And there came one that had escaped, and told Abram the Hebrew; for he dwelt in the plain of Mamre the Amorite, brother of Eshcol, and brother of Aner: and these [were] confederate with Abram.
13 16. Abram’s Victory
13. Abram the Hebrew ] Abram is described, as Lot in the previous verse, as if mentioned for the first time: an indication of the independent origin of the narrative.
The name “Hebrew” here occurs for the first time in Scripture. It is a title used of Israelites, either by foreigners, or in speaking of them to foreigners, or in contrast with foreigners. The word was popularly explained as a patronymic meaning “descendant of Eber,” see notes on Gen 10:24, Gen 11:14. Its formation, from the root ‘br, suggests that it means “one who has come from the other side,” probably, of the river Euphrates, cf. Jos 24:2. The LXX renders here , Lat. transeuphratensis.
It is sometimes claimed that the name is identical with that of the abiri, a nomad, restless people, mentioned in the Tel-el-Amarna tablets as making war upon the Canaanite towns and communities (circ. 1400). The name abiri is akin to Hebron, and may denote “the confederates.” The identification of ‘Ibri = “Hebrew” with abiri would require a change of the first consonant, and an alteration of root meaning 1 [16] .
[16] See Appendix D.
the oaks of Mamre ] Better, terebinths. See note on Gen 13:18. Mamre, though probably the name of a place, is here personified in its occupant. But there is no indication in Gen 13:18 that “the oaks of Mamre” were called by the name of a local chieftain.
Eshcol ] The well-known name, meaning “a bunch of grapes,” given to a valley near Hebron (cf. Num 13:23), is here transferred to a person.
Aner ] has not been identified as a place near Hebron, but appears as the name of a town in 1Ch 6:70.
confederate with Abram ] Lit. “lords of the covenant of Abram,” i.e. allies with him by mutual compact, like Abimelech the Philistine, Gen 21:22-23; Gen 21:32, Gen 26:28-31.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Gen 14:13-16
When Abram heard that his brother was taken captive, he armed his trained servants
Abram as a warrior
I.
IN THE CAUSE OF MAN.
1. The sacredness of natural affection.
2. The noble generosity which forgets the faults of friends or kindred in their distress.
3. The heroism which sacrifices self for the benefit of others.
II. IN THE CAUSE OF GOD.
1. His engaging in war cannot be accounted for, except on the supposition that he had a Divine warrant for his conduct.
(1) As a private individual he would not have the right to wage war.
(2) His chance of success, to all human appearance, was small.
2. He wages war as the ruler and proprietor, by Divine right, of the land. (T. H.Leale.)
The blessed life illustrated in the history of Abraham
And now what think you Abraham shall do? Away in Hebron he dwells hidden in his pavilion from the strife of men, kept in perfect peace, untroubled amidst his flocks and herds, wrapped in communion with God. As the messenger arrives and inquires for him, do they go forth to find him at the altar and in prayer? Do they tell him the latest news–all about Chedorlaomer king of Elam, and Tidal king of nations, and Amraphel king of Shinar, and Arioch king of Ellasar? Think of the holy man, waving them away with his hand, indignant at the interruption. What is all that to me? Do you know that I am seeking a country out of sight, and that I am but a pilgrim here?
It is not for me, called with so high a calling, to trouble myself with such things, or indeed to heed them. Leave me to my altar and to my God. And he turns again to pray. If he had done so the blessed life would not have been his. Many a man has tried to overcome this world by running away from it, but has never succeeded. The life that loses all interest in this world, in its politics, in its business, and thousand interests, is not the blessed life. You may baptize this selfish indifference with any sentimental name you please–call it, if you will, heavenly-mindedness: but it remains as ugly as ever. So long as I am in this world, so long ought its concerns to concern me, and its interests to interest me. Selfish isolation will not make me any more of an angel, only less of a man. The blessed life, the life of communion with God and surrender to Him, does not give me a pair of wings to fly away from the world; it does much better than that, it teaches me how to put the world under my feet and keep it there. Turn the message round a little, and there is another aspect of it worth dwelling upon: Lot is taken, Abrams brothers son. What shall he say? What have I to do with Lot? we have dissolved partnership. He has gone his way, and I have gone mine; and we have no further dealings together. He cannot complain, for I do him no wrong; he made his choice, and I had to accept what was not good enough for him. He knew the people that he was going amongst, and has only himself to blame. If I were in trouble he certainly would not go far to help me. Abraham could not have said so: depend upon it we cannot either, if our life is the life of surrender to God and communion with Him. Very significant is the first word: And when Abram heard that his brother–Do you think it is a misprint? I think not. He was only a nephew in prosperity, but in trouble he is a brother. That is the blessed life, when every man is in true relation to us; but sorrow makes men very much nearer and more to us. Many an earnest man misses the blessed life just at this point. You think you can quite justify the indignation you feel. Your position and natural feeling require that there should be an explanation or apology before you can render any help. So the opportunity is lost; and who, think you, is the loser, he whom I might have helped, or I? I who might have been a blessing shall be unblessed. But turn the incident round again, and let another light fall upon it. However much concerned about Lot, and however eager to help him, what can Abraham do? The case was really a desperate one. The mightiest monarchs probably in the world had combined their forces and conquered all the nations that dwelt in their course. There was one thing that he could do: perhaps only one,–things are never so desperate but that we can pray about them,–and that Abraham did pray comes out later in the chapter: I have lift up mine hand unto the Lord, the most high God. As to fighting in relation to the blessed life, I do not know that I need say more than this: that when God bids us fight and promises to go with us, then let us go forth as bravely as Abraham, but till then let us try to live peaceably with all men. But the great thing for us to heed is this, our faith must be after the pattern and spirit of Abrahams. There must be the same indignation against wrong. Cold-blooded indifference, that goes on its way never seeing the misery of men and women, never heeding the want of our poor humanity, is simply devilish; and not much better is the sentimentality that cannot bear to see what others have to endure. Abraham was not a man of war, he was a man of peace: a man perhaps almost too ready for compromise. But his brother suffers–then Abraham cannot be quiet: all his soul is stirred within him. Nor does his indignation waste itself only in pity. He goes forth for his deliverance, with all the help he can get; he is away to help this brother of his as much as in him lies. (M. G. Pearse.)
The victorious warrior
In this chapter Abram appears in a new character. He had encouraged Lot to separate from him for the sake of peace, and now we find him taking up arms at the head of a confederacy of Amorite chiefs, and contending against Elam, then the ruling power in that part of Asia. When Lot went to live in the Jordan valley, the kings of the Pentapolis acknowledged the suzerainty of Chedorlaomer, king of Elam, and paid him an annual tribute. At length, however, they had rebelled, and Chedorlaomer, with three tributary kings, after sweeping down upon the surrounding tribes, defeated the allied army in the Valley of Siddim. The foreign host then plundered Sodom and Gomorrah, took Lot and his goods (Gen 14:12), and withdrew up the Jordan valley, laden with booty and captives.
I. ABRAMS RESCUE OF LOT (Gen 14:13-16). In this Abram showed–
1. A magnanimous and generous spirit. He did not say to himself, Serve him right; my ungrateful nephew has made his bed, and I shall allow him to lie upon it. His natural affection and family spirit, together with the grace of God reigning in his heart, would not permit him to cherish any secret satisfaction in connection with Lots punishment.
2. Martial prowess. In the sudden arming of his household, the gathering of his Amorite allies, the rapid march to the springs of the Jordan, the skilful tactics adopted in the attack, and the pursuit of the flying foe as far as Damascus, Abram discovered not only great gallantry, but also brilliant generalship. He employed the same tactics which Gideon used long afterwards to surprise the Midianites (Jdg 7:16), which Sauladopted against the Ammonites (1Sa 11:11), and which have commended themselves to the greatest generals in all ages. What a contrast is presented here between the patriarchs distrustful timidity in Egypt Gen 12:12-13), and the heroism which he displayed in the rescue of his kinsman! It was by faith that Abram fought to recover Lot, and in the fear of the Lord is strong confidence.
II. ABRAMS MEETING WITH THE KING OF SODOM (Gen 14:17; Gen 14:21-24).
1. Abrams personal disinterestedness and independence (Gen 14:22-23). Abram was not seeking his own when he went forth to rescue Lot, and he will accept nothing for having done his duty. The Lord whom he serves has made him heir of the whole land, and he cannot receive any portion of his inheritance from man, least of all from the representative of the filthy Sodomites.
2. His considerateness of the claims of others (Gen 14:24). He is generous, but he does not forget to be just. His own young men shall have only what of the spoil they have used as rations–a portion which, of course, could not be returned; but his allies, Aner, Esheol, and Mature, are entitled to their fair share of the plunder, and this cannot in equity be taken from them, except with their consent.
III. ABRAMS INTERVIEW WITH MELCHIZEDEK (Gen 14:18-20). How marked the contrast between the patriarchs attitude towards the King of Sodom and his conduct to this King of Salem! He saw in the former the chief representative of the wicked heathen Pentapolis, but he recognized in the latter the priest of the Most High God (Gen 14:18). So, while he maintained a dignified reserve in his interview with the King of Sodom, and refused to receive any benefit at his hands, he accepted refreshment for both body and spirit from Melchizedek. In his dealings with Melchizedek two traits in Abrahams character are brought out.
1. His recognition of the communion of saints. The patriarch discerned in this royal priest–although he was a stranger, and perhaps a Hamite–a faith and piety closely akin with his own. These two eminent personages met on the basis of a common worship, involving a common confession of monotheism.
2. His profound humility as a man of faith. He that had the promises Heb 7:6) felt himself honoured in being blessed by this Canaanite pontiff, and in offering his tithes to God through him.
LESSONS:
1. Trust in God enables its possessor to be helpful to his fellow men, while it also keeps him exalted above all who are not like-minded with himself. We may well covet earnestly the wonder-working faith which Abram manifested in this great achievement.
2. We must beware lest the Jew beat us in noble behaviour. He can be great! He can forgive vile injuries!
3. Abram, in declining to retain any of the spoil for himself, acted under the guidance of a great principle, and not of the custom of the times, reminding us thereby that moral principle, rather than the example of others, ought to be our rule of action.
4. It casts a dark light upon the character of Lot that he should have allowed himself to return to Sodom after his rescue by Abraham, instead of seeing that he had suffered a punishment which was not only fully deserved, but also plainly premonitory.
5. The sight of some men disfigures us. We feel after being with them that we can never be mean again. Abram had seen Melchizedek, and the King of Sodom dwindled into a common man. Abram had eaten the holy sacrament, and after that all gifts were poor. (Charles Jerdan, M. A. , LL. B.)
Refreshment between the battles
I. HERE IS THE UNSELFISH AND SUCCESSFUL INTERPOSITION OF A SEPARATED MAN, ON BEHALF OF OTHERS.
II. THE TIME OF A GREAT SUCCESS IS OFTEN THE SIGNAL FOR A GREAT TEMPTATION.
III. THE PREVENIENT GRACE OF GOD. (F. B. Meyer, B. A.)
Abrahams conquest
There are two lessons implied in Abrahams conquest.
1. One is, 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. The history of earth contains the record of no battles so glorious as those of Morgarten, Bannockburn, Drumelog, the taking of the Bastille, and the Three Days of Paris in 1830. On such occasions, war assumes a grander aspect, is freed from its conventional and hireling character, unfrocked of its tame uniform, and catches the wild light of liberty and the free breeze of the mountains.
2. Another lesson we gather from Abrahams conquest is, that Christian duty varies at different times and in different circumstances. Sometimes it is the Christians part to stay at home; and at other times to go far hence among the heathen. Sometimes it is his duty to sit under his family oak and attend to his family exercises; and at another time, like Abraham, to choose some post of peril, and do some good deed of daring. (G. Gilfillan.)
Lessons
1. Providence, usually in the deepest distress of His servants, sends speediest means for their help.
2. God letteth some escape in public calamities, that may seek succour, for others who are oppressed.
3. Gods escaped ones out of death and dangers, should haste to give tidings for help to others.
4. It is most proper that the sufferings of the Church in one place should be declared to the Church elsewhere for its relief.
5. The line of His Church, truth, and religion, God hath kept under a proper name.
6. It is fit that such as sit at ease in their own habitations should hear of the Churchs troubles.
7. God can bring heathens eminently to confederate with His Church and people in affection and religion.
8. Confederates in truth are affected with the evils that betide their parties, especially in the Church of God (Gen 14:13). (G. Hughes, B. D.)
Lessons
1. Tidings of the Churchs miseries should make deep impression upon its members.
2. Gods servants are not slow in hearing of the miseries of the Church and helping it.
3. Brethrens captivity by oppressors should affect and move to their rescue.
4. It becomes righteous heads of families to have their servants instructed in righteousness, and trained to righteous undertakings.
5. Righteous leaders called of God may array and muster forces against oppressors.
6. Small force of men, and great faith in God, may do mighty things.
7. Leaders affected with the oppression of the Church will haste to follow the oppressors.
8. Difficulties of march in such cases do not deter believers from the pursuit (Gen 14:14). (G. Hughes, B. D.)
Abrams conduct
He did not sit in his tent and say, He left me for his own pleasure, and now he must take the consequences of his selfishness: he thought he could do without me, now let him try. If Abram had said this there would have been a good deal of excuse for him. It would have been most human. We at all events could not have complained with any consistency, for this is exactly what we said when our friend offended us; but, to be sure, we are Christians, and Abram was only a Hebrew: and Hebrews are mean, greedy, crafty, villainous! I find we must beware, though, lest the Jew beat us in noble behaviour! He can be great! He can forgive vile injuries! How much greater should he be who has seen Christ slain and has named himself after the name of the Son of God! How noble his temper, how forgiving his spirit, how hopeful his charity! (J. Parker, D. D.)
Abraham in the path of daily duty
In all this we have another illustration of the strength of Abrahams faith. It kept him equally removed from ascetic seclusion on the one hand, and worldly conformity on the other. He did not scruple to work with ungodly allies when he was himself clearly in the path of duty. Lot was a prisoner. There was no question in his mind that he should do his utmost to deliver his kinsman; and though he could hope for success in that only by joining himself for the time with the Canaanitish sheiks, and seeming to be on the side of the King of Sodom, yet he did not hesitate to take that course and leave the issue with God. Herein he has left us an example which is not without is significance; for there are movements, some political and some moral, in our city and in our land, in which we can hope to succeed only by accepting the alliance of men with whom in the highest parts of our nature we have no sympathy whatever; and there are many among us who stand aloof because they do not wish to be brought into contact with such characters. What is it but a widespread feeling of this sort which has given the regulation of municipal affairs among us into the hands of men who have in many cases neither the confidence nor the respect of the Christian portion of the community? But for Christians to stand aloof in these circumstances and let things take their course is the merest cowardice. Say not to me that you are seeking thereby to keep yourselves pure. Do your duty, and leave the consequences to God. Believe me, He will not let you suffer from that which you undertake out of a regard to His glory and the welfare of your fellow men. So, again, there are many enterprises of benevolence in which the deliverance of our fellow men from the misery of disease or poverty cannot be accomplished by us, unless we consent to work with persons of whose characters we cannot in all respects approve. What then? Must we refuse to sit at a benevolent board because Aner, Eshcol, and Mature are there also? As well might we decline to lend a hand in the extinguishing of a destructive fire, because we saw one of the greatest roughs of the neighbourhood holding the hose! No! no! So long as we are in the world we shall have to meet the men of the world; we shall have to work with them, too, in benevolent matters, if at least we would set free the Lots whom tyrannous evils have taken captive; and they who hold back from the fear of contamination are signally deficient in that faith for which Abraham was so remarkable. But notice, again, that this old patriarch would not allow the presence of the ungodly to keep him from showing honour to God in the person of His priest. When Melchizedek came forth to meet him, Abraham did not treat him with coldness, because he happened at the moment to be in company with the King of Sodom. On the contrary, he showed him special honour, was not ashamed to receive his benediction, and gave him, without asking anyones leave, a tithe of the spoils. Now there was true courage! Abraham was not ashamed of his religion, and, when the occasion offered, he was ready to make it known. He did not hide his flag, but let it flutter openly in the breeze. And what a lesson is there in all this for us! It is hard enough for many of us to confess Christ in the midst of a company of His friends, and multitudes are altogether ashamed of Him in the presence of His enemies. If a stranger happens to be our guest, and we know that he ridicules religion, we omit family worship for that evening. If a friend not remarkable for spirituality calls upon us on the Lords day, and the time comes for us to go to the sanctuary, we are afraid to say anything about it, and we remain at home with him. If, in our business hours, a brother comes and speaks to us about spiritual things, in a style that might be as refreshing to us as the bread and wine of Melchizedek were to Abraham, we see a smile of contempt on the countenance of our worldly customer, and we plead that we are too much engaged at present to give him any more of our time. And if one waits upon us in the name of Christ, and asks our pecuniary help for his cause, we have no tithes to give him, and too frequently consider him as an intruder. Why is this? Ah, friends! let us be honest and confess it frankly, it is because we do not really believe that our chief business is with God, or that our strongest obligations are to Him. But still farther here, observe how Abraham would not consent to be laid under any debt of any sort whatever to the King of Sodom. He could take refreshment and a blessing from the hand of Melchizedek, but he would receive nothing from Bern. Why this distinction? The only answer we can give is because of the different characters of the two men. With Melchizedek he was safe; but how did he know that Bera would not claim from him some return which he could not conscientiously make? Therefore he would fetter himself with no entanglement. (W. M. Taylor, D. D.)
To the rescue
In the last century, when absence of trains and existence of bad roads isolated English towns and villages from each other, and from London, the separation of friends became a serious matter. A young maiden persuaded her relatives to allow her to leave the remote western hamlet home and to visit friends of the family in the metropolis. After a time tidings came that the maiden had been carried off, and was supposed to be concealed in the hall of a northern baronet. Distressed at the tidings, and full of love for their sister, the two brothers considered how her rescue was to be achieved. Ascertaining the whereabouts of the hall, they decided to explore its buildings in disguise, so as to learn the precise apartment in which their sister was lodged, and then, under cover of night, to secure her freedom. A brother in battle:–Timoleon the Corinthian was a noble pattern of fraternal love. Being in battle with the Argives, and seeing his brother fall by the wounds he had received, he instantly leaped over his dead body, and with his shield protected it from insult and plunder; and though severely wounded in the generous enterprise, he would not on any account retreat to a place of safety, till he had seen the corpse carried off the field by his friends.
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 13. Abram the Hebrew] See Clarke on Ge 10:21. It is very likely that Abram had this appellation from his coming from beyond the river Euphrates to enter Canaan; for haibri, which we render the Hebrew, comes from abar, to pass over, or come from beyond. It is supposed by many that he got this name from Eber or Heber, son of Salah; see Ge 11:15. But why he should get a name from Heber, rather than from his own father, or some other of his progenitors, no person has yet been able to discover. We may, therefore, safely conclude that he bears the appellation of Hebrew or Ibrite from the above circumstance, and not from one of his progenitors, of whom we know nothing but the name, and who preceded Abram not less than six generations; and during the whole of that time till the time marked here, none of his descendants were ever called Hebrews; this is a demonstration that Abram was not called the Hebrew from Heber; see Ge 11:15-27.
These were confederate with Abram.] It seems that a kind of convention was made between Abram and the three brothers, Mamre, Eshcol, and Aner, who were probably all chieftains in the vicinity of Abram’s dwelling: all petty princes, similar to the nine kings before mentioned.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Abram the Hebrew; so called, either,
1. From his great and good predecessor Eber, Gen 10:24; 11:14, in and by whom the primitive language and true religion were preserved; and therefore though Abram had five other progenitors between Eber and him, which were persons of less note, he is rightly denominated from Eber, the Hebrew, because he was the first that revived the memory and the work of Eber, that kept up the same language, and eminently propagated the same true religion. Or,
2. As others think, from his passing over the river Euphrates, from beyond which he came into Canaan.
These were confederate with Abram, i.e. had entered into a league for their mutual defence against common enemies. Whence we learn that it is not simply and universally unlawful to make a league with persons of a false religion.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
13. there came one that hadescapedAbram might have excused himself from taking any activeconcern in his “brother,” that is, nephew, who littledeserved that he should incur trouble or danger on hisaccount. But Abram, far from rendering evil for evil, resolved totake immediate measures for the rescue of Lot.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And there came one that escaped,…. Both the sword of the enemy and the slimepits; either one of the inhabitants of Sodom, who had an acquaintance with Lot and a friendship for him, and knew his relation to Abram; or one of Lot’s family, that might escape being taken and carried captive: for not Michael the prince, so called, because when the angels fell they would have drawn him with them, but God delivered him, and therefore his name was called , or “one that escaped”, as the Jews z say; nor Og, that escaped the waters of the flood, as they also say a, and now from this war, and was the only one left of the Rephaim, or giants, whom Amraphel slew, which they gather from De 3:11; who they suppose came with the following message to Abram with an ill design, that he might go out to war with the kings, and be slain, and then he thought to marry his wife; but these are idle fancies, what is first suggested is right.
And told Abram the Hebrew; that there had been a battle of four kings with five, that the latter were beaten, among whom were the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah; and that Lot, his kinsman, who dwelt in or near Sodom, was carried captive, with all his goods. Abram is called the Hebrew, either from his passing over or coming beyond the river Euphrates, from Chaldea into Canaan; with which the Septuagint version agrees, rendering it the “passer over”; and so Jarchi says he is called, because he came beyond the river: or rather from his having lived beyond it, as such as dwelt there were called; for it can hardly be thought that he should peculiarly have this name from that single action of his passing the river, which multitudes did besides him: but rather, why should he not be called Ibri, the word here used, from the place of his birth? For, according to the Talmudists b, Ur of the Chaldees was called , “little Ibra”; though it is more generally thought he had this name from his being a descendant of Eber, and who was not only of his sons’ sons, and spoke the same language, but professed the same religion, and which was continued in his posterity, who to the latest ages were called Hebrews, and sometimes Eber, Nu 24:24; and which is the opinion of many Jewish writers c, and seems most probable:
for he dwelt in the plain of Mamre the Amorite; see Ge 13:18; it was about forty miles from Sodom, but from it to Dan, whither he pursued the four kings, and where he overtook, fought, and smote them, is by some computed one hundred and twenty four miles d: this Mamre, from whom the plain or grove of oaks were called, was the
brother of Eshcol, and brother of Aner; who are particularly mentioned, because of their concern in the following expedition:
and these [were] confederate with Abram; or “[were] masters” or “authors of a covenant” e with him; they had entered into a league to defend one another, their persons and properties, from the insults of invaders and tyrants, or thieves and robbers: and it may be lawful to form such leagues with irreligious persons on such accounts, where there is no prohibition from God, as there was none as yet, though there afterwards was one; and the Israelites, were forbid to make covenants with the Canaanites, but that was after they were drove out of the land for their sins, De 7:1; besides, it is not improbable that these men were religious men, and worshipped the same God with Abram, for such there were among the Canaanitish princes, of which Melchizedek, after spoken of, is an instance; and as yet the sin of the Amorites was not full, of which tribe or nation these men were.
z Pirke Eliezer, c. 27. a Targum Jon. & Jarchi in loc. Bereshit Rabba, sect. 42. fol. 37. 2. T. Bab. Niddah, fol. 61. 1. b T. Bab. Bava Bathra, fol. 91. 1. & Gloss. in ib. c Bereshit Rabba, sect. 42. fol. 37. 3. Sepher Cosri, par. 1. sect. 49. fol. 24. 2. Shalshalet Hakabala, fol. 75. 1. Aben Ezra on Exod. i. 16. d Bunting’s Travels, p. 57. e , “Domini vel antores foederis”, Piscator, Oleaster.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
A fugitive (lit., the fugitive; the article denotes the genus, Ewald, 277) brought intelligence of this to Abram the Hebrew ( , an immigrant from beyond the Euphrates). Abram is so called in distinction from Mamre and his two brothers, who were Amorites, and had made a defensive treaty with him. To rescue Lot, Abram ordered his trained slaves ( , i.e., practised in arms) born in the house (cf. Gen 17:12), 318 men, to turn out (lit., to pour themselves out); and with these, and (as the supplementary remark in Gen 14:24 shows) with his allies, he pursued the enemy as far as Dan, where “ he divided himself against them, he and his servants, by night, ” – i.e., he divided his men into companies, who fell upon the enemy by night from different sides – “ smote them, and pursued them to Hobah, to the left (or north) of Damascus.” Hobah has probably been preserved in the village of Noba, mentioned by Troilo, a quarter of a mile to the north of Damascus. So far as the situation of Dan is concerned, this passage proves that it cannot have been identical with Leshem or Laish in the valley of Beth Rehob, which the Danites conquered and named Dan (Jdg 18:28-29; Jos 19:47); for this Laish-Dan was on the central source of the Jordan, el Leddan in Tell el Kady, which does not lie in either of the two roads, leading from the vale of Siddim or of the Jordan to Damascus.
(Note: One runs below the Sea of Galilee past Fik and Nowa, almost in a straight line to Damascus; the other from Jacob’s Bridge, below Lake Merom. But if the enemy, instead of returning with their booty to Thapsacus, on the Euphrates, by one of the direct roads leading from the Jordan past Damascus and Palmyra, had gone through the land of Canaan to the sources of the Jordan, they would undoubtedly, when defeated at Laish-Dan, have fled through the Wady et Teim and the Bekaa to Hamath, and not by Damascus at all (vid., Robinson, Bibl. Researches).)
This Dan belonged to Gilead (Deu 34:1), and is no doubt the same as the Dan-Jaan mentioned in 2Sa 24:6 in connection with Gilead, and to be sought for in northern Peraea to the south-west of Damascus.
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
| Lot Taken Captive, and Rescued. | B. C. 1913. |
13 And there came one that had escaped, and told Abram the Hebrew; for he dwelt in the plain of Mamre the Amorite, brother of Eshcol, and brother of Aner: and these were confederate with Abram. 14 And when Abram heard that his brother was taken captive, he armed his trained servants, born in his own house, three hundred and eighteen, and pursued them unto Dan. 15 And he divided himself against them, he and his servants, by night, and smote them, and pursued them unto Hobah, which is on the left hand of Damascus. 16 And he brought back all the goods, and also brought again his brother Lot, and his goods, and the women also, and the people.
We have here an account of the only military action we ever find Abram engaged in, and this he was prompted to, not by his avarice or ambition, but purely by a principle of charity; it was not to enrich himself, but to help his friend. Never was any military expedition undertaken, prosecuted, and finished, more honourably than this of Abram’s. Here we have,
I. The tidings brought him of his kinsman’s distress. Providence so ordered it that he now sojourned not far off, that he might be a very present help. 1. He is here called Abram the Hebrew, that is, the son and follower of Heber, in whose family the profession of the true religion was kept up in that degenerate age. Abram herein acted like a Hebrew–in a manner not unworthy of the name and character of a religious professor. 2. The tidings were brought by one that had escaped with his life for a prey. Probably he was a Sodomite, and as bad as the worst of them; yet knowing Abram’s relation to Lot, and concern for him, he implores his help, and hopes to speed for Lot’s sake. Note, The worst of men, in the day of their trouble, will be glad to claim acquaintance with those that are wise and good, and so get an interest in them. The rich man in hell called Abram Father; and the foolish virgins made court to the wise for a share of their oil.
II. The preparations he made for this expedition. The cause was plainly good, his call to engage in it was clear, and therefore, with all speed, he armed his trained servants, born in his house, to the number of three hundred and eighteen–a great family, but a small army, about as many as Gideon’s that routed the Midianites, Judg. vii. 7. He drew out his trained servants, or his catechised servants, not only instructed in the art of war, which was then far short of the perfection which later and worse ages have improved it to, but instructed in the principles of religion; for Abram commanded his household to keep the way of the Lord. This shows that Abram was, 1. A great man, who had so many servants depending upon him, and employed by him, which was not only his strength and honour, but gave him a great opportunity of doing good, which is all that is truly valuable and desirable in great places and great estates. 2. A good man, who not only served God himself, but instructed all about him in the service of God. Note, Those that have great families have not only many bodies, but many souls besides their own, to take care of and provide for. Those that would be found the followers of Abram must see that their servants be catechised servants. 3. A wise man for, though he was a man of peace, yet he disciplined his servants for war, not knowing what occasion he might have, some time or other, so to employ them. Note, Though our holy religion teaches us to be for peace, yet it does not forbid us to provide for war.
III. His allies and confederates in this expedition. He prevailed with his neighbours, Aner, Eshcol, and Mamre (with whom he kept up a fair correspondence) to go along with him. It was his prudence thus to strengthen his own troops with their auxiliary forces; and probably they saw themselves concerned, in interest, to act, as they could, against this formidable power, lest their own turn should be next. Note, 1. It is our wisdom and duty to behave ourselves so respectfully and obligingly towards all men as that, whenever there is occasion, they may be willing and ready to do us a kindness. 2. Those who depend on God’s help, yet, in times of distress, ought to make use of men’s help, as Providence offers it; else they tempt God.
IV. His courage and conduct were very remarkable. 1. There was a great deal of bravery in the enterprise itself, considering the disadvantages he lay under. What could one family of husbandmen and shepherds do against the armies of four princes, who now came fresh from blood and victory? It was not a vanquished, but a victorious army, that he was to pursue; nor was he constrained by necessity to this daring attempt, but moved to it by generosity; so that, all things considered, it was, for aught I know, as great an instance of true courage as ever Alexander or Caesar was celebrated for. Note, Religion tends to make men, not cowardly, but truly valiant. The righteous is bold as a lion. The true Christian is the true hero. 2. There was a great deal of policy in the management of it. Abram was no stranger to the stratagems of war: He divided himself, as Gideon did his little army (Judg. vii. 16), that he might come upon the enemy from several quarters at once, and so make his few seem a great many; he made his attack by night, that he might surprise them. Note, Honest policy is a good friend both to our safety and to our usefulness. The serpent’s head (provided it be nothing akin to the old serpent) may well become a good Christian’s body, especially if it have a dove’s eye in it, Matt. x. 16.
V. His success was very considerable, Gen 14:15; Gen 14:16. He defeated his enemies, and rescued his friends; and we do not find that he sustained any loss. Note, Those that venture in a good cause, with a good heart, are under the special protection of a good God, and have reason to hope for a good issue. Again, It is all one with the Lord to save by many or by few, 1 Sam. xiv. 6. Observe,
1. He rescued his kinsman; twice here he is called his brother Lot. The remembrance of the relation that was between them, both by nature and grace, made him forget the little quarrel that had been between them, in which Lot had by no means acted well towards Abram. Justly might Abram have upbraided Lot with his folly in quarrelling with him and removing from him, and have told him that he was well enough served, he might have known when he was well off; but, in the charitable breast of pious Abram, it is all forgiven and forgotten, and he takes this opportunity to give a real proof of the sincerity of his reconciliation. Note, (1.) We ought to be ready, whenever it is in the power of our hands, to succour and relieve those that are in distress, especially our relations and friends. A brother is born for adversity, Prov. xvii. 17. A friend in need is a friend indeed. (2.) Though others have been wanting in their duty to us, yet we must not therefore deny our duty to them. Some have said that they can more easily forgive their enemies than their friends; but we shall see ourselves obliged to forgive both if we consider, not only that our God, when we were enemies, reconciled us, but also that he passeth by the transgression of the remnant of his heritage, Mic. vii. 18.
2. He rescued the rest of the captives, for Lot’s sake, though they were strangers to him and such as he was under no obligation to at all; nay, though they were Sodomites, sinners before the Lord exceedingly, and though, probably, he might have recovered Lot alone by ransom, yet he brought back all the women, and the people, and their goods, v. 16. Note, As we have opportunity we must do good to all men. Our charity must be extensive, as opportunity offers itself. Wherever God gives life, we must not grudge the help we can give to support it. God does good to the just and unjust, and so must we, Matt. v. 45. This victory which Abram obtained over the kings the prophet seems to refer to, Isa. xli. 2, Who raised up the righteous man from the east, and made him rule over kings? And some suggest that, as before he had a title to this land by grant, so now by conquest.
Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary
Verses 13-16:
A survivor of the battle brought word to Abram, and told him of Lot’s capture. Abram had made a treaty with Mamre, Aner, and Eschol. These were apparently chieftains who lived in the region, and who joined Abram in his pursuit of the invaders. Abram’s own private army consisted of three hundred eighteen warriors. Abram pursued the invaders to the north, where he and his allies mounted a surprise attack in the dead of night. The rout was complete. The defeated confederacy fled with Abram’s army in pursuit almost to Damascus. All captives and all loot were recovered. There is no mention of casualties among Abram’s forces. This victory broke the power of the Confederacy, and there is no record of any subsequent attempt to renew their hold on the Land.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
13. And there came one that had escaped. This is the second part of the chapter, in which Moses shows, that when God had respect to his servant Lot, he gave him Abram as his deliverer, to rescue him from the hands of the enemy. But here various questions arise; as, whether it was lawful for Abram, a private person, to arm his family against kings, and to undertake a public war. I do not, however, doubt, that as he went to the war endued with the power of the Spirit, so also he was guarded by a heavenly command, that he did not transgress the bounds of his vocation. And this ought not to be regarded as a new thing, but as his special calling; for he had already been created king of that land. And although the possession of it was deferred to a future time; yet God would give some remarkable proof of the power which he had granted him, and which was hitherto unknown to men. (358) A similar prelude of what was to follow, we read in the case of Moses, when he slew the Egyptian, before he openly presented himself as the avenger and deliverer of his nation. And for this reason the subject ought to be noticed, that they who wish to defend themselves by armed force, whenever any force is used against them, may note from this fact, frame a rule for themselves. We shall hereafter see this same Abram bearing patiently and with a submissive mind, injuries which had at least, an equal tendency to provoke his spirit. Moreover, that Abram attempted nothing rashly, but rather, that his design was approved by God, will appear presently, from the commendation of Melchizedek. We may therefore conclude, that this war was undertaken by him, under the special direction of the Spirit. If any one should take exception, that he proceeded further than was lawful, when he spoiled the victors of their prey and captives, and restored them wholly to the men of Sodom, who had, by no means been committed to his protection; I answer, since it appears that God was his Guide and Ruler in this affair, — as we infer from His approbation, — it is not for us to dispute respecting His secret judgment. God had destined the inhabitants of Sodom, when their neighbors were ruined and destroyed, to a still more severe judgment; because they were themselves the worst of all. He, therefore, raised up his servant Abram, after they had been admonished by a chastisement sufficiently severe, to deliver them, in order that they might be rendered the more inexcusable. Therefore, this peculiar suggestion of the Holy Spirit ought no more to be drawn into a precedent, than the whole war which Abram had carried on. With respect to the messenger who had related to Abram the slaughter at Sodom, I do not accept what some suppose, that he was a pious man. We may rather conjecture that, as a fugitive from home, who had been deprived of all his goods, he came to Abram to elicit something from his humanity. That Abram is called a Hebrew, I do not explain from the fact of his having passed over the river, as is the opinion of some; but from his being of the progeny of Eber. For it is a name of descent. And the Holy Spirit here again honorably announces that race as blessed by God.
And these were confederate with Abram. It appears, that in the course of time, Abram was freely permitted to enter into covenant and friendship with the princes of the land: for the heroical virtues of the man, caused them to regard him as one who was not, by any means, to be despised. Nay, as he had so great a family, he might also have been numbered among kings, if he had not been a stranger and a sojourner. But God purposed thus to provide for his peace, by a covenant relating to temporal things in order that he never might be mingled with those nations. Moreover, that this whole transaction was divinely ordered we may readily conjecture from the fact, that his associates did not hesitate, at great risk, to assail four kings, who (according to the state of the times) were sufficiently strong, and were flushed with the confidence of victory. Surely they would scarcely ever have been thus favorable to a stranger, except by a secret impulse of God.
(358) “ Dieu a voulu donner un patron singulier de la puissance qu’il luy avoit bailee, laquelle estoit encore incognue aux hommes.” — French Tr
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
CRITICAL NOTES.
Gen. 14:13. Abram the Hebrew.] The lxx renders the word by one passing over, i.e., the immigrant, and some say that Abram is so described as having crossed the Euphrates from the east. But Murphy considers that the word should be understood as a patronymic, because in every other place the word is always used in this sense, and it might be said of every other tribe that they had originally migrated across the Euphrates. And moreover Abram is distinguished as the Hebrew, just as his confederate Mamre is distinguished as the Amorite. The Sons of Heber are distinctly mentioned in the table of nations among the descendants of Shem.Mamre.] This was near the seat of war. Confederate] Heb. Lords of the earth (or covenant) of Abram. They were in league together for mutual defence.
Gen. 14:14. His brother] In the wider sense of a near relative. Trained servants born in his own house, three hundred and eighteen. This would represent a domestic following of upwards of one thousand men, women, and children.
Gen. 14:15. And he divided himself against them] He divided his forces into two portions so as to attack the enemy on two different quarters. Hobah on the left hand of Damascus. The Hebrews supposed the face to be turned towards the rising sun, and named the points of the compass accordingly. Hence, Hobah would lie to the north of Damascus. The Jews regard the village of Jobar, a few miles N.E. of Damascus, as answering to Hobah. At Burzeh, very near, is a spot held in veneration by the people as having been the praying place of Abraham, where he returned thanks to God after the discomfiture of the kings. (Alford)
MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.Gen. 14:13-16
ABRAM AS A WARRIOR
Here Abram appears altogether in a new character. He who was noted for the meekness of his disposition and simple trust in God, now acts the strange part of a warrior. He had shown the heroism of self-sacrifice, and now he shows the heroism of a patriot and a friend. In a private capacity the virtues and graces of his life were such as command esteem; and now, as a public man, vindicating and succouring the oppressed and unfortunate, he displays admirable skill and courage. We may consider Abram as a warrior in a twofold light:
I. In the cause of man. The lives of good and holy men, which are recorded in the Scriptures, have a double aspect, on the one hand as they regard their fellow-creatures, and on the other as they regard God. He who is promoting the welfare of mankind may at the same time be accomplishing the wider purposes of the Almighty. The conduct of Abram must be interpreted in this double relationin the light of social facts, and in the light of his high calling of God. One who is closely related to him in blood is in great danger. Moved by natural affection, by brotherly love, he engages in war. One motive which led him to take up arms was the rescue of Lot from the hands of the enemy. From this we learn
1. The sacredness of natural affection. The Bible gives no distorted views of life, but accepts the great facts of human nature as they stand revealed to our ordinary observation. It inculcates no laws of conduct which are unpractical or unnatural. It insists upon the propriety and duties of natural affection. The assertion that all men are equal is true within limits, for they are such in the sight of God, and in the main features of their existence and destiny. We ought to love the whole human race. But this equality of affection is interfered with and modified by blood. There are duties which clearly lie nearest to us, and we have the prescription of nature urging us to their performance. A man is bound to love those of his own household with a peculiar affection. Our first impulse is to bless and deliver the brother and the friend. That virtue which professes devotion to humanity at large, while it disregards or thinks lightly of duties towards home and kindred, is not taught in the Bible. Our social love must move in the ways of the Divine order, i.e., it must move from within the domestic circle outwards to the whole human race. The impulse of natural affection was a sufficient justification of Abrams conduct. We learn also
2. The noble generosity which forgets the faults of friends or kindred in their distress. Lot had some serious social faults. He was narrow-minded, selfish, and lacking in those graces which lend a charm to life and reduce that friction which must arise in the dealings of men with one another. He had behaved ungenerously towards Abram, and had separated from him at a time when his companionship was of importance to the social interests of both. Yet Abram forgets the faults and unkindness of his kinsman when he is in trouble. As a religious man, also, Lot was greviously at fault. By his own act he left the family circle of Abram, where so many religious privileges could be enjoyed. He exposed himself to great spiritual peril by dwelling in the midst of a people notorious for their wickedness. Yet Abram does not leave his kinsman to reap the consequences of his own folly, but hastens to render him aid. We have
3. The heroism which sacrifices self for the benefit of others. Abram exposed himself to great danger in undertaking so desperate an enterprise; but he thinks not of himself while engaged in the noble cause of rescuing a brother. Others, also, shared in the benefits of his self-sacrificing act (Gen. 14:16). But we must consider Abram as a warrior
II. In the cause of God. The external features of the history show us Abram in the light of a friend delivering his kinsman from the hand of the enemy. But he stood in certain relations to the kingdom of God, and therefore we must read a wider meaning into his conduct on the occasion of this war. Thus the history reveals to us more than appears upon the first view.
1. His engaging in war cannot be accounted for, except on the supposition that he had a Divine warrant for his conduct. This is rendered very probable if we reflect that Abram, ever since God called him, ordered all things in his life by faith. He would scarcely have faced the dangers of such an expedition as this, where, humanly speaking, the chances of success were against him, unless he had clearly ascertained the will of God. He was moved by the spirit, not of adventure but of faith. If he had merely obeyed his own feelings, we can hardly suppose that he would afterwards have received so remarkable a blessing. The prophet Isaiah is supposed to refer to Abrams conduct in this war (Isa. 41:2-3), and if such be the reference, it is evidently implied that the patriarchs enterprise had the Divine sanction. Who raised up the righteous man from the east, called him to His foot, gave the nations before him, and made him rule over kings? He gave them as the dust to his sword, and as driven stubble to his bow. He pursued them, and passed safely; even by the way that he had not gone with his feet. Thus the motives which urged Abram on were not those of a man of the world, but they were derived from a principle of obedience to God, and faith in His promise. Two considerations will show, that he would scarcely have undertaken the mission of a warrior without the Divine sanction and assurance.
(1) As a private individual he would not have the right to wage war. He was not a chief, invested with power and authority, but a private and unofficial person, and moreover a stranger in the land. What right or title had he then to raise an army, and wage war? Besides, he was subject to other kings and rulers, and it was not likely that so irregular an expedition on his part would be tolerated. Consider
(2). That his chance of successto all human appearancewas small. The males of his own household were but 318, hastily prepared and armed, and with this insignificant force he ventures to pursue an army flushed with victory and commanded by four powerful monarchs! Surely Gideons exploit in the war with the Midianites was scarcely more desperate. It is easier to believe that in each case the success was miraculous. Like the faith which led to it, this also was the gift of God. Abram derived the right and power by which he acted, not from human expediency but from God.
2. He wages war as the ruler and proprietor, by Divine right, of the land. God had promised the land to him. He was the real owner of it, and now exercises his royal prerogative of making war. Though a stranger and a pilgrim he appears for a moment in his true character as a victorious prince. He is permitted by the favour of God to foredate the great blessing which was in store for him. Thus Our Lord, in the days of His humiliation, was seen for awhile on the Mount of Transfiguration, in that glory in which He shall hereafter appear when He comes to reign. Abram acts throughout as the man of faith who was accomplishing the purposes of God, and not following his own private ends. He had an eye to the interests of a larger family than that which was bound to him by the ties of natural relationship, even that family which is the Church of God. When he had asserted his rights and privileges, and delivered his kinsman, he retires into private life again. He refuses to enrich himself with the conquests he had won, for he had that faith in God which does not make haste. His cause was with the Most High.
SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS ON THE VERSES
Gen. 14:13. Among those who fled from the drawn sword and the fear-fulness of war, there was one who reached the plain of Mamre, and told the sad tale to Abram. He feels much, but what can he do? Can he raise an army wherewith to spoil the spoilers, and deliver the captives? He will try. Yes, from his regard to Lot, whose late faults would be now forgotten, and his former love recur to mind; and if he succeed, he will not only deliver him but many others. The cause is a just one, and God has promised to bless Abram and make him a blessing. Who can tell but he may prove in this instance a blessing to the whole country, by delivering it from the power of a cruel foreign oppressor.(Fuller.)
The fugitive who escaped to tell Abram the sad news was probably an inhabitant of Sodom, but he was the servant of Gods providence.
In the greatest calamities which happen to the Church, God finds a way of deliverance.
Abram and his kinsman represented the Church of God then upon earth. That Church is still one family, united by a common interest, and owning a common Father. One portion of that family cannot suffer without exciting the sympathy and engaging the help of the other.
It is fit that such as sit at ease in their own habitations should hear of the Churchs troubles.(Hughes.)
Abram could induce the chiefs of the land to make a covenant with him. Thus the blessings of the Church have overflowed to heathendom.
The Church of God will at last take all the kingdoms of the world into its unity.
Gen. 14:14. Abram thought not of his kinsmans ingratitude, but of his need. He stayed not to weigh his deserts, but obeyed the call of his distress.
To deal with others on the principles of rigid justice would often inflict upon them the greatest injury. If God so dealt with man, none of us should see salvation. The property of mercy and compassion is to flow by the necessity of its own fulness.
Abram armed his trained servants, and hastened to rescue Lot. We must not be content with mere feeling for the miseries of others, but do all that in us lies to bring them succour. Love is not an empty emotion. It delights in giving, blessing, and helping.
He led forth to battle his tried onestrained and skilful and trustyborn in his own house, and thus well-known and confidential house servants and body-guard, three hundred and eighteen, answering to more than a thousand men, women, and children, with flocks and herds of a corresponding extent. What was the force of his allies does not appear. This large number of slaves in Abrams house, capable of bearing arms, gives us an insight into the patriarchal household. These slaves were such as were originally taken in war, or bought with money. Many were also born in the house and trained in the doctrines and duties of religion, and admitted into the privileges of circumcision and the Sabbath, and treated as a religious charge. Abram commanded his children, and his household after him, that they might keep the way of the Lord, to do justice and judgment, that the Lord might bring upon Abram all that He had promised.(Jacobus.)
It is the duty of the Church of God to train all who belong to her for service. The Church of God is still militant here on earth, and has not entered upon the repose of victory.
Small force of man, and great faith in God, may do mighty things.(Hughes.)
He armed his trained servants. Or catechised; such as he had painfully principled both in religion and military discipline, tractable and trusty, ready pressed for any such purpose. It is recorded to the commendation of Queen Elizabeth, that she provided for war, even when she had most perfect peace with all men. Darts foreseen are dintless.(Trapp).
Gen. 14:15. By prompt movements, Abram and his troop soon came up with the enemy. It was in the dead of the night. The conquerors, it is likely, were off their guard, thinking no doubt that the country was subdued, and that scarcely a dog was left in it that dare move his tongue against them. But when haughty men say, Peace, peace; lo sudden destruction cometh! Attacked after so many victories they are surprised and confounded: and it being in the night, they could not tell but their assailants might be ten times more numerous than they were, so they flee in confusion, and were pursued from Dan even to Hobah in Syria.(Fuller.)
Abram came upon them as they were, secure, sleepy, and drunken, as Josephus writeth. So did David upon the Amalekites (1Sa. 30:16), and Ahab the Syrians (1Ki. 20:16).(Trapp).
A state of warfare necessitates policy and stratagem.
Gen. 14:16. Abrams object was simply the recovery of Lot and his family; and having accomplished this he is satisfied. It is surprising that amidst all this confusion and slaughter their lives should be preserved, yet so it was, and he with his property and family, and all the other captives taken with him are brought safe back again. It was ill for Lot to be found among the Sodomites; but it was well for the Sodomites that he was so, else they had been ruined before they were.(Fuller).
Those who are strangers to the knowledge of God have often shared in those deliverances which He has wrought out for His people.
Abram delivered others besides his kinsman Lot. There are duties of heroic enterprise and benevolence which we owe to men, irrespective of creed or race.
It is true heroism to come to the rescue of the defenceless and weak. This is imitating the kindness of God, which is most tender and plentiful towards His feeblest creature.
And the women also and the people. The hope of this might haply move that officious messenger to address himself to the old Hebrew (Gen. 14:13), little set by, till now that they were in distress.(Trapp).
ILLUSTRATIONS
BY THE
REV. WM. ADAMSON
Battle and Blessing! Gen. 14:1-24.
(1) Numerous as are the mountains of Switzerland, one stands out singular and unique. It belongs to Switzerland, and bears signs of resemblance to the other hills and valleys of the country; yet it has its own peculiar individuality. Who does not recognise the special prominence of Mont Blanc?
(2) The rocky mountains of the far West are a magnificent range, evidencing their continuous and successive resemblance one with the other. Yet there is a spur, so singular and unique in its formation and contour, that for a moment the traveller almost fancies it is out of place.
(3) This chapter has the air and aspect of an episode in history. It stands out singular and unique. As Candlish says, The warlike character which Abram assumes is a solitary exception to the usual tenor of his life; while his subsequent interview with the royal priest is altogether peculiar.
(4) A plant grows in Eastern jungles which sheds a clear light when all beside is dark. To midnight travellers amid Himalayan hills it seems as if it were a lamp to guide them on their wanderings. And the appearance of Melchizedek is just such a plant-lamp, pointing to Him who is a Priest for ever, after the order of Melchizedek.
On the truth thus dimly shadowed
Later days a lustre shed,
When the Great High Priest eternal
Offers us both wine and bread.
Four Kings! Gen. 14:1-16. Lincoln says that we have here a scene representing millenial glory. It is to be received prophetically and practically.
(1) Prophetically, we have here the four kingdoms of Daniel, Tidal standing for the fourth of these, viz., Rome. For the Roman empire will yet again be headed up under ten kings, who, Lincoln conceives, are to sweep away corrupt, unclean Christianity after the removal of the Church to heaven. And thus Abram is the Jews, who, after the overthrow of Rome in the plain of Armageddon, are to be blessed by the appearance of their Messiah.
(2) Practically, we have here three battles, the second of which represents the man of faith, relying solely on faith, as he goes forth to attack the confederated hosts, and to deliver Lot. The second is, however, preliminary to the third; and in Abrams case the most important of all. It was the struggle with Sodom against receiving any gift. It was the struggle of the moral against the materialof the spiritual against the sinful. No doubt the timely interposition of Melchizedek with refreshment and benediction nerved the patriarchs soul for victory.
Here is My gracethe mighty power victorious,
Which rights so strong for thy poor feeble strength;
Which nerves thy faith, the faith all-glorious,
Which fights and wins, and enters heaven at length.
Rescue! Gen. 14:13.
(1) In the last century, when absence of trains and existence of bad roads isolated English towns and villages from each other, and from London, the separation of friends became a serious matter. A young maiden persuaded her relatives to allow her to leave the remote western hamlet home and to visit friends of the family in the metropolis. After a time tidings came that the maiden had been carried off, and was supposed to be concealed in the hall of a northern baronet. Distressed at the tidings, and full of love for their sister, the two brothers considered how her rescue was to be achieved. Ascertaining the whereabouts of the hall, they decided to explore its buildings in disguise, so as to learn the precise apartment in which their sister was lodged, and then, under cover of night, to secure her freedom.
(2) Lot had chosen to go to the neighbourhood of the friendly citizens of Sodom and Gomorrah. Four northern potentates make an incursion southwards, subdue the five princes in the Vale of Siddim, and carry off Lot, his family, and goods. A fugitive servant bears the sad tidings to Abram, whofull of love for his captured nephew and householdconsiders how their rescue is to be accomplished. The conquerors track must be first ascertained, and then, under cover of the darkness of the night, an attempt to rescue must be made.
Around are the nations, and enemies strong;
But God is our fortress, our strength, and our song.
Prayer-Power! Gen. 14:13, etc.
(1) Naturalists say that at times when the eagle is about to soar, he seeks, finds, and puts himself upon a column of uplifting air; and thus, by its upheaving power, he is borne until he finds himself at the height at which he aimed.
(2) When the Lord Jesus was about to enter upon that struggle on Calvary, by which captive humanity was to be rescued and restored to moral freedom, He sought the column of uplifting communion with God in Gethsemane; and thus was able to rise to the lofty summit of the Cross, and achieve a glorious victory.
(3) We can hardly conceive Abram doing otherwise here. Happy is that soul which, entering on any spiritual expedition in behalf of others, places itself upon the uplifting breath of prayer, and thus is borne safely and securely on the tide of successful effort: Lord, what wilt Thou have me to do? Up, for the Lord hath delivered them into thine hand.
Go, fight the battles of your Lord,
But not with helm, or spear, or sword;
Take ye the Christians panoply,
And sing, Not unto us, O Lord.
Christian-Enterprise! Gen. 14:13-14, etc.
(1) In the far East an Arab sheikh heard of the capture of his kinsman, chief of another Arab tribe, and of his being carried by his captors across the desert. His affection for his kinsman, to say nothing of the Arab sense of honour which required him to make some effort for his kinsmans safety, prompted him to summon a few of his bravest tribesmen, hurry after the spoilers to the verge of the terrible desert, fall upon them, and rescue his depressed kinsman.
(2) Abram does not do so on the mere impulse of natural affection; he has Divine warrant for what he does. He fights once, remarks Candlish, as he walks alwaysby faith. Isa. 41:2 is generally supposed to refer to Abrams course here; and if so, the testimony is explicit as to the Divine sanction given to Abrams enterprise. But, apart from this, the subsequent benediction of Abram, and the vision and promise in Genesis 15. establish clearly that he went forth by the express will of God.
(3) Christians have gone forth on enterprises for which they had no warrant; and they have brought shame on the Christian faithas when Zwingle buckled on armour and went forth to die on the battlefield. It has even been suggested that Coligny yielded to do in France for the oppressed Huguenots what he felt was at variance with the Divine will. And missionary enterprise against the powers which have carried our fellow creatures captive in their minds and morals, senses and souls, should never be ventured on, except with prayer to know the Divine will, Shall we go, or shall we refrain?
Gainst sin, the world, and Satan all,
And every foe, both great and small,
This great crusade of faith and love,
Is owned and blessed of God above.
Union and Obedience! Gen. 14:14.
(1.) In the Island of New Guinea is the bird of paradise, whose tail is a magnificent plume of fairy-like feathers, partly white and partly yellow, so that they resemble silver and gold. Wallace says that the king bird is distinguished by spots on his tail, and generally flies high up in the air above the flock. Every one keeps an eye upon their leader, obeying his guidance with startling exactness.
(2.) Naturalists refer in a similar manner to the herds of deer among the savannahs of North America. The buck-leader of the herd is distinguished by his remarkable antlers, and by the position which he assumes in the herd. All the members of the herd keep a constant watch with eye and ear upon their leader, and follow his lead with unity and completeness.
(3.) Abram seems to have had similar unity and submission amongst his servants. The moment he signals an advance and attack all are ready. And so ought the followers and servants of the Lord Jesus to follow Him with absolute exactness, implicit confidence and ready allegiance. As the birds and beasts keep an eye upon their leaders, so should we be ever looking unto Jesus.
Temptations throng on every side;
We overleap them all;
Fight the good fight of faith, and hear
Our glorious Captains call.
Dan-Laish! Gen. 14:14.
(1.) This place becomes prominent in the time of the Judges. It was near Paneas on the way to Tyre, not far from the mound now called Tell-el-Kady. Thomson says that not one habitation is there now. The fountain still pours forth its river of delicious water. Herds of black buffaloes wallow in its crystal pools; and in vain does the traveller look for the maiden with her pitcher. The site of the town cannot even be examined with satisfaction, so dense is the jungle of briars, thorns, and thistles which overspread the country.
(2.) The mention of the name Dan here has caused much discussion. We must suppose that either the Dan of Abrams pursuit was another place than the Dan of the Judges; or that the more modern name has been substituted for the more ancient one in the sacred text. Neither of them is impossible in itself. Dan may have been the name of a place in the time of Abram, and the word Jordan (river of Dan) may have been employed because the Jordan sources were beside Dan. Thither Abram sped in pursuit of the marauding hosts of Elam.
Along the steep, above the dale,
And oer the mountain wild,
To where dear Jordans fountains rise,
And Hermons snows are piled.
Abrams Pursuit, etc. Gen. 14:14-16. In the Far West, a white man with his daughters left the white settlements and pitched his block house near the village of a friendly Indian tribe. Highly esteemed by all, it was with regret and misgiving that the white settlers saw the family disappear in the trackless wilderness of wood and water. A distant Indian tribe, whose chiefs had long been at variance with the friendly tribe of Indians, resolved on an attack upon the village. Successful in their raid, they spared the white man and his daughters, but carried them off with all their cattle and chattels. One of the white mans servants, absent at the beginning of the attack, arrived as the triumphant Indians were setting off on their return home, and hastened off to the distant settlements to give the alarm. Eager to rescue their esteemed friend and his family, the settlers and hunters started in pursuit. For days they tracked the Indians, and at last reached the camp, which was now within easy reach of the villages and wigwams of the predatory tribe. Ignorant of any pursuit, and revelling over their spoil, the Indians retired to rest; when the settlers, suddenly breaking in upon the camp, attacked and scattered the foe, and delivered their white friend and maidens. Christian champions have their deeds of heroic rescue to achieve.
Dark places of the soul and sin,
Dark places of the earth to win;
The inner shrine of man is trod
By foes of man, and foes of God.
Faiths Trial and Triumph. Gen. 14:15.
(1) This incident presents to us the Father of the Faithful most vividly apprehending things to come. The tidings brought by the fugitive from Siddims Vale were a test of Abrams faith, as to whether he had grasped the promise in Genesis 13. To thee will I give this land; therefore, arise, walk up and down as its undoubted, destined heir. This is the victory of faith. While as yet Abram has not a foot of ground which he can call his own, he assumes, with all the calmness of undoubted sovereignty, the right to act as the heir of the land. And he goes forth in the full assurance of faith, that victory shall be his.
(2) When the first missionary reached the centre of Africa and gazed upon the wondrous scene, he felt that the kingdoms of the country were surely to become the possession of Christ. The eagle eye of Divine faith looked down in calm conviction upon the powers of darkness and heathenism, and saw the captive souls delivered from their bondage, sitting at the feet of Jesus, clothed and in their right mind. All Christians thus venture forth against the powers of hellstrong in faithconfident of victory against opposing foes.
Faith whets the sword; faith is our shield;
Faith keeps our armour bright
It makes us more than conquerors,
And then is lost in light.Maguire.
Attach! Gen. 14:15.
(1) Chardin says that the Arabs, when desirous of pillaging a caravan crossing the eastern deserts follow it day by day until a favourable opportunity occurs for a night attack. Then they silently fall upon the camp, and carry off one part of it before the rest can get under arms 2) Mayne Reid describes how a party of hunters thus followed a retreating band of Indians, until it separated into two bands. The white pursuers then followed the band, which carried off the white woman whose rescue they were after; and, waiting until night, burst upon the band, and rescued the captive.
(3) Harmer supposes that Abram fell upon the Elamite camp at Laish much as the Arabs did and do; and so, by unequal forces, accomplished the deliverance of Lot. There can be little doubt that it was by a sudden night attack that Abram was able, with so small a following, to overcome the vast, veteran hosts of Elam.
Not now such fields of earthly strife
Demand the Christian warriors life;
The moral fields of warfare stand
In every heartin every land.
Sodom Sinners! Gen. 14:16.
(1) Amongst those who were delivered by English arms from the oppression and cruelty of the West African chiefs, were a number of natives who still remained heathen. These shared in the deliverance; but for them alone, or even chiefly, the expedition would never have been undertaken. White and native Christians claimed and enjoyed the interposition of England: the others were partakers of the deliveranceno more.
(2) Abram delivers Lot and his family. That the men of Sodom shared for a season in the benefit of that deliverance, was an incidental consequence; at least, was not the main and primary purpose of Abrams interposition. It was not for their sakes that the pilgrim became the warrior, but for that of Lot, who, however far he had strayed, was a servant of God.
(3) In achieving the moral deliverance of His kinsfolk by the Lord Jesus, the ungodly are often partakers of the temporal blessing. The deliverance is not wrought for their sakes but for that of His own, whose souls are in peril; but even His enemies are benefited in the liberty wrought for His own. Yet, they do not share in the spiritual benediction, so long as they persist, as the sinners of Sodom. And the temporal deliverance is like that of Sodom, a respitea fresh lease of mercys forbearance, ere heavier doom of fire falls.
When in majestic splendour He will rise,
With judgment and with terror on His wings.
Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell
(13) One that had escaped.Heb., the escaped; not any one in particular, but the fugitives generally. As Sodom lay at the north-western end of the Dead Sea, the region where Abram was dwelling would be their natural place of refuge.
Abram the Hebrew.That is, the immigrant (from beyond the Euphrates), but also his patronymic from Eber, who in like manner had crossed the Tigris. It was, no doubt, the usual title of Abram among the Canaanites, and has been preserved from the original document, whence also probably was taken the exact description of Lot in Gen. 14:12.
The plain of Mamre . . . these were confederate with Abram.Heb., the oak of Mamre (see Gen. 13:18), and lords, or owners of a covenant. Abram had not occupied Mamre without the consent of the dominant Amorites, and probably there was also a league for mutual defence between him and them.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
ABRAM’S MILITARY VICTORY, Gen 14:13-16.
13. One that had escaped Hebrews the fugitive, emphatic as representing a class, or company .
The Hebrew Or the Eberite, a patronymic of Eber, (Gen 10:21,) the ancestor of Abram . Abram is called the Eberite in distinction from Mamre the Amorite with whom he held friendly alliance . What gave Eber such prominence in connexion with Abram’s descendants we do not know, but the language of Gen 10:21, assigns him a notable prominence among the sons of Shem. Others derive the name Hebrew from , the region beyond, and understand it of Abram because he was an immigrant from beyond the great river Euphrates . This latter view appears in the Septuagint and Vulgate, and is held by most ancient interpreters .
Confederate with Abram Hebrews lords of a covenant with Abram. They had joined an alliance, and, as appears from Gen 14:24, they went with Abram to the war.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘And there came one who had escaped and told Abram the Hebrew. Now he dwelt by the oaks of Mamre the Amorite, the brother of Eshcol and brother of Aner, and these were confederate with Abram’.
Had it not been for this situation we might not have known of these wider relationships of Abram. Mamre the Amorite has clearly been named after the famous oaks in the area in which he lives which is only a problem to the very sceptical, it is in fact quite reasonable and feasible. Many people in ancient inscriptions are named after places. He has two brothers, Eshcol and Aner. They are all presumably petty princes like Abram. Here we learn that the four of them are in a loose alliance ready to come to each other’s aid in time of need.
Abram is called “the Hebrew” (see article, ” “) only here, a term which represents him as a stateless person and as a (potential) leader of a military force who is part of a confederation. As Abram was stateless in contrast with Mamre the Amorite this method of identifying him may be seen as of some significance. It ties in with the use of the terms ‘apiru and habiru elsewhere of stateless military leaders. The writer is describing Abram as he sees him.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Abraham’s March and Victory
v. 13. And there came one that had escaped, and told Abram, the Hebrew; for he dwelt in the plain of Mamre, the Amorite, brother of Eshcol, and brother of Aner; and these were confederate with Abram. Abram, living at some distance from the scene of all these happenings, was not aware of the straits into which Lot had fallen, until a fugitive from the battle brought him the news. He was known as the Hebrew, the immigrant from the other side of the Euphrates, and he was still living in the grove of terebinths which belonged to Mamre, the Amorite.
v. 14. And when Abram heard that his brother was taken captive, he armed his trained servants, born in his own house, three hundred and eighteen, and pursued them unto Dan. By the time Abram received the news, the enemies had gotten a long start on their way to their home country. But he acted with commendable speed and energy, for it was his brother, his near relative, whose life was in danger. He immediately assembled the slaves that had been born in his house and had been trained in the use of arms, and literally poured them forth in pursuit of the Babylonian armies, in proper battle array. There were three hundred and eighteen of these servants, besides the men of Aner, Eshcol, and Mamre, that went with Abram to the extreme northern boundary of Gilead, in Perea, where the city of Dan was afterward situated.
v. 15. And he divided himself against them, he and his servants, by night, and smote them, and pursued them unto Hobah, which is on the left hand of Damascus. By making use of strategy and with the help of Almighty God, before whom mere numbers are not the deciding factor, Abram was able to put the Babylonian armies to rout and even to pursue them northward from Damascua (literally, on the left hand, as one faces the east), to a little village now known as Hoba.
v. 16. And he brought back all the goods, and also brought again his brother Lot, and his goods, and the women also, and the people. The whole spoil of the enemy was thus taken from them by Abram’s little army, who thereby, in magnanimous love, rewarded Lot good for evil. Thus true faith produces holy courage and is able to face and to overcome all dangers, if the work in which a believer is engaged is one which meets with the approval of God.
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
EXPOSITION
Gen 14:13
And there came one that had escaped. Literally, the fugitive party, the article denoting the genus, as in “the Canaanite,” Gen 12:6. And told Abram the Hebrew. “The immigrant” trans fluvialis, , from beyond the Euphrates, if applied to the patriarch by the inhabitants of Palestine (LXX; Aquila, Origen, Vulgate, Keil, Lange, Kalisch); but more probably, if simply inserted by the historian to distinguish Abram from Mature the Amorite, “the descendant of Eber” (Lyra, Drusius, Calvin, Bush, Candlish, Murphy, ‘Speaker’s Commentary;’ vide on Gen 10:21). For he dweltliterally, and (sc. at that time) he was dwellingin the plainrather “oak groves” (vide Gen 13:18)of Mature the Amorite, the brother of Eshcol, and brother of Anor, concerning whom nothing is certainly known beyond the fact that they were Canaanitish chieftains (probably possessing some remnant of the true faith, like Melchisedeck) with whom the patriarch entered into an offensive and defensive alliance. And these were confederateliterally, lords of covenant, i.e. masters or possessors of a treaty (cf. “lord or possessor of dreams,” Gen 37:19; “lords or masters of arrows,” 2Ki 1:8); rendered (LXX.)lords of the oath, as in Neh 6:18, (LXX.)wit Abram.
Gen 14:14
And when Abram heard that his brotherso called as his brother’s son, or simply as his relative (Gen 42:8)was taken captive, heliterally, and hearmedliterally, caused to pour forth, i.e. drew out in a body, from a toot signifying “to pour out” (Gesenius, Furst); from a root meaning to unsheath or draw out anything as from a scabbard, and hence equivalent to expedivit, he got ready (Onkelos, Saadias, Rosenmller, Bush, ‘Speaker’s Commentary’). Kalisch connects both senses with the root. The LXX; Vulgate, and others translate “numbered,” reading later for his trainedliterally, initiated, instructed, but not necessarily practiced in arms (Keil); perhaps only familiar with’ domestic duties (Kalisch), since it is the intention of the writer to show that Abram conquered not by arms, but by faithservants, born in his own housei.e. the children of his own patriarchal family, and neither purchased nor taken in warthree hundred and eighteenwhich implied a household of probably more than a thousand soulsandalong with these and his allies (vide Gen 14:24)pursued themthe victorious Asiaticsunto Danwhich is here substituted for its older name Laish, for which vide Jos 19:47 (Ewald), though regarded by some as not the Laish Dan conquered by the Danites, but probably Dan-jaan, mentioned in 2Sa 24:6 (Havernick, Keil, Kalisch); against which, however, is the statement of Jose. phus (‘Ant.,’ 1.10), that this Dan was one of the sources of the Jordan. Murphy regards Dan as the original designation of the town, which was changed under the Sidonians to Laish (lion), and restored at the conquest. Clericus suggests that the Jordan fountain may have been styled Dan, “Judge,” and the neighboring town Laish, and that the Danites, observing the coincidence of the former with the name of their own tribe, gave it to the city they had conquered. Alford is doubtful whether Dan-juan was really different from Laish.
Gen 14:15
And he divided himself (i.e. his forces) against them, he and his servants (along with the troops of his allies), by night, and (falling on them unexpectedly from different quarters) smote them, and pursued them unto Hobah. A place Choba is mentioned in Judith 15:5 as that to which the Assyrians were pursued by the victorious Israelites. A village of the same name existed near Damascus in the time of Eusebius, and is “probably preserved in the village Hoba, mentioned by Troilo, a quarter of a mile to the north of Damascus” (Keil); or in that of Hobah, two miles outside the walls, or in Burzeh, where there is a Moslem wady, or saint’s tomb, called the sanctuary of Abraham. Which is to the left of (i.e. to the north of, the spectator being supposed to look eastward) Damascus. The metropolis of Syria, on the river Chrysorrhoas, in a large and fertile plain at the foot of Antilibanus, the oldest existing city in the world, being possessed at the present day of 150,000 inhabitants.
Gen 14:16
And he brought back all the goods. Col-harecush. The LXX. translate , as if they read for . And also brought again his brother Lot, and his goods. (LXX.). And the women also, and the people.
HOMILETICS
Gen 14:13-16
The kinsman deliverer, or Abram’s military expedition.
I. ABRAM‘S ELEVATED PIETY.
1. Self-forgetful magnanimity. Had the patriarch possessed a less noble soul, the tidings of his nephew’s capture would almost certainly have kindled in his breast a secret feeling of complacency. But not only in his behavior on the occasion was there the complete absence of any such revengeful disposition as gloats with satisfaction over the punishment of a wrong-doer, there was something like a manifest unconsciousness of having ever suffered injury at Lot’s hands at all.
2. Brotherly compassion. If he did sometimes admit to himself that his nephew had scarcely acted handsomely towards him, any feeling of resentment with which that reflection may have been associated was completely swallowed up by the sorrow which he felt for that nephew’s fate. After all Lot was his dead brother’s son, and was a child of God as well, and he could not choose but be affected by the melancholy news. Besides being self-forgetful, the piety of Abram was sympathetic.
3. Active benevolence. Meekly patient of injuries when inflicted on himself, the patriarch was ever ready to redress the wrongs of others, even of the undeserving. Nor was his philanthropy of that weakly benevolent sort which is always going to do some act of kindness to others, but never does it, or is so unaccountably slow in doing it that it comes to be practically of little use, or that would willingly extend a helping hand to the unfortunate if it could only be done without much trouble; on the contrary, it was prompt, decisive, energetic, and carried through with much labor, and at considerable risk to his own personal safety.
II. ABRAM’S MILITARY GENIUS.
1. Unexpectedly evoked. The last thing which ordinary minds would anticipate as an element in the character of one so good, pious, benevolent, and magnanimous as Abram the Hebrew, there is yet no essential incongruity between the talents of a soldier and the graces of a Christian; while as for the patriarch suddenly discovering all the qualities of a great commander, it is perhaps sufficient to reply that hitherto the crisis had not arrived to call them forth. The annals of warfare, both ancient and modern, attest that true military genius has not always been confined to professors of the soldier’s art, but has oftentimes been discovered, of the rarest kind, in persons who, till summoned forth by Providence, have been engaged in peaceful callings.
2. Brilliantly displayed. In the gallant exploit of the patriarch are exhibited the tactics that from time immemorial have been adopted by all great generalsby Miltiades and Themistocles of Greece, by Julius Caesar, by Belisarius, the general of Justinian, by Oliver Cromwell, by Napoleon, by Stonewall Jackson and Sherman of America, and again by Von Moltke of Prussiacelerity of movement, suddenness of attack, skilful division of forces, outflanking and outmarching of the enemy.
3. Completely successful. The foe was defeated, the prisoners and spoil were recaptured, and it does not appear that Abram or his allies lost a man. That generalship is the best which accomplishes its object at the least expense of soldiers’ blood and subjects’ treasure.
III. ABRAM‘S WONDER–WORKING FAITH. It afforded
1. A sufficient ground on which to go to war. The question as to Abram’s right to mingle contest in the Sodom valley is fairly answered by replying that Abram had the right
(1) of natural affection to attempt the rescue of his relative,
(2) of a sacred humanity to liberate the captive and punish the oppressor, and
(3) of faith. Already God had given him the land, and we are fully warranted in regarding him as acting in this heroic expedition in the capacity of (under God) lord-paramount of the soil.
2. The necessary power with which to prosecute the war. Possessed of military genius though the patriarch was, it is not supposable that he entered upon this campaign against the trained armies of the conquering kings, pursuing them along a difficult and dangerous track, without first casting himself on the Almighty and as his strength. And if that Almighty arm, in order to succor him, took the way of developing the capabilities for warfare which had hitherto been lying dormant in his soul, it was none the less true that the help which he received was Divine.
3. The splendid victory which resulted from the war. Whether the writer to the Hebrews (Gen 11:1-32 :34) thought of Abram when he spoke of faith’s heroes subduing kingdoms and waxing valiant in the fight, it is apparent that Isaiah (Gen 41:2, Gen 41:3) ascribed the triumph of the son of Terah to the grace of God, which thus rewarded the faith which, in obedience to a Divine impulse, sprang to the relief of Lot.
IV. ABRAM‘S TYPICAL CHARACTER. The symbolic foreshadowing of the great kinsman Deliverer is too obvious to be overlooked.
1. In his person the Lord Jesus Christ, like Abram, was the kinsman of those whom he delivered.
2. The work he undertook, like that of Abram, was the emancipation of his brethren.
3. As in the case of Abram, that work consisted in despoiling the principalities and powers of evil.
4. The motive by which he was impelled on this arduous warfare was, like that which inspired the patriarch, love for his kinsmen.
5. The promptitude of Christ in coming to the aid of men was typified by Abram’s celerity in hastening to the rescue of Lot.
6. As the campaign of Abram, so the warfare of Christ was carried through at great expense of toil and suffering to himself.
7. In the faith of Abram was shadowed forth the calm reliance of the Savior that all he did was in obedience to his Father’s will.
8. The success with which the patriarch was rewarded was emblematic of the higher victory of Christ.
Learn
1. To imitate the piety of Abram.
2. To admire in him, if we cannot in ourselves, the possession of superior abilities.
3. To covet earnestly the wonderworking faith which he displayed.
4. To trust in the great kinsman Deliverer of which he was the type.
HOMILIES BY W. ROBERTS
Gen 14:13-16
Abram’s expedition a sermon for the New Testament Church.
I. THE LITTLE ARMY; emblematic of the handful of Christ’s disciples at the first, and of the comparative feebleness of the Church still; yet “God’s strength is ever made perfect in weakness,” and so “the weakness of God becomes stronger than men.”
II. THE TRUSTY CONFEDERATES; regarding the Amorite chieftains as possessors of the true faith, suggestive of the united purpose and action by which the Church of Christ in all its parts should be governed, and of the weakness that springs from divided counsels.
III. THE RAPID MARCH; a picture of the holy celerity and earnest zeal with which the Church should set about her enterprise of conquering the world for Christ; a reminder of how much may be lost by delay.
Fuente: The Complete Pulpit Commentary
Gen 14:13. Abram, the Hebrew It is disputed whether Abram was called the Hebrew from his father Eber, or as coming from beyond the river Euphrates. Those who are inclined to the first, urge, that it was usual to denominate nations and people from some great progenitor; and as Eber was the father of this branch, it was natural to denominate Abram, and so his faithful descendants, from him: that if Abram had been so called only from passing the Euphrates, the name would not have descended to his posterity, who did not come from beyond the river: and that eber, signifying only beyond, it seems too much to add the river to it. But Le Clerc, who is the strongest advocate for the second derivation, remarks, that eber, or heber, signifies the other side, whether of a river, sea, or any other thing: in which sense some people are called transmarine, transalpine, and the like. Accordingly the LXX and Aquila translate it , the stranger, from beyond the river; as if it had been an appellation given to Abram and his family by the Canaanites. Nor can any good reason be offered, why Abram should be called a Hebrew from eber, rather than a Terahite from Terah, &c. Add to this, that it is very improbable, that the Canaanites should know any thing of Abram’s being descended from Eber, whereas it was natural for them to distinguish him by the name of , the Trans-Euphratian, or foreigner, because he not only came from beyond the Euphrates, but shunned all alliance with the Canaanites. And this, at the same time, gives a good reason, why the Ishmaelites, Edomites, and other descendants of Abram, were not called Hebrews; namely, because they incorporated with the Canaanites by marrying their daughters, and so insensibly wore out the distinction. Besides, the name derived from that source, was a perpetual memorandum to all his posterity of their great forefather’s faith in relinquishing his own country, and coming a stranger into a foreign land, at the call of God. And probably, the word eber, though it signifies only beyond, might be used for the sake of shortness: the river, the Euphrates, being perhaps originally added to, but in common phrase dropt from, the sentence. The English word over seems to come from the Hebrew eber, as well as aber in the Welch, which signifies the fall of a lesser water into a greater, and in North-Wales a brook, a stream: from which word, and the name of the river joined to it, are derived many names of towns in Wales, as well as in Scotland, as Aber-deen, Aber-nethy, Aber-gavenny, &c. See Richard’s Welch Dictionary.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Gen 14:13 And there came one that had escaped, and told Abram the Hebrew; for he dwelt in the plain of Mamre the Amorite, brother of Eshcol, and brother of Aner: and these [were] confederate with Abram.
Ver. 13. And there came one that had escaped. ] A Sodomite likely, but a servant to God’s good providence, for Lot’s rescue. “The Lord knoweth how to deliver his,” &c. 2Pe 2:9 He that “led captivity captive,” Eph 4:8 can “turn our captivity as the streams in the south”. Psa 126:4
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Genesis
ABRAM THE HEBREW
Gen 14:13 .
This is a singular designation of Abram as ‘The Hebrew.’ Probably we have in its use here a trace of the customary epithet which he bore among the inhabitants of Canaan, and perhaps the presence of the name in this narrative may indicate the influence of some older account, traditional or written, which owed its authorship to some of them. At all events, this is the first appearance of the name in Scripture. As we all know, it has become that of the nation, but a Jew did not call himself a ‘Hebrew’ except in intercourse with foreigners. As in many other cases, the national name used by other nations was not that by which the people called themselves. Here, obviously, it is not a national name, for the very good reason that there was no nation then. It is a personal epithet, or, in plain English, a nickname, and it means, probably, as the ancient Greek translation of Genesis gives it, neither more nor less than ‘The man from the other side,’ the man that had come across the water. Just as a mediaeval prince bore the sobriquet Outremere-the ‘man from beyond the sea’-so Abram, to the aboriginal, or, at least, long-settled, inhabitants of the country, was known simply as the foreigner, the ‘man from the other side’ of the Jordan, or more probably of the great river Euphrates, the man from across the water.
Now that name may suggest, with a permissible, and, I hope, not misleading play of fancy, just two things, which I seek now to press upon our hearts and consciences. The one is as to how men become Christians, and the other is as to how they look to other people when they are.
1. Men become Christians by a great emigration.
‘Get thee out from thy father’s house, and from thy country, and from thy kindred,’ was the command to Abram. And he became the heir to God’s promises and the father of the faithful, because he did not hesitate a moment to make the plunge and to leave behind him all his past, his associations, his loves, much of his possessions, and, in a very profound sense, his old self, and put a great impassable gulf between him and them all.
Now I am not going to say anything so narrow or foolish as that the Christian life must always begin with a conscious and sudden change; but this I am quite sure of, that in the vast majority of cases of thoroughly and out-and-out religious men, there must be a conscious change, whether it has been diffused through months or years, or concentrated in one burning moment. There has been a beginning; whether it has been like the dawn, or whether it has been like the kindling of a candle, the beginning of the flashing of the divine light into the heart; and the men that are most really under the influence of religious truth can, as a rule, looking back upon their past experience, see that it divides itself into two halves, separated from each other by a profound gulf-the time on the other side, and that on this side, of the great river. We must take heed lest by insisting on any one way of entrance into the kingdom we seem to narrow God’s mercy, or sadden true hearts, or make the method of approach a test of the fact of entrance. God’s city has more than twelve gates; they open to all the thirty-two points of the compass, yet there is, in the religious experience of the truest saints, always something analogous to this change. And what I desire to press upon you is, that unless you are only religious people after the popular superficial fashion of the day, there will be something like it in your lives.
There will be a change in a man’s deepest self, so that he will be a ‘new creature,’ with new tastes, new motives stirring to action, new desires pressing for satisfaction, new loves sweetly filling his heart, new insight into the meanings and true good of life and time guiding his conduct, new aversions withdrawing him from old delights which have become hateful now, new hopes pluming their growing wings, and new powers bearing him along a new road. There will be a change in his relations to God and to God’s will. God in Christ will have become his centre, instead of self, which was so before. He lives in a new world, being himself a new man.
Our Lord uses this very illustration when He says, ‘He that heareth My Word, and believeth Him that sent Me, hath eternal life, and cometh not into judgment, but hath passed out of death into life.’ That is a great migration, is it not, from the condition of a corpse to that of a living man? Paul, too, gives the same idea with a somewhat different turn of the illustration, when he gives ‘thanks to the Father who delivered us out of the power of darkness, and translated us into the kingdom of,’-not, as we might expect to complete the antithesis, ‘the light,’ but-the ‘kingdom of the Son of His love,’ which is the same thing as the light. The illustration is probably drawn from the practice of the ancient conquering monarchs, who, when they subjugated a country, were wont to lead away captive long files of its inhabitants as compulsory colonists, and set them down in another land. Thus the conquering Christ comes, and those whom He conquers by His love, He shifts by a great emigration out of the dominion of that darkness which is at once tyranny and anarchy, and leads them into the happy kingdom of the light.
Thus, then, all Christian men become such, because they turn their backs upon their old selves, and crucify their affections and lusts; and paste down the leaf, as it were, on which their blotted past is writ, and turn over a new and a fairer one. And my question to you, dear brethren, is, Are you men from the other side, who were not born where you live now, and who have passed out of the native Chaldea into the foreign-and yet to the new self home-land of union with God?
2. This designation may be taken as teaching that a Christian should be known as a foreigner, a man from across the water.
Everybody in Canaan that knew Abram at all knew him as not one of themselves. The Hebrew was the name he went by, because his unlikeness to the others was the most conspicuous thing about him, even to the shallowest eye. Abram found himself, when he had migrated into Canaan, in no barbarous country, but plunged at once into the midst of an organised and compact civilisation, that walled its cities, and had the comforts and conveniences and regularities of a settled order; and in the midst of it all, what did he do? He elected to live in a tent. ‘He dwelt in tabernacles, as the Epistle to the Hebrews comments upon his history, ‘because he looked for a city.’ The more his expectations were fixed upon a permanent abode, the more transitory did he make his abode here. If there had been no other city to fill his eyes, he would have gone and lived in some of those that were in the land. If there had been no other order to which he felt himself to belong, he would have had no objection to cast in his lot with the order and the people with whom he lived on friendly terms. But although he bought and sold with them, and fought for them and by their sides, and acquired from them land in which to bury his dead, he was not one of them, but said, ‘No! I am not going into your city. I stay in my tent under this terebinth tree; for I am here as a stranger and a sojourner.’ No doubt there were differences of language, dress, and a hundred other little things which helped the impression made on the men of the land by this strange visitor who lived in amity but in separation, and they are all crystallised in the name which the popular voice gave him, ‘The man from the other side.’
That is the impression which Christian people ought to make in the world. They should be recognised, by even unobservant eyes who know nothing of the inner secret of their lives, as plainly belonging to another order. If we seek to keep fresh in our own minds the consciousness that we do so, it will make itself manifest in all our bearing and actions. So that exhortation to cultivate the continual sense that our true city-the mother city of our hearts and hopes-is in heaven is ever to be reiterated, and as constantly obeyed, as the necessary condition of a life worthy of our true affinities and of our glorious hopes.
Nor less needful is the other exhortation-live by the laws of your own land, not by those of the foreign country where you are for a time. If you do that thoroughly, you will not need to say, ‘I am from another country.’ Your conduct will say it for you. An English ship is a bit of England, in whatever latitude it may be, and however far beyond the three-mile limit of the King’s authority upon the seas it may float. And so, wherever there is a Christian man, there is a bit of God’s kingdom, and over that little speck in the midst of the ocean of the world the flag with the Cross on it should fly, and the laws of the Christ should be the only laws that have currency. If it could be said of us as Haman said to his king about the Jews, that we were a people with laws ‘di<scripRef passage=” Gen 13:1-13 “> from those of all people,’ we should be doing more than, alas! most of us do, to honour Him whom we profess to serve. Follow Christ, and people will be quick enough to say of you ‘The man from the other side,’ ‘He does not belong to our city.’ There is no need for ostentation, nor for saying, ‘Come and see my zeal for the Lord,’ nor for blowing trumpets before us at street corners or elsewhere. The less of all that the better. The more we try to do the common things done by the folk round us, but from another motive, the more powerful will be our witness for our Master.
For instance, when John Knox was in the French galleys, he was fastened to the same oar with some criminal, perhaps a murderer. The two men sat on the same bench, did the same work, tugged at the same heavy sweep, were fed with the same food, suffered the same sorrows. Do you think there was any doubt as to the infinite gulf between them? We may be working side by side, at the very same tasks, and under similar circumstances, with men that have no share in our faith, and no sympathy with our hopes and aspirations, and yet, though doing the same thing, it will not be the same thing. And if we keep Christ before us, and follow His steps who has left us an example, depend upon it people will very soon find out that we are men ‘from across the water.’
Notice, further, how this dissimilarity and obvious aloofness from the order of things in which we dwell is still perfectly compatible with all sorts of helpful associations. The context shows us that. There had come a flood of invasion, under kings with strange and barbarous names, from the far East. They had swept down upon the fertile valley of Siddim, and there had inflicted devastation. Amongst the captives had been Lot, Abram’s relative, and all his goods had been taken. One fugitive, as it appears, had escaped, and the first thing he did was to go straight to ‘the man from the other side,’ and tell him about it, as if sure of sympathy and help. No doubt the relationship between Abram and Lot was the main reason why the panting survivor made his way to the hills where Abram’s tent was pitched, but there was also confidence in his willingness to help the Sodomites who had lost their goods. So it was not to the sons of Heth in Mamre that the fugitive turned in his extremity, but he ‘told Abram the Hebrew.’
I need not narrate over again the familiar story of how, for once in his peaceful life, the ‘friend of God’ girds on his sword and develops military instincts in his prompt and well-planned pursuit, which show that if he did not try to conquer some part of the land which he knew to be his by the will of God, it was not for want of ability, but because he ‘believed God,’ and could wait. We all know how he armed his slaves, and made a swift march to the northern extremity of the land, and then, by a nocturnal surprise, came down upon the marauders and scattered them like chaff, before his onset, and recovered Lot and all the spoil.
Let us learn that, if Christian men will live well apart from the world, they will be able to sympathise with and help the world; and that our religion should fit us for the prompt and heroic undertaking, as it certainly does for the successful accomplishment, of all deeds of brotherly kindness and sympathy, bringing help and solace to the weak and the wearied, liberty to the captives, and hope to the despairing.
I do not believe that Christian men have any business to draw swords now. Abram is in that respect the Old Testament type of a God-fearing hero, with the actual sword in his hands. The New Testament type of a Christian warrior without a sword is not one jot less, but more, heroic. The form of sympathy, help, and ‘public spirit’ which the ‘man from the other side’ displayed is worse than an anachronism now in the light of Christ’s law. It is a contradiction. But the spirit which breathed through Abram’s conduct should be ours. We are bound to ‘seek the peace of the city’ where we dwell as strangers and pilgrims, avoiding no duty of sympathy and help, but by prompt, heroic, self-forgetting service to all the needy, sorrowful, and oppressed, building up such characters for ourselves that fugitives and desperate men shall instinctively turn to men from the other side for that help which, they know full well, the men of the country are too selfish or cowardly to give.
May I venture to suggest yet another and very different application of this name? To the aboriginal inhabitants of heaven, the angels that kept their first estate, redeemed men are possessors of a unique experience; and are the ‘men from the other side.’ They who entered on their pilgrimage through the Red Sea of conversion, pass out of it through the Jordan of death. They who become Christ’s, by the great change of yielding their hearts to Him, and who live here as pilgrims and sojourners, pass dryshod through the stream into His presence. And there they who have always dwelt in the sunny highlands of the true Canaan, gather round them, and call them, not unenvying, perhaps, their experience, ‘The men that have crossed.’ The ‘Hebrews of the Hebrews’ in the heavens are those who have known what it is to be pilgrims and sojourners, and to whom the promise has been fulfilled in the last hour of their journey, ‘When thou passest through the river, I will be with thee.’ They teach the angels a new song who sing, ‘Thou hast led us through fire and through water, and brought us into a wealthy place.’
Fuente: Expositions Of Holy Scripture by Alexander MacLaren
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Gen 14:13-16
13Then a fugitive came and told Abram the Hebrew. Now he was living by the oaks of Mamre the Amorite, brother of Eshcol and brother of Aner, and these were allies with Abram. 14When Abram heard that his relative had been taken captive, he led out his trained men, born in his house, three hundred and eighteen, and went in pursuit as far as Dan. 15He divided his forces against them by night, he and his servants, and defeated them, and pursued them as far as Hobah, which is north of Damascus. 16He brought back all the goods, and also brought back his relative Lot with his possessions, and also the women, and the people.
Gen 14:13 “Abram the Hebrew” The term “Hebrew” (BDB 720) can derive from
1. Eber – a descendant of Shem (cf. Gen 10:21) and Shelah (cf. Gen 10:24). The name means “beyond” (cf. LXX) or “the region across” (BDB 719). If this term designates a people group (cf. Gen 39:14), it is another example of an anachronism denoting a later editor or scribe updating the text.
2. Habiru – name for migrating Semites of the second millennium B.C.; Akkadian for Hebrew (ABD, vol. 3, p. 6); the name itself means “refugees.”
This term is often used to designate Israelites to foreigners. Chapter 14 is unique in the recorded events of Abram’s life.
1. use of “Hebrew” (BDB 720 I)
2. linked to the city of Jerusalem (Salem)
3. use of the title “God Most High” (cf. Gen 14:18-20; Gen 14:22)
Gen 14:14 It is surprising that a force of 318 (plus allies) could defeat a combined army of four Fertile Crescent kings (this is the faith miracle). This defeat is meant to reveal the presence and power of YHWH with Abraham (as Gen 14:17-24; Gen 15:1 clearly show). This is the reason this event is recorded! Also Abram’s use of the title “Melchizedek” recognizes YHWH’s activity beyond Abram’s covenant. Others (i.e., Job, Elihu) also knew and worshiped YHWH, but by a different name (i.e., El Elyon). Abram’s call was not an exclusive act, but a way to reveal YHWH to all the nations.
“trained men” Even though this is a military context, this term (BDB 335) refers to domestic or pastoral training.
A military aspect may be found in the VERB “he led out” (BDB 937, KB 1227, Hiphil IMPERFECT), which may reflect an Akkadian root, “to muster troops,” which follows the Samaritan Pentateuch and the Septuagint.
“as far as Dan” This is another case of a later name being used. Dan (the city) refers to the migration of the tribe of Dan from the Philistine area to the far north in Jos 19:40-48 and Judges 18. Obviously a later editor or scribe is making updates!
Gen 14:15 The UBS’s Handbook on Genesis makes a good comment here.
“Gen 14:15 shows ‘that Abram did not recover Lot in the night raid at Dan, but only later at Hobah” (p. 319).
This city/region “Hobah” (BDB 295) is north of Damascus and is mentioned only here in the Bible. The invading kings and Abram with his allies traveled long distances.
Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley
Hebrew. So called from ‘Eber (Gen 11:14. Compare Gen 10:21; Gen 39:14; Gen 41:12. Num 24:24), from ‘abar, “to pass on” = “he who passed over from beyond” (Greek. hyper), i.e. beyond the Euphrates (Jos 24:2).
he: emph. in contrast with Lot.
these: emph. = these also having a covenant with Abrarn. See Gen 13:17.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Abram and Melchizedek
Gen 14:13-24
Recently discovered monuments confirm this narrative of the confederacy of the kings, but do not tell of their overthrow. Abram might fairly have left Lot to reap as he had sown, but his soul yearned over his weak and entrapped relative, and he set himself to deliver him. Men of faith and prayer are still able to rescue those who are taken captive by the devil at his will. Faith subdues kingdoms. The moment of success is always one of danger. The king of Sodom insidiously proposed that they should share the spoils! But how could Abram live as a pensioner on Gods care, if he feathered his nest with the tainted wealth of Sodom? A previous interview had taken place, which made Abram strong. Melchizedek was king and priest of the tribe which held Jerusalem. Read Heb 7:1-28. He brought bread and wine, and a fresh revelation of the character of God, on which Abram rested his soul. What had he to do with Sodom, who was the child of such a Father? Christ always anticipates Satan. See Luk 22:31.
Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary
one: 1Sa 4:12, Job 1:15
the: Gen 39:14, Gen 40:15, Gen 41:12, Gen 43:32, Exo 2:6, Exo 2:11, Jon 1:9, 2Co 11:22, Phi 2:5
dwelt: Gen 13:18
Mamre: Gen 14:24, Gen 13:18
Amorite: Gen 10:16, Num 21:21
and these: Gen 14:24
Reciprocal: Gen 18:1 – Mamre Gen 21:24 – General Gen 21:32 – General Gen 35:27 – Mamre Num 24:24 – and shall afflict Eber Jer 34:9 – Hebrew Phi 3:5 – an
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Gen 14:13. We have here an account of the only military action we ever find Abram engaged in, and to this he was not prompted by avarice or ambition, but purely by a principle of charity. Considering the impropriety of Lots conduct, he might have found a very plausible pretence for declining to expose himself and his servants to the danger which it was reasonable to suppose would attend the enterprise; but his love to his relation, who, notwithstanding his late error, was, upon the whole, a righteous man, and his compassion for him and his family in their distress, induced him to undertake this difficult and hazardous service, and his faith in the providence and promises of God supported him in it, and brought him through it much to his honour, and for the comfort of his nephew and many others.
Abram is here called the Hebrew, and because the word signifies passage, some have thought that he is so called from his passing the Euphrates; but it is much more probable that he is called so from his great and good ancestor Eber, mentioned Gen 10:24; Gen 11:14, in and by whom the primitive language and true religion were preserved; and, therefore, though Abram had five other progenitors between Eber and him, who were persons of less note, he is rightly denominated from Eber, because he revived the memory and work of Eber, kept up the same language, and eminently propagated the same true religion.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Gen 14:13-17. Abraham Smites the Victors and Rescues Lot.The fugitive, who is wont in such stories to bring the news, tells Abraham, mentioned here as if for the first time. He musters (Sam., LXX) his trained men, on whom as slaves born in his house he could rely more confidently than on purchased slaves, 318 in number (the sum of the letters in the name of Eliezer; see p. 148), and sets off in pursuit. He overtakes them at Dan, a name not borne by Laish till the age of Moses grandson (Jdg 18:29). There, attacking on three sides (cf. Jdg 7:16, 1Sa 11:11, Job 1:17), he smites the army of the four kings by night and pursues them to Hobah. The site is unknown; it is placed by some in the neighbourhood of Damascus, by others twenty hours to the N. of it. Damascus itself is fifteen hours N. of Dan. It is no mere night attack on the rearguard that is meant (cf. Gen 14:17). On his return he is met by the king of Sodom.
Gen 14:17. the king of Sodom: either Beras successor, or the author has carelessly forgotten Gen 14:10, or possibly the subject of fell in Gen 14:10 is the people, not the kings.Shaven: here a proper name, not as in Gen 14:5. For the Kings Vale, see 2Sa 18:18.
Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible
14:13 And there came one that had escaped, and told Abram the Hebrew; for he dwelt in the plain of Mamre the Amorite, brother of Eshcol, and brother of Aner: and these [were] {g} confederate with Abram.
(g) God removed them to join Abram, and preserves him from their idolatry and superstitions.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
Abram could have lost his possessions and his life by getting involved in war with the Mesopotamian kings. He also set himself up as the target for retaliation. Almost everyone in the ancient Near East practiced retaliation, and it is still a major factor in the continuing political turmoil that characterizes the Middle East to this day. The "ancient Near East" is a term that applies to the whole eastern Mediterranean world in ancient times. The "Middle East" is a term that refers to the area roughly between Africa, Europe, and Asia in modern times. People did not forgive and forget; they harbored resentment for acts committed against their ancestors or themselves for generations and took revenge when they thought they could succeed.
Why was Abram willing to take such risks? He probably thought he could win. His love for Lot may have been the primary factor. He did not think, "He’s made his own bed; let him lie in it." Perhaps Abram hoped that Lot had learned his lesson living in Sodom and would return to him. Unfortunately Lot had not learned his lesson but returned to Sodom soon after his release as a prisoner of war. Undoubtedly Abram also had confidence in God’s promises to him (Gen 12:2-3; Gen 12:7).
"We have here a prelude of the future assault of the worldly power upon the kingdom of God established in Canaan; and the importance of this event to sacred history consists in the fact, that the kings of the valley of Jordan and the surrounding country submitted to the worldly power, whilst Abram, on the contrary, with his home-born servants, smote the conquerors and rescued their booty,-a prophetic sign that in the conflict with the power of the world the seed of Abram would not only not be subdued, but would be able to rescue from destruction those who appealed to it for aid." [Note: Keil and Delitzsch, 1:202.]
Some scholars have suggested that Abram’s designation as a Hebrew (Gen 14:13) marked him as a resident alien rather than a semi-nomad. As such he took steps to take possession of the land God had promised him. [Note: See Donald J. Wiseman, "Abraham in History and Tradition. Part I: Abraham the Hebrew," Bibliotheca Sacra 134:534 (April-June 1977):123-30.] He could have been both. [Note: See Yochanan Muffs, "Abraham the Noble Warrior: Patriarchal Politics and Laws of War in Ancient Israel," Journal of Jewish Studies 33:1-2 (Spring-Autumn 1982):81-107.] Albright argued that he was a "donkeyman, donkey driver, caravaneer." [Note: Albright, p. 34.] However most conservative interpreters have concluded that he was a semi-nomadic shepherd. [Note: E.g., Kitchen, The Bible . . ., p. 57. Cf. 46:32, 34; 47:3.] The term "Hebrew" is primarily an ethnic designation in the Old Testament. [Note: Hamilton, p. 405.] Usually people other than Hebrews used it to describe this ethnic group.
"The appearance of the later name ’Dan’ [Gen 14:14] is a post-Mosaic updating of the place name for later readers." [Note: Mathews, Genesis 11:27-50:26, p. 147.]
The situation that Abraham faced taking his 318 men and going into battle against an alliance of four armies was similar to the one Gideon faced in leading 300 men against 135,000 Midianites (Jdg 7:6; Jdg 8:10). The lesson of both passages is similar: God is able to give a trusting and obedient minority victory over ungodly forces that are overwhelmingly superior in numbers.