livelihood they had any experience of and entered what they knew to be a bare desert, because they believed in the land that lay beyond and in Gods promise. What then has your faith done? What have you ventured that you would not have ventured but for Gods promise. Suppose Christs promise failed, in what would you be the losers? Of course you would lose what you call your hope of heaven-but what would you find you had lost in this world? When a merchants ships are wrecked or when his investment turns out bad, he loses not only the gain he hoped for, but the means he risked. Suppose then Christ were declared bankrupt, unable to fulfil your expectations, would you really find that you had ventured so much upon His promise that you are deeply involved in His bankruptcy, and are much worse off in this world and now than you would otherwise have been? Or may I not use the words of one of the most cautious and charitable of men, and say, “I really fear, when we come to examine, it will be found that there is nothing we resolve, nothing we do, nothing we do not do, nothing we avoid, nothing we choose, nothing we give up, nothing we pursue, which we should not resolve, and do, and not do, and avoid, and choose, and give up, and pursue, if Christ had not died and heaven were not promised us.” If this be the case-if you would be neither much better nor much worse though Christianity were a fable-if you have in nothing become poorer in this world that your reward in heaven may be greater, if you have made no investments and run no risks, then really the natural inference is that your faith in the future inheritance is small. Barnabas sold his Cyprus property because he believed heaven was his, and his bit of land suddenly became a small consideration; useful only in so far as he could with the mammon of unrighteousness make himself a mansion in heaven. Paul gave up his prospects of advancement in the nation, of which he would of course as certainly have become the leader and first man as he took that position in the Church, and plainly tells us that having made so large a venture on Christs word, he would if his word failed be a great loser, of all men most miserable because he had risked his all in this life on it. People sometimes take offence at Pauls plain way of speaking of the sacrifices he had made, and of Peters plain way of saying “we have left all and followed Thee, what shall we have therefore?” but when people have made sacrifices they know it and can specify them, and a faith that makes no sacrifices is no good either in this worlds affairs or in religion. Self-consciousness may not be a very good thing: but self-deception is a worse.
Here as elsewhere a clear hope sprang from faith. Recognising God, Abraham knew that there was for men a great future. He looked forward to a time when all men should believe as he did, and in him all families of the earth be blessed. No doubt in these early days, when all men were on the move and striving to make a name and a place for themselves, an onward look might be common. But the far-reaching extent, the certainty, and the definiteness of Abrahams view of the future were unexampled. There far back in the hazy dawn he stood while the morning mists hid the horizon from every other eye, and he alone discerns what is to be. One clear voice and one only rings out in unfaltering tones and from amidst the babel of voices that utter either amazing follies or misdirected yearnings, gives the one true forecast and direction-the one living word which has separated itself from and survived all the prognostications of Chaldean soothsayers and priests of Ur, because it has never ceased to give life to men. It has created for itself a channel and you can trace it through the centuries by the living green of its banks and the life it gives as it goes. For this hope of Abraham has been fulfilled; the creed and its accompanying blessing which that day lived in the heart of one man only has brought blessing to all the families of the earth.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Fuente: Expositions Of Holy Scripture by Alexander MacLaren
Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Fuente: Through the Bible Commentary
Fuente: Spurgeon’s Verse Expositions of the Bible
Fuente: An Exposition on the Whole Bible
Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary
Fuente: The Sermon Bible
Fuente: Gaebelein’s Annotated Bible (Commentary)
Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Fuente: Church Pulpit Commentary
Fuente: Neighbour’s Wells of Living Water
Fuente: James Gray’s Concise Bible Commentary
Fuente: Gary Hampton Commentary on Selected Books
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Fuente: Sutcliffe’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Fuente: Mackintosh’s Notes on the Pentateuch
Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible
Fuente: Grant’s Commentary on the Bible
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
Fuente: Expositors Bible Commentary