[Is] not the whole land before thee? separate thyself, I pray thee, from me: if [thou wilt take] the left hand, then I will go to the right; or if [thou depart] to the right hand, then I will go to the left.
9. the whole land, &c.] Abram’s offer is made with the elaborate profuseness and courtesy characteristic of an Oriental bargain: cf. Gen 23:11-16; 2Sa 24:21-24.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Gen 13:9
Is not the whole land before thee?
—
The goodly land in prospect
In many respects the earthly Canaan was typical of the heavenly. The heavenly Canaan is–
I. A LAND OF PROMISE (1Jn 2:25; Rev 21:7; Rev 22:14).
II. A LAND OF LIFE (1Jn 3:15; Rev 21:4).
III. A LAND OF LIGHT (Rev 22:5).
IV. A LAND OF PLENTY (Rev 7:16; Rev 22:2).
V. A LAND OF FELICITY AND JOY. This joy will be complete; perfect, full, everlasting (Psa 16:11; Isa 35:10). Application:
1. Have I a title clear to heaven?
2. The way to eternal life open to all.
3. Jesus Christ is the way, the living way, the only way.
4. As human life is so uncertain, all should strive at once to make a full preparation, and seek to get that meekness requisite for the inheritance of the saints in light. (H. Dingley.)
Abrams proposal to Lot
I. THIS PROPOSAL SHOWS THAT A GOOD MAN LOVES PEACE RATHER THAN WEALTH.
1. Because strife hardens the heart.
2. Because strife destroys a mans happiness.
3. Because strife hinders ones spiritual progress.
II. THAT A GOOD MAN HAS CONFIDENCE IN THE RULER OF THE UNIVERSE.
1. Abraham had confidence in Gods wisdom.
2. He had confidence in Gods love.
III. THAT A GOOD MAN HAS HIGHER INTERESTS THAN WORLDLY PROSPERITY. (Homilist.)
A peaceable spirit
I. HOW DESIRABLE A THING IT IS TO LIVE IN PEACE WITH OTHERS. We are commanded to live at peace. Contention undermines the welfare of all.
II. THERE ARE ALWAYS SOME MEANS OF MAINTAINING PEACE. Unselfish yielding of rightful claims. A friendly separation need be no schism. (F. Hastings.)
Magnanimity of Abraham
1. How different he might have acted. The whole land was his. He was most powerful and wealthy. He might have decided without consulting Lot, and simply have announced his decision. How many would have stood on their dignity, and vindicated their rights.
2. See what he did. Took his nephew to a rising ground, whence the whole land might be seen. Offered him the first choice. Was willing to abide by Lots decision, and take what he left.
3. This was the result of a peaceful spirit and a firm faith in God. (J. C. Gray.)
The excellence of a peaceable disposition, exemplified in the conduct of Abraham towards Lot
I. WE PROPOSE TO CONSIDER THE FACTS RECORDED. The conduct of these two good men, on the occasion to which the text refers, had certainly many shades of difference. In the one, the religious principle was in lively and adapted operation, it governed the passions, and its effects engage our approbation; in the other, that principle seems to have lain dormant, while feelings of jealousy or ambition appear for a time to have controlled the heart; their fruit however was disappointment and sorrow. We feel no difficulty in knowing which to condemn and which to censure; but if the conduct of Abraham be deemed so worthy of admiration, let us imitate; if the conduct of Lot be deemed improper, let us avoid following his example. Such should be our aim and our practice in reading the excellences or the defects of men.
II. LET US DEDUCE SOME PRACTICAL INFERENCES FOR THE PURPOSE OF PERSONAL APPLICATION.
1. We may learn how honourable and happy it is to be a promoter of peace.
2. Let us cultivate the dispositions necessary to be exercised in preserving or promoting peace; particularly that meekness which is careful not to take offence, and which is as mindful not to give offence.
3. We may learn the danger of judging merely from appearances, and of preferring what is great or splendid in circumstances, to those situations in life which are friendly to religious improvement. This Lot does not seem sufficiently to have regarded.
4. We may ascertain with what confidence we may commit our temporal interests to the care and goodness of providence, while we are walking in the path of holy obedience. If true religion guide us, it will be found that her ways are pleasantness and peace. Those who honour God He will honour. (Essex Remembrancer.)
Abrahams disinterestedness
Many good reasons might have been given by Abraham for claiming the first right of choice for himself. For one thing, he was the older man, and naturally might have expected that Lot would defer to him. For another thing, he might have reminded Lot that it was not he who had accompanied Lot, but Lot who had accompanied him, when together they had left their Chaldean home, and might have insisted that, simply on that ground, it was Lots place to yield the preference to him. But no! he gave up all such claims of priority, and in a manner at once chivalrous and disinterested said, Is not the whole land before thee? Now, when we ask how Abraham came to act in this way, we see at once that his conduct was the outgrowth of his faith in God. For observe, in this very connection, indeed in the very middle of this history, it is said, The Canaanite and the Perizzite dwelt then in the land. Now these were idolatrous and selfish tribes. They were at that very moment filling up the measure of their iniquity on account of which the land was taken from them and given to Abraham. It would never do, therefore, for the worshippers of the true God to quarrel before them. That would only give them occasion to blaspheme Jehovahs name, and so bring His worship into contempt. Therefore, out of regard to the honour of the Lord, Abraham was ready to sacrifice his worldly interest rather than do anything which would tend to compromise the religion he professed. Moreover, the Lord had promised to provide for him. Ever since he had left the far land of Ur, he had looked upon himself as the ward of God, and he was quite sure that God would take care of him. So, without either hesitation or misgiving, he made this proposal to his nephew, and as a proof that he had not miscalculated, we are told in the concluding verses of the chapter that God appeared unto him, renewed the promise of the land of Canaan, and guided him to the plain of Mamre, near to that city of Hebron which today bears in its name El-Khulil–the friend–the memorial of his connection with its neighbourhood. But now, rising from this old history and looking over the face of modern society, what envying, strifes, wraths, back-bitings, whisperings, swellings, tumults, might be prevented in households, neighbourhoods, churches, nations, by acting on the principles which animated Abraham here? There, for instance, are two men in the same business, and there is not enough for both; but the one happens to have more capital than the other and so he commences to undersell him by putting down his prices to a figure that is absolutely dishonest, and then, when he has closed his neighbour up, and secured all the trade for himself, he begins to reimburse himself at his leisure. In the good old days of the fathers, the maxim used to be, Live and let live, but now, in the selfishness of competition, men trample each other down, and virtually say, Die, that I may live. Or look at it in another sphere: there are two railway companies, each connecting the same great centres of commerce with each other. There is enough probably for both, if they were only to be mutually considerate. But so far from that, each wishes to have the larger share; and so they run each other down and down, until shareholders are ruined, and employees are ground to the lowest farthing; and then! such scenes as were lately witnessed in the land come to alarm and appall. Nor is this evil confined to commerce. To the disgrace of our Christianity, there is the same suicidal rivalry among churches. Is it so, that neither business can thrive nor churches be advanced without selfishness that tramples others down? What is your faith in God worth if you can believe that? (W. M. Taylor, D. D.)
Abrams generosity
Abram met the danger as promptly and resolutely as the brave Hollanders, in days gone by, threw up their dykes against the encroaching sea. But how did he meet it? We might expect him to say, Why this strife? Rebuke thy servants–they must yield to mine–I am the elder–and to me the land is promised. Would this have stopped the strife? It ought, certainly; all the right and authority were on his side, but the assertion of right does not always win the side that is in the wrong, and Abram chose a surer dyke to stop the threatening torrent. Did what he did say stop it? Yes, but not in the way we might have hoped. If Lot had said, Nay, dear uncle, I cannot forestall thee–choose thou first,–that would have been a complete victory. But when we yield up a right for the sake of peace, we must not expect to be met with corresponding generosity; we must be prepared to be taken at our word, as Abram was. (E. Stock.)
Magnanimity
An instance of the practical effectiveness of Mr. Shermans preaching is narrated thus. In one of his Monday evening lectures to teachers, the subject was the parting of Abraham and Lot: in the course of which he spoke of the magnanimity of Abraham, and as a contrast to it, said that he had just visited a family belonging to the congregation that was rent by discord about the ownership of an old iron bedstead. It happened that amongst his hearers was a man who had not been in Surrey chapel for years. He was greatly amused by the illustration. As he left the chapel, he called on an old friend, and told him that he was at the very time arranging the distribution of some property left by a relative, amongst which there was an old bedstead, which had been matter of dispute: but the effect of the address upon him was such that the bedstead difficulty was soon amicably settled. (Old Testament Anecdotes.)
Of such as have been great lovers and promoters of peace
There are no greater instances of the folly and wicked disposition of mankind, than that their favourites have been clad in steel; the destroyers of cities, the suckers of human blood, and such as have imprinted the deepest fears upon the face of the universe, are the men it has crowned with laurels, and flattered with the misbecoming titles of heroes and gods: while the sons of peace are remitted to the cold entertainment of their own virtues. Still there have ever been some who have found so many heavenly beauties in the face of peace, that they have been contented to love that sweet virgin for her own sake, and to court her without the consideration of any additional dowry.
1. The inhabitants of the island of Borneo, not far from the Molluccas, live in such detestation of war, and are so great lovers of peace, that they hold their king in no other veneration than that of a god, so long as he studies to preserve them in peace; but if he discover inclinations to war, they never rest till he is fallen in battle under the arms of his enemies. So soon as he is slain they set upon the enemy with all imaginable fierceness, as men that fight for their liberty, and such a king as will be a greater lover of peace. Nor was there ever any king known amongst them that was the persuader and author of a war, but he was deserted by them, and suffered to fall under the sword of the enemy.
2. At Tez, in Africa, they have neither lawyers nor advocates; but if there be any controversies amongst them, both parties, plaintiff and defendant, come to their Alfakins, or chief judge, and at once, without any further appeals or pitiful delays, the cause is heard and ended.
3. It is said of the sister of Edward III, the wife of David king of Scots, that she was familiarly called Jane Make-peace, both for her zeal and success therein.
4. The Lord Treasurer Burleigh used to say that he overcame envy and evil will more by patience and peaceableness, than by pertinaey and stubbornness; and he so managed his private affairs, that he never sued any man, nor did any man ever sue him, but he lived and died universally respected and beloved.
5. It is recorded of Servius Sulpitius, an heathen lawyer, that he respected equity and peace in all that he did, and always sought rather to settle differences than to multiply suits of law.
6. Numa Pompilius instituted the priests or heralds called Feciales, whose office was to preserve peace between the Romans and neighbouring nations; and if any quarrel arose, they were to pacify them by reason, and not suffer them to come to violence till all hope of peace was past; and if these feciales did not consent to the wars neither king nor people had it in their power to undertake them.
The folly of strife
An old writer tells of two brothers who went out to take a walls in the night, and one of them looked up to the sky and said, I wish I had a pasture field as large as the night heaven. And the other brother looked up into the sky and said, I wish I had as many oxen as there are stars in the sky. Well, said the first, how would you feed so many oxen? Said the second, I would turn them into your pasture. What! whether I would or not. Yes, whether you would or not. And there at once arose a quarrel, and when the quarrel ended, one had slain the other. Not less foolish have been many of the quarrels of modern times. One of the six things God hates is he that soweth discord among brethren.
Strife among brethren
I read a story the other day of an elder of a Scotch kirk, who at the elders meeting had angrily disputed with his minister, until he almost broke his heart. The night after he had a dream, which so impressed him, that his wife said to him in the morning, Ye look very sad, Jan; what is the matter with ye? And well I am, said he, for I have dreamed that I had hard words with our minister, and he went home and died, and soon after I died too; and I dreamed that I went up to heaven, and when I got to the gate, out came the minister, and put out his hands to welcome me, saying, Come along, Jan, theres nae strife up here, Im so glad to see ye. So the elder went down to the ministers house to beg his pardon, and found in very truth that he was dead. He was so smitten by the blow, that within two weeks he followed his pastor to the skies; and I should not wonder but what his minister did meet him, and say, Come along, Jan, theres nae strife up here. Brethren, why should there be strife below? Let us love each other, and by the fact that we are co-heirs of that blessed inheritance, let us dwell together as partakers of a common life, and soon to be partakers of a common heaven. (C. H. Spurgeon.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 9. Is not the whole land before thee.] As the patriarch or head of the family, Abram, by prescriptive right, might have chosen his own portion first, and appointed Lot his; but intent upon peace, and feeling pure and parental affection for his nephew, he permitted him to make his choice first.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Is not the whole land before thee? i.e. open to thy view, and free to choose which part thou pleasest, as thou canst agree with the owners: I give thee full power to choose before me. See a like phrase, Gen 20:15; 34:10,21; 47:6.
Thou wilt take: this and the following supplement are easily gathered both from the words of this and Gen 13:11, and from the nature of the thing. And the Hebrew language being a concise or short language, such supplements are frequently necessary, and very usual. Compare 2Ch 10:11, with 1Ki 12:11; 2Sa 23:8, with 1Ch 11:11.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
[Is] not the whole land before thee?…. Signifying, that though there were not room and convenience for them both in that part of the country in which they were, yet there were in other parts; and though the land was given to Abram, he did not desire Lot to depart out of it; nay, he sets it all before him to choose what part he would dwell in, which was great condescension in him:
separate thyself, I pray thee, from me; not that he was weary of his company and fellowship with him, but, as things were circumstanced, a separation was necessary for the subsistence of their herds and flocks, and for the peace and comfort of their respective families; nor did he desire him to go out of the land, or be so far from him, that he could be of no advantage to him; but though separate, yet so near him as to give him help and assistance, as there might be occasion for it, and as there was some time after, which appears from the history of the following chapter.
If [thou wilt take] the left hand, then I will go to the right; or if [thou depart] to the right hand, then I will go to the left; or as the Targums of Onkelos and Jonathan are,
“if thou wilt go to the north, I will go to the south, or if thou wilt go to the south, I will go to the north:”
for when a man stands with his face to the east, the principal part, the north is on his left hand, and the south on his right; and this was an usual way of speaking in the eastern countries; but they were not, as Grotius observes, Aristotelians, who make the east the right hand, and the west the left. This was an instance of the peaceable disposition of Abram, and of his humility and condescension to give his nephew leave, who was in all respects inferior to him, to make his choice, to go which way he would, and take what part of the country he pleased.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
9. Is not the whole land before thee ? Here is that moderation of which I have spoken; namely, that Abram for the sake of appeasing strifes voluntarily sacrifices his own right. For as ambition and the desire of victory (354) is the mother of all contentions; so when every one meekly and moderately departs, in some degree, from his just claim, the best remedy is found for the removal of all cause of bitterness. Abram might indeed, with an honorable pretext, have more pertinaciously defended the right which he relinquished, but he shrinks from nothing for the sake of restoring peace: and therefore he leaves the option to his nephew.
(354) Φιλονεικία
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
Is not the whole land before thee? separate thyself, I pray thee, from me: if thou wilt take the left hand, then I will go to the right; or if thou depart to the right hand, then I will go to the left.
Sweet and endearing argument! Oh! that it were more generally made use of, and its power more generally felt. Canaanites and Perizzites may quarrel; for nature untaught, unrestrained by grace, hath corruptions to beget it. But let not you and I, who profess to be disciples of the lovely and all-loving Jesus; Joh 13:35 .
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Gen 13:9 [Is] not the whole land before thee? separate thyself, I pray thee, from me: if [thou wilt take] the left hand, then I will go to the right; or if [thou depart] to the right hand, then I will go to the left.
Ver. 9. Is not the whole land before thee? ] Abram chooseth rather to take wrong, than to strive for his right, which he here parts with for peace’s sake. They that do otherwise, though they think they do bravely, and get the better of their adversary, yet (if St Paul may judge) they sit down by the loss. For he purposely disgraceth their contentious courses, in standing for their utmost right, without respect to peace and quietness, by a word ( ) that signifieth disgrace, or loss of victory: – “Now therefore there is utterly a fault,” or a defect of true manhood, “amongst you, because ye go to law one with another; why do ye not rather take wrong? why do ye not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded?” 1Co 6:7 Aristotle a by the dim light of nature, could see and say, that it is better to suffer wrong than do it. It was a brave speech of Calvin: “Though Luther call me devil, yet I will honour him as a servant of God.” And when a fierce friar, in dispute with Beza and his colleagues, called them foxes, apes, asses, &c., Beza answered no more but this, Nos non magis credere, quam Transubstantionem. In rixa is inferior est, qui victor est , saith Basil. And Demosthenes when he was reproached by one, thought it sufficient to say, Nolim tecum in hoc genus certaminis descendere, in quo qui vincitur ipso victore est melior .
Separate thyself, I pray thee, from me.
If thou wilt take the right hand, &c.
a A , Ethic.
b Interdum disiunctio melius alit amicitiam ,& c. – Bucholc.
c Pererius.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Is not the whole land, &c. Figure of speech Erotesis.
thou wilt take. Figure of speech Complex Ellipsis. See App-6.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Is not: Gen 20:15, Gen 34:10
if thou wilt: Psa 120:7, Rom 12:18, 1Co 6:7, Heb 12:14, Jam 3:13-18, 1Pe 3:8-12
Reciprocal: Gen 13:11 – they Gen 16:6 – Abram Gen 47:6 – is Pro 15:18 – he Pro 17:14 – leave Eze 21:16 – either Rom 12:10 – in honour
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
13:9 [Is] not the whole land before thee? separate thyself, I pray thee, from me: if [thou wilt {f} take] the left hand, then I will go to the right; or if [thou depart] to the right hand, then I will go to the left.
(f) Abram resigns his own right to buy peace.