And it came to pass at that time, that Abimelech and Phichol the chief captain of his host spoke unto Abraham, saying, God [is] with thee in all that thou doest:
22 34 (E, J). The Covenant between Abraham and Abimelech at Beer-sheba
22. Abimelech ] This passage seems to be a continuation of chap. 20.
Phicol the captain of his host ] For this title, cf. 1Sa 14:50; 2Sa 2:8 (where it is applied to Abner); Gen 24:2 (to Joab). It shews that Abimelech was a petty king of some importance.
Here and in Gen 21:32, the LXX inserts another name and title between Abimelech and Phicol, , “Ahuzzath his friend.” This name occurs with that of Phicol again in Gen 26:26.
God is with thee ] Cf. 20, Gen 26:28. Abimelech has had reason to discern the meaning of the description of Abraham, in Gen 20:7, as “a prophet.”
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Gen 21:22
God is with thee in all that thou doest
Christian prosperity
I. ALL CHRISTIAN PROSPERITY IS CONSCIOUSLY IDENTIFIED WITH GOD.
II. ALL CHRISTIAN PROSPERITY IS ALSO CONSCIOUSLY IDENTIFIED WITH CHRISTIAN CHARACTER.
III. ALL CHRISTIAN PROSPERITY IS IDENTIFIED WITH CHRISTIAN ENTERPRISE. Between God blessing a mans labour and God doing a mans labour for him there is a wide difference. God wont pasture the sheep, but God will multiply the flock. God wont dig the ground, but Hell water it with rain and dew.
IV. IN ALL CHRISTIAN PROSPERITY THERE IS A CONSCIOUS INFLUENCE AND POWER. (A. W. Potts.)
The son of the bondwoman
Gods care even for Ishmael–for one who would appear to be outside all covenant blessings–is a most encouraging fact!
1. God delivered him in extremity. He heard his cry and distress. He knew his needs; for God always knows our needs and how to supply them. There is a well for bondmen as well as for the free. Gods living well is to be reached in any position of life. The word is nigh thee, in thine heart, etc. Rom 10:8).
2. God was with the son of the bondwoman as he developed. He was with him as he grew up, and gave him favour in the sight of others. God is ever seeking by His Holy Spirit to mould the characters of the worst for good.
3. God had intentions of grace towards the slave-mothers boy. He gave a promise to him as well as to Isaac.
4. God shewed how He was with Ishmael by quickening his faculties. He became an archer. He had to learn to defend himself, and secure for himself by Gods help a position. The fiery defenders of faith and controversial champions of the truth have their sphere as well as the pious, plodding, pastors of Christs flock. We have all to learn to appreciate diversity of talents, and to remember that skill in any work is the outcome of independence, resolution and energy.
4. Gods care was seen in the selection of the place of abode for the son of the bond-woman. He gave to him the desert for his domain, a place in which he might roam and pitch his tent at his own suggestion. The wilderness was the most suitable place for this man of wild nature. Some grow up under the sweet shadow of the home, and ever find there a resting-place. They occupy themselves in some work at hand, pleasant and profitable; but others wander off, perhaps go to sea, emigrate, engage in sheep-farming, cattle-tending in some wide and lonely ranch, or go to gold-digging and diamond-hunting. God works through all these phases of life to discipline the heart. He follows each one, and cares for all.
5. God also was with Ishmael, securing for him acceptance among others. He was to dwell in the presence of his brethren (Gen 16:12). Though cast out by Abraham he was not cast off by God, or cut off from all interchange with others.
6. God was with Ishmael to the end of his life. He had a shorter life than Isaac. Ishmael died at a hundred and thirty years old, Isaac at a hundred and eighty. Evidently the active, restless, wandering, hazardous life was more wearing and consuming than the calm and meditative life of pastoral Isaac. But that his death was recorded shows that it was noticed by God. (F. Hastings.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 22. At that time] This may either refer to the transactions recorded in the preceding chapter, or to the time of Ishmael’s marriage, but most probably to the former.
God is with thee] melmera daiya, the WORD of Jehovah; see before, Ge 15:1. That the Chaldee paraphrasts use this term, not for a word spoken, but in the same sense in which St. John uses the , the WORD of God, Joh 1:1, must be evident to every unprejudiced reader. See Clarke on Ge 15:1.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
We plainly see that God blesseth and prospereth thee in all thy undertakings.
Of Abimelech, see Gen 20:2.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
22. Abimelech and PhicholHerea proof of the promise (Ge 12:2)being fulfilled, in a native prince wishing to form a solemn leaguewith Abraham. The proposal was reasonable, and agreed to [Ge21:24].
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And it came to pass at that time,…. Not when Ishmael was grown up and married, but when Isaac was weaned and Ishmael was expelled:
that Abimelech, and Phichol, the chief captain of his host, spake unto Abraham; Abimelech was king of Gerar, the same that is spoken of in the preceding chapter, and Phichol was the general of his army; these two great personages came together and paid Abraham a visit, and had some conversation with him, who was still in Gerar, or however in some part of that country not far from it:
saying, God [is] with thee in all that thou doest; greatly prospered him in the things of the world, for of them only could they make a judgment; they saw that he increased in worldly substance, and that his family was increased, and that he succeeded in everything in which he engaged; and, being jealous of his growing greatness and power, were desirous of securing an interest in him and in his favour.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Abimelech’s Treaty with Abraham. – Through the divine blessing which visibly attended Abraham, the Philistine king Abimelech was induced to secure for himself and his descendants the friendship of a man so blessed; and for that purpose he went to Beersheba, with his captain Phicol, to conclude a treaty with him. Abraham was perfectly ready to agree to this; but first of all he complained to him about a well which Abimelech’s men had stolen, i.e., had unjustly appropriated to themselves. Abimelech replied that this act of violence had never been made known to him till that day, and as a matter of course commanded the well to be returned. After the settlement of this dispute the treaty was concluded, and Abraham presented the king with sheep and oxen, as a material pledge that he would reciprocate the kindness shown, and live in friendship with the king and his descendants. Out of this present he selected seven lambs and set them by themselves; and when Abimelech inquired what they were, he told him to take them from his hand, that they might be to him (Abraham) for a witness that he had digged the well. It was not to redeem the well, but to secure the well as his property against any fresh claims on the part of the Philistines, that the present was given; and by the acceptance of it, Abraham’s right of possession was practically and solemnly acknowledged.
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
| Abimelech’s Covenant with Abraham. | B. C. 1892. |
22 And it came to pass at that time, that Abimelech and Phichol the chief captain of his host spake unto Abraham, saying, God is with thee in all that thou doest: 23 Now therefore swear unto me here by God that thou wilt not deal falsely with me, nor with my son, nor with my son’s son: but according to the kindness that I have done unto thee, thou shalt do unto me, and to the land wherein thou hast sojourned. 24 And Abraham said, I will swear. 25 And Abraham reproved Abimelech because of a well of water, which Abimelech’s servants had violently taken away. 26 And Abimelech said, I wot not who hath done this thing: neither didst thou tell me, neither yet heard I of it, but to day. 27 And Abraham took sheep and oxen, and gave them unto Abimelech; and both of them made a covenant. 28 And Abraham set seven ewe lambs of the flock by themselves. 29 And Abimelech said unto Abraham, What mean these seven ewe lambs which thou hast set by themselves? 30 And he said, For these seven ewe lambs shalt thou take of my hand, that they may be a witness unto me, that I have digged this well. 31 Wherefore he called that place Beer-sheba; because there they sware both of them. 32 Thus they made a covenant at Beer-sheba: then Abimelech rose up, and Phichol the chief captain of his host, and they returned into the land of the Philistines.
We have here an account of the treaty between Abimelech and Abraham, in which appears the accomplishment of that promise (ch. xii. 2) that God would make his name great. His friendship is valued, is courted, though a stranger, though a tenant at will to the Canaanites and Perizzites.
I. The league is proposed by Abimelech, and Phichol his prime-minister of state and general of his army.
1. The inducement to it was God’s favour to Abraham (v. 22): “God is with thee in all that thou doest, and we cannot but take notice of it.” Note, (1.) God in his providence sometimes shows his people such tokens for good that their neighbours cannot but take notice of it, Ps. lxxxvi. 17. Their affairs do so visibly prosper, and they have such remarkable success in their undertakings, that a confession is extorted from all about them of God’s presence with them. (2.) It is good being in favour with those that are in favour with God, and having an interest in those that have an interest in heaven, Zech. viii. 23. We will go with you, for we have heard that God is with you. We do well for ourselves if we have fellowship with those that have fellowship with God, 1 John i. 3.
2. The tenour of it was, in general, that there should be a firm and constant friendship between the two families, which should not upon any account be violated. This bond of friendship must be strengthened by the bond of an oath, in which the true God was appealed to, both as a witness of their sincerity and an avenger in case either side were treacherous, v. 23. Observe, (1.) He desires the entail of this league upon his posterity and the extension of it to his people. He would have his son, and his son’s son, and his land likewise, to have the benefit of it. Good men should secure an alliance and communion with the favourites of Heaven, not for themselves only, but for theirs also. (2.) He reminds Abraham of the fair treatment he had found among them: According to the kindness I have done unto thee. As those that have received kindness must return it, so those that have shown kindness may expect it.
II. It is consented to by Abraham, with a particular clause inserted about a well. In Abraham’s part of this transaction observe,
1. He was ready to enter into this league with Abimelech, finding him to be a man of honour and conscience, and that had the fear of God before his eyes: I will swear, v. 24. Note, (1.) Religion does not make men morose and unconversable; I am sure it ought not. We must not, under colour of shunning bad company, be sour to all company, and jealous of every body. (2.) An honest mind does not startle at giving assurances: if Abraham say that he will be true to Abimelech, he is not afraid to swear it; an oath is for confirmation.
2. He prudently settled the matter concerning a well, about which Abimelech’s servants had quarrelled with him. Wells of water, it seems, were choice goods in that country: thanks be to God, that they are not so scarce in ours. (1.) Abraham mildly told Abimelech of it, v. 25. Note, If our brother trespass against us, we must, with the meekness of wisdom, tell him his fault, that the matter may be fairly accommodated and an end made of it, Matt. xviii. 15. (2.) He acquiesced in Abimelech’s justification of himself in this matter: I wot not who has done this thing, v. 26. Many are suspected of injustice and unkindness that are perfectly innocent, and we ought to be glad when they clear themselves. The faults of servants must not be imputed to their masters, unless they know of them and justify them; and no more can be expected from an honest man than that he be ready to do right as soon as he knows that he has done wrong. (3.) He took care to have his title to the well cleared and confirmed, to prevent any disputes or quarrels for the future, v. 30. It is justice, as well as wisdom, to do thus, in perptuam rei memoriam–that the circumstance may be perpetually remembered.
3. He made a very handsome present to Abimelech, v. 27. It was not any thing curious or fine that he presented to him, but that which was valuable and useful–sheep and oxen, in gratitude for Abimelech’s kindness to him, and in token of hearty friendship between them. The interchanging of kind offices is the improving of love: that which is mine is my friend’s.
4. He ratified the covenant by an oath, and registered it by giving a new name to the place (v. 31), Beer-sheba, the well of the oath, in remembrance of the covenant they swore to, that they might be ever mindful of it; or the well of seven, in remembrance of the seven lambs given to Abimelech, as a consideration for his confirming Abraham’s title to that well. Note, Bargains made must be remembered, that we may make them good, and may not break our word through oversight.
Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary
Verses 22-34:
Verses 22-34: These events occurred after the birth of Isaac, possibly after the expulsion of Ishmael. Abimelech sought confirmation of a treaty between himself and Abraham, and between their sons and grandsons. This is the same king whom Abraham had earlier tried to deceive (see ch. 20). Abraham evidently remained in his territory for a considerable time.
“Phichol” appears to be the title of the prime minister or commander-in-chief of the army of Abimelech. Both Phichol and his master were convicted of the reality of Abraham’s God, by the life which Abraham lived and by the evident blessings of God upon him.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
22. And it came to pass at that time. Moses relates, that this covenant was entered into between Abraham and Abimelech, for the purpose of showing, that after various agitations, some repose was, at length, granted to the holy man. He had been constrained, as a wanderer, and without a fixed abode, to move his tent from place to place, during sixty years. But although God would have him to be a sojourner even unto death, yet, under king Abimelech, he granted him a quiet habitation. And it is the design of Moses to show, how it happened, that he occupied one place longer than he was wont. The circumstance of time is to be noted; namely, soon after he had dismissed his son. For it seems that his great trouble was immediately followed by this consolation, not only that he might have some relaxation from continued inconveniences, but that he might be the more cheerful, and might the more quietly occupy himself in the education of his little son Isaac. It is however certain, that the covenant was not, in every respect, an occasion of joy to him; for he perceived that he was tried by indirect methods, and that there were many persons in that region, to whom he was disagreeable and hateful. The king, indeed openly avowed his own suspicions of him: it was, however, the highest honor, that the king of the place should go, of his own accord, to a stranger, to enter into a covenant with him. Yet it may be asked, whether this covenant was made on just and equal conditions, as is the custom among allies? I certainly do not doubt, that Abraham freely paid due honor to the king; nor is it probable that the king intended to detract anything from his own dignity, in order to confer it upon Abraham. What, then, did he do? Truly, while he allowed Abraham a free dwelling-place, he would yet hold him bound to himself by an oath.
God is with thee in all that thou doest. He commences in friendly and bland terms; he does not accuse Abraham nor complain that he had neglected any duty towards himself, but declares that he earnestly desires his friendship; still the conclusion is, that he wishes to be on his guard against him. It may then be asked, Whence had he this suspicion, or fear, first of a stranger, and, secondly, of an honest and moderate man? In the first place, we know that the heathen are often anxious without cause, and are alarmed even in seasons of quiet. Next, Abraham was a man deserving of reverence; the number of servants in his house seemed like a little nation; and there is no doubt, that his virtues would acquire for him great dignity; hence it was, that Abimelech suspected his power. But whereas Abimelech had a private consideration for himself in this matter; the Lord, who best knows how to direct events, provided, in this way, for the repose of his servant. We may, however, learn, from the example of Abraham, if, at any time, the gifts of God excite the enmity of the men of this world against us, to conduct ourselves with such moderation, that they may find nothing amiss in us.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
CRITICAL NOTES.
Gen. 21:22. Phichol.] Name signifies mouth of all, i.e., all-commanding. Probably an official title.
Gen. 21:23. Nor with my son, nor with my sons son.] The LXX. has neither my seed, nor my name. Murphy renders it kin and kith, to represent the conversational alliterative phrase of the original.
Gen. 21:31. Beersheba.] The well of the oath, or, the well of the seven. The latter meaning may have some allusion to the seven lambs by which Abraham secured the possession of the well. (Gen. 21:29-30.) The Heb. word for taking an oath comes from the same root which signifies seven. The reason is, an oath was confirmed by seven witnesses. Herodotus says that the Arabians chose some seven things for the confirmation of the oath. They sware both of them; Heb., were sworn. In Heb., swearing is always represented by the passive form of speech, conveying the idea that one is adjured by another, or has an oath imposed upon him by another.
Gen. 21:32. Thus they made a covenant.] Cut a covenant, according to the usual Heb. expression. Hence, probably, animals were slain, and the covenant thus ratified by the parties passing between the divided portions.
MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPHGen. 21:22-32
ABRAHAM THE FRIEND OF MAN
This treaty between Abimelech and Abraham brings out that kindness and goodwill towards men for which the Patriarch was as remarkable as for his piety towards God. He was to be known afterwards as the Friend of God, and no one can be such without being also the friend of man.
I. He yields readily to the request for his friendship. There were lower, as well as higher motives which led Abimelech to seek the friendship of Abraham. He was a heathen king, having little knowledge of the true God, and very imperfect conceptions of human duty. We cannot suppose that he desired the friendship of Abraham purely on the highest grounds. His motives were a mixture of good and evil.
1. Expediency. There is a worldly, calculating prudence which takes that course most profitable for the time, and regards not its entire moral bearings. This is expediency considered in its bad sense. There is little doubt but that there was some trace of this worldly policy in the conduct of Abimelech. Abraham had become a rich and powerful man, and was every day increasing in influence. It would be, therefore, greatly to the advantage of this king to seek an alliance with him. There is something here, no doubt, of that selfishness to which our poor human nature is so prone.
2. The worship of success. It is the way of the world to idolize success. When men have attained to great prosperity they are credited with many and great virtues, which in humbler ways of life would escape recognition. Men may admire virtue, but they adore worldly splendour and magnificence. The king was not unmindful of the fact that Abraham was a good man and deserved success, yet still the adoration of that success, considered by itself, greatly influenced him in seeking the friendship of a man of such good social standing.
3. The admiration of goodness. We must also credit Abimelech with this higher motive. The facts were clearly before him. In the defeat of the four kings, in the twofold deliverance of Sarah, in the miraculous birth of Isaac, in the growing power of the Patriarch, and in the richness of his heritage of promise, Abimelech had full evidence that this man was greatly favoured and blessed of God. There is a certain atmosphere about good and holy men which others immediately detect, and in which they are compelled to feel awe and reverence. Abraham encouraged this request for his friendship, though the motives which prompted it were not altogether pure. He was ready to swear allegiance and constant friendship (Gen. 21:24). He knew that it is only from weak beginnings that men can advance to the nobility of goodness. He knew that his special position in the Covenant did not cut him off from the rest of mankind. They, too, stood in certain relations to God, and lay under obligations to God which no facts of depravity and no special favours to individual men could set aside. It was not for himself alone that Abraham was thus favoured and visited. He was destined to become a blessing to all the families of mankind.
II. He undertakes the duties of friendship. He freely accepts all the conditions which Abimelech lays down for him.
1. True and righteous dealing. Swear that thou wilt not deal falsely with me (Gen. 21:23). Lasting friendship can only be raised upon the foundations of truth and justice.
2. Gratitude for favours shown. According to the kindness that I have done unto thee, thou shalt do unto me (Gen. 21:23). True friendship is always mindful of favours received. Gratitude towards men is a duty as well as towards God, and must be shown when men (even though imperfectly) reflect the kindness of God.
3. Faithfulness to the faults of a friend. There was a matter of dispute which must be settled before the treaty can be made. Abraham was careful to point out to Abimelech what seemed to be his fault (Gen. 21:25). That openness which shrinks not to point out the faults of another is the duty of true friendship. It is that reproof of the righteous which smites with kind intent. The result of this faithfulness must have been grateful to Abraham, for Abimelech was able to clear himself entirely from blame (Gen. 21:26). Thus, in the long run, it is best to be perfectly open and sincere. A clear conscience is the best safeguard of any true and lasting brotherhood amongst men.
III. He recognises the sacredness of friendship. He gives it the sanctions of religion by appealing to God as a witness to his sincerity (Gen. 21:24). Abraham needed not to be bound in this way by a solemn outward form, but he submitted to it for the good of future generations. He wished these obligations to be strengthened by the external rites of religion. Even though he had seen fit to pledge his bare word, unaccompanied by any outward form, he would still have regarded the Godward aspects of the relationship into which he was about to enter. As one who lived by faith he could not separate any portion of human life or activity from the control and direction of God.
SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS ON THE VERSES
Gen. 21:22. He saw that God was with him. Such was the motive which induced this friendly request. Probably the news of the extraordinary birth of Isaac, and of the various incidents which had grown out of it, had reached the court of Abimelech, and become a topic of conversation. This, he would perhaps say to himself, is a great man, and a great family, and will become a great nation; the blessing of heaven attends him. It is our wisdom, therefore, to take the earliest opportunity to put ourselves on good terms with him. In proposing this, he was acting more for his interest than he was aware of; for God in blessing Abraham had promised to bless them that blessed him, and to curse them that cursed him. In making a covenant therefore with Abraham, he was virtually making a covenant with the God of Abraham.(Bush.)
The evident blessing of God upon the righteous raises a feeling of reverence even in the minds of those who are outside the Church.
He who lives a godly and righteous life will have a growing influence, so that, at length, men will regard him with something of awe and veneration. In this way the humblest Christian gains a dignity and power which marks him as one of Gods nobility. This is the crown of glory which the world sets upon the head of the righteous.
The fact that God is with a man cannot long remain unknown to others.
Abimelech believed that God had blessed Abraham, upon stronger grounds than those afforded by the sight of his temporal prosperity. God had appeared to him in a dream to interpose on behalf of the patriarch. Isaac had been born by an evident interference of the Divine power, so that the family of Abraham seemed destined to achieve greatness and distinction amongst mankind.
Gen. 21:23-24. Swear unto me by God. Such was the solemnity with which he wished the friendship to be confirmed. With this request Abraham complied, though we cannot suppose that he needed to be sworn not to deal falsely; but as posterity was concerned, the more solemn the engagement the better. But why should covenants, promises, oaths be necessary in the commerce of human life? It is, alas, for no other reason than that men are false, treacherous, and perfidious: The manners and customs of past times only serve to convince us that in every age the corruption of man has been so great upon the earth that ordinary obligations will not bind; that without the sanctions of religion neither the sense of honour or justice, or interest, will avail to preserve men in a course of rigid integrity. No other argument is necessary to prove that our nature is depraved than the necessity of solemn appeals to the Deity, making an oath for confirmation the end of all strife.(Bush.)
The necessities of human society require some condescension on the part of believers.
Abraham quickly consents to so reasonable a request from so honourable a person. The wisdom from above is easy to be entreated (Jas. 3:17). The churl Nabal holds it a goodly thing to hold off. It is but manners to reciprocate: the very publicans can find in their hearts to do good to those that have been good to them (Mat. 5:46-47).(Trapp.)
Abraham would readily lend himself to any suggestions which would be likely to promote peace with his neighbours. He who was destined by Providence to bear so prominent a part in the revelation of the Gospel, would be likely to share something of its spirit.
Gen. 21:25. Abraham takes occasion to remonstrate with Abimelech about a well which his people had seized. Wells were extremely valuable in Palestine on account of the long absence of rain between the latter or vernal rain ending in March, and the early or autumnal rain beginning in November. The digging of a well was therefore a matter of the greatest moment, and often gave a certain title to the adjacent fields. Hence the many disputes about wells, as the neighbouring emirs or chieftains were jealous of rights so acquired, and often sought to enter by the strong hand on the labours of patient industry.(Murphy.)
Abraham: A peacemaker.
1. He bears an injury long, without seeking to redress it by forcible means. Men who are disposed to quarrel can easily magnify even the slightest neglect or offence into a gross affront.
2. He is desirous of removing every barrier in the way of peace. He refers now to this matter of the well when Abimelech requests his friendship, in order that there might be nothing to mar it.
Gen. 21:26. The wrong had not been done by him, nor with his consent; it was the act of his servantsthat is, his officers, who, perhaps, had pretended his authority for their unjust spoliation, than which nothing is more common among the minions and creatures of sovereignty. Subjects are wronged, oppressed, despoiled, and yet their grievances never reach the ears of rulers, because the oppressors find it for their own interest to bar access to all voices but their own. Too often are not only the consciences, but the very senses of princes taken into the keeping of corrupt and unprincipled officials.(Bush).
Suspicion is the bane of friendship, and the sooner it is proved to be groundless the better.
Abimelech was no unworthy example of meekness. He shows no irritation at a reproof which, in point of fact, was unjust. He appreciated the pure motives which prompted it.
Gen. 21:27-32. That these animals were intended for sacrifice seems probable from the last clause of the verse, which informs us that they both made, or, as the Hebrew has it, cut a covenanti.e. made a covenant by cutting the victims in pieces. But why the sheep and oxen are said first to have been presented to Abimelech is not so clear, unless it were that Abraham designed to do him greater honour by giving him the animals to offer before the Lord. As if duly mindful of his rank as a subject, and desirous of showing a proper respect to the king, he seems to have studied to give him the precedency in the whole transaction.(Bush).
Abraham lays more stress on a public attestation that he has dug, and is therefore the owner of this well, than on all the rest of the treaty. Seven is the number of sanctity, and therefore of obligation. This number is accordingly figured in some part of the form of confederation; in the present case in the seven ewe lambs, which Abraham tenders, and Abimelech, in token of consent, accepts at his hand. The name of the well is remarkable as an instance of the various meanings attached to nearly the same sound. Even in Hebrew it means the well of seven, or the well of the oath, as the roots of seven, and of the verb meaning to swear, have the same radical letters. Bir es Seba means the well of seven or of the lion.(Murphy).
Thus worthily does the first chapter in the history of treaties open.(Kitto)
The alliance here ratified may be regarded as a prophecy of the all-embracing mercy of the Gospel, whose provisions are for all men, both Jews and Gentiles.
Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell
5. The Covenant with Abimelech (Gen. 21:22-34)
22 And it came to pass at that time, that Abimelech and Phicol the captain of his host spake unto Abraham, saying, God is with thee in all that thou doest: 23 now therefore swear unto me here by God that thou wilt not deal falsely with me, nor with my son, nor with my sons son: but according to the kindness that I have done unto thee, thou shalt do unto me, and to the land wherein thou hast sojourned. 24 And Abraham said, I will swear. 25 And Abraham reproved Abimelech because of the well of water, which Abimelechs servants had violently taken away. 26 And Abimelech said, I know not who hath done this thing: neither didst thou tell me, neither yet heard I of it, but today. 27 And Abraham took sheep and oxen, and gave them unto Abimelech; and they two made a covenant. 28 And Abraham set seven ewe lambs of the flock by themselves. 29 And Abimelech said unto Abraham, What mean these seven ewe lambs which thou hast set by themselves? 30 And he said, These seven ewe lambs shalt thou take of my hand, that it may be a witness unto me, that I have digged this well. 31 Wherefore he called that place Beer-sheba; because there they sware both of them. 32 So they made a covenant at Beer-sheba: and Abimelech rose up, and Phicol the captain of his host, and they returned into the land of the Philistines. 3 3 And Abraham planted a tamarisk tree in Beer-sheba, and called there on the name of Jehovah, the Everlasting God. 34 And Abraham sojourned in the land of the Philistines many days.
At that time, that is, about the time Isaac was born, Jewish scholarship explains this incidentthe dialogue between Abimelech and Abrahamsubstantially as follows (SC, 106107). Abimelech recognized that God was with Abraham, as evident by the latters escape from Sodom (and his abandonment of that area as his place of residence), and the birth of Isaac in Sarahs declining years. On these grounds Abimelech sought peace between them by means of a covenant (in this sense, a pact, a treaty), not on the ground of Abrahams wealth and power. The king reminded the patriarch of his kindness in permitting the latter to live in the land surrounding Gerar, seat of the royal residence, and sought from him a formal declaration of reciprocal courtesy. To give support to this approach and to the proposed pact, the king brought with him, Phicol, the leader of his army (cf. Gen. 26:26). We now learn that the reason for Abimelechs proposal was the fact that a strained relationship had arisen; this, said he, should not be allowed to persist. Whereupon Abraham replied that his only cause of complaint was the theft by violence of one of his wells, by Abimelechs servants. (Skinner (ICCG, 326) thinks that the right to several wells was being contestedon the basis of the frequentative used here; also on the basis of the plural Wells in the LXX, Brooke-McLean adition, 1906; and especially by comparison with the fuller parallel in Gen. 26:18. Skinner translates, And as often as Abraham took Abimelech to task about the wells . . . Abimelech would answer . . . etc.) To this the king replied that he had not been cognizant of the incident until today (i.e., the day on which he was meeting with Abraham to propose this mutual agreement), even chiding the patriarch for not telling him about it. (This would seem to refute Skinner: indeed Abraham might well have dug several wells, but the violence may have occurred at only one of them.) When the air had been cleared by this preliminary exchange, the covenant was actualized. (Some authorities think that the word covenant in Scripture should be used exclusively to signify pacts in which God is one of the parties involved). It must be kept in mind that in these hot countries a well was of great value (cf. Gen. 26:18-21).
Gen. 21:28-30 : The seven ewe-lambs. Abrahams explanation of his purpose in presenting the seven-ewe lambs to the king by themselvesan allusion to the special end which they were intended to serveand the kings acceptance of them, signified Abimelechs renunciation of all claim to the well in question. The gift or exchange of presents frequently accompanied the making of a covenant (cf. 1Ki. 15:19, Isa. 30:6, Hos. 12:1-2), the exchange in this case, however, was not an integral part of the covenant. The covenant itself (berith) was then confirmed by the mutual oath-taking: hence the name Beersheba, meaning the Well of the Oath, after the essential element of the covenant. The first part of the compound means well; but the second part could be either seven or oath. Hence an original and entirely appropriate Well of Seven, that is, Seven-Wells, lent itself to elaboration as Well of the Oath, which popular etymology would be loath to ignore. As a matter of fact, all three connotationswell, seven, and oathfigure in the present episode through the medium of popular interpretation: a dispute over a well is resolved by a treaty that is solemnized by seven ewes, which in turn symbolize a mutual oath (ABG, 159160). But Skinner seems to insist that the seven lambs, a present or gift, was not an understood part of the ceremony, at least on the part of Abimelech. Why can we not let the Bible say what it means and mean what it says? that is, why is it necessary to assume that Abraham himself had nothing to do with the naming of the place, in view of the plain statement in Gen. 21:31 that he did, and that he so named it with regard to the mutual oath taken by the king and himself, the Well of the Oath? (Why does the ultra-academic mentality insist on reading discrepancies into Scripture passages when there is no necessity for such nit-picking) Can it be true that the ultra-educated mind has become so intellectually bogged down with minutiae that it has lost the power to think, or at least to think straight?) It seems that the whole question involved here is presented with complete clarity: that the first group of animals, Gen. 21:27, symbolized the basic pact (cf. Gen. 15:9 ff.), that the second group, on the other hand, the seven ewe-lambs, was clearly labeled a gift, the acceptance of which by Abimelech was to constitute the validation of Abrahams claim to the well. (Obviously Abraham may have caused other wells to be dug after this occurrence, cf. Gen. 26:18). The king and his captain then returned into the land of the Philistines, that is, they simply returned from Beersheba where this took place, to Gerar which was the capital (SC, 107). As Beersheba lay in the same general area it could also be described as being in the land of the Philistines. Beersheba did not belong to Gerar, in the stricter sense; but the Philistines extended their wanderings so far, and claimed the district as their own, as is evident from the fact that Abimelechs people had taken the well from Abraham. On the other hand, Abraham with his numerous flocks would not confine himself to the Wady es Seba, but must have sought for pasturage in the whole surrounding country; and as Abimelech had given him full permission to dwell in the land (Gen. 20:15), he would still, as heretofore, frequently come as far as Gerar, so that his dwelling at Beersheba (Gen. 22:19) might be correctly described as sojourning (nomadizing) in the land of the Philistines (BCOTP, 247). There are several wells in this vicinity, in our day, we are told, the largest of which is a little over 12 feet in diameter; the digging of this well involved cutting through 16 feet of solid rock. . . . Conder found a date indicating that repairs had been carried out as late as the 12 th century A.D. At the time of his visit in 1874, it was 38 feet to the surface of the water (NBD, 138).
Gen. 21:33The tamarisk tree, planted by Abraham in Beersheba, common in Egypt and in Petraea, has been found growing in recent years near the ancient Beersheba. This is a species of stunted bush or gnarled tree of desert areas. The planting of this long-lived tree, with its hard wood, and its long, narrow, thickly clustered, evergreen leaves, was to be a type of the ever-enduring grace of the faithful covenant God. But there is no mention whatever of a cult associated with this place, or of sacrifice in memoriam of the treaty made there. The tamarisk with its firm and durable wood was a fitting emblem of the Everlasting God. Why some make a fetish of this tree, or others say that the tree was only believed to have been planted by Abraham, is beyond our power to explain (EG, 614). Sacred trees, sacred wells, sacred stones, etc., each sacred by virtue of the event which it memorialized, are common throughout the Scriptures (cf. Jos. 4:7; Gen. 35:8; Gen. 13:18; Exo. 3:1-5; cf. Exo. 34:13; Deu. 16:21-22; cf. Deu. 33:16; cf. also Gen. 2:16-17; Gen. 3:6; Rev. 22:2). Jehovah, the Everlasting God. The peculiar term here, El Olam, apparently is to justify the translation, the Eternal. (The critics assume that there was a Cult of Beersheba, among the sacra of which there must have been a sacred tamarisk believed to have been placed there by Abraham. Hence the name of Deity here is explained presumably as being the pre-Israelite name of the local numen [presiding spirit] here identified with Yahwe. But this whole hypothesis is based on the apriori determination to explain everything recorded in the Old Testament solely in the light of pagan mythologies and cults: hence the many such instances in Genesis. The fact seems to be that no concrete evidence exists to justify the notion that in this particular account in Genesis a grove was involved rather than a single tamarisk tree. Similarly, there is no real warrant, outside human speculation, for trying to tie in the name of Jehovah here with any localized numen. I find Langes explanation the simplest and most convincing (CDHCG, 460): Abraham had earlier (Gen. 14:22) designated Jehovah as El Elyon, then recognized him (Gen. 17:1) as El Shaddai. It follows from this that Jehovah had revealed himself to him under various aspects, whose definitions form a parallel to the universal name Elohim. The God of the highest majesty who gave him victory over the kings of the East, the God of miraculous power who bestowed upon him his son Isaac, now revealed himself in his divine covenant-truth, over against the temporary covenant with Abimelech, as the eternal God. And the tamarisk might well signify this also, that the hope of his seed for Canaan should remain green until the most distant future, uninjured by his temporary covenant with Abimelech, which he will hold sacred. (For the tamarisk, cf. also 1Sa. 22:6; 1Sa. 31:13; for The Everlasting God, cf. Exo. 15:18, Psa. 90:2, Jer. 10:10, Deu. 32:40, Dan. 6:26, Rom. 1:20, Eph. 3:9, 2Pe. 3:8; Rev. 1:8; Rev. 4:9; Rev. 22:13, etc.) Speiser (ABG, 159): This need not, however, refer to the local deity of Beer-sheba, but may be a local epithet of a deity called upon to support a formal treaty that is expected to be valid for all time. Gen. 21:34More and more Abraham, and later his son Isaac, saw that this southern extremity of the land (Palestine) was best suited to his sojourning. (This word sojourning is indeed the key to Abrahams life throughout: cf. Heb. 11:8-10). Many daysaccording to Rashis calculations: More than in Hebron: in Hebron he dwelt twenty-five years but here twenty-six years (SC, 108). (Cf. Gen. 22:19; Gen. 26:23-33; Gen. 28:10; Gen. 46:1).
FOR MEDITATION AND SERMONIZING
The Allegory of Sarah and Hagar
Gal. 4:21-31, cf. 2Co. 3:1-18, Rev. 21:2. An allegory is defined as a sustained comparison, as a prolonged metaphor, in which typically a series of actions are symbolic of other actions (Webster). In the allegory of Sarah and Hagar the Apostle certainly points up the principle of interpretation on which we have insisted, in this work on Genesis, from the very beginning, namely, that no Scripture passage or incident can be clearly understood, or interpreted, except in the light of the teaching of the Bible as a whole. Failure to recognize this norm is responsible for ninety per cent, I should say, of the doctrinal confusion that abounds in the nominal Christian world.
In our text the Apostle teaches us that in Hagar and Sarah we have an allegory of the Old and the New Covenants respectively (in stereotyped form, the two Testaments which make up the entire Bible). On the basis of this allegorical interpretation, we find the following comparisons (in this case, points of difference):
HAGAR
SARAH
(fugitive, flight)
(princess)
__the bondwoman, slave, Gen. 21:10; Gen. 21:12; Gal. 4:30.
__the freewoman, the wife, Gen. 17:15-19, Gal. 4:31.
Ishmael, God hears, the child of bondage, Gen. 16:15, Gal. 4:21-31.
__Isaac, laughter, the child of Divine promise, Gen. 17:19; Gen. 18:14; Gen. 21:2; Gal. 4:23.
__the Old Covenant, which engendered unto bondage, Gal. 4:24.
__the New Covenant, which engenders unto freedom, Gal. 4:26, Joh. 8:31-32, Rom. 8:1-11, Jas. 1:25.
__made with the fleshly seed of Abraham, Gen. 12:1-3; Gen. 17:7; Deu. 5:1-5, Jer. 31:31-34.
__made with the spiritual seed of Abraham, those redeemed by Christ Jesus, Gal. 3:23-29, 1Co. 12:13, 1Pe. 2:1-5.
__mediated by Moses, Deu. 5:4-5; Joh. 1:17; Joh. 7:19; Gal. 3:18-20.
__mediated by Christ, 1Ti. 2:5; Heb. 8:1-6; Heb. 9:15; Heb. 12:24.
__included Jews (and proselytes) only, Gen. 17:9-14.
__includes all obedient believers in Christ, both Gentiles and Jews, Eph. 2:11-22; Eph. 3:6-7; Rom. 11:28-32; Gal. 3:23-29.
__that of natural or fleshly birth (generation), Gen. 17:13.
__that of spiritual birth (re generation), Joh. 3:1-7; Rom. 5:5; Rom. 8:1-11; 1Co. 3:16; 1Co. 6:19; Gal. 5:22-25, 2Co. 3:1-3, Tit. 3:5.
__that of fleshly circumcision, as the sign and seal thereof, hence infants and heathen servants, who had to be taught to know the Lord after their induction into the Covenant by circumcision, Gen. 17:9-14; Joh. 3:6; Joh. 7:22; Act. 7:8; Jer. 31:31-34; Heb. 8:7-12.
__that of spiritual circumcision as the sign and seal thereof, Rom. 2:29, Eph. 2:11, Php. 3:3, Col. 2:9-12. Cf. Act. 2:38, Joh. 3:5; Rom. 5:5; Rom. 6:1-9; Gal. 3:27, 2Co. 1:22, 1Co. 3:16; 1Co. 6:19. (See under Part 30, Circumcision of the Heart.)
that of an earthly (the Levitical) priesthood, Exo. 28:1, Heb. 5:4; Heb. 7:1-9.
__that of the priesthood of all obedient believers, 2Pe. 2:5; 2Pe. 2:9; Rev. 1:6, Rom. 12:1.
__that of an earthly (the Aaronic) high priesthood, Lev. 8:1-9.
__that of the royal High Priest hood of Christ, after the order of Melchizedek, i.e., the King-Priest without beginning of days or end of life, Psa. 110:4; Heb., chs. 7, 8, 9, 10.
__that of Law, Joh. 1:17, the bond written in ordinances, Col. 2:14, Rom. 2:12-16, Luk. 24:44, etc.
__that of Grace (unmerited favor), Joh. 1:27, Rom. 3:24; Rom. 7:4; Rom. 8:3; Rom. 10:4; Eph. 2:8, Tit. 3:7, Act. 20:24, etc.
__that of Law written on tables of stone, Exo. 32:15, Deu. 10:4, Heb. 9:4, 2Co. 3:3.
__that of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus, Rom. 8:2, 1Co. 15:45, Joh. 6:63; Joh. 6:68; written on tablets of human hearts, 2Co. 3:3 (R.S.V.); hence, by the hearing of faith, Gal. 3:2. (Cf. also Jer. 31:33, Eze. 11:19).
__that of the letter, i.e., of the Mosaic Law regarded as a yoke of externalism, a system that possessed no life of its own, and inspired no life in others. Rom. 3:19-20.
__that of the spirit, 2Co. 3:3, Rom. 3:21-27; Joh. 6:63; Rom. 8:1-11; that which makes for freedom in Christ Jesus, Joh. 8:31-32, Jas. 1:25; freedom both from the guilt of sin (Eze. 18:19-20; and from the consequences of sin, Exo. 20:5-6, and from passion, pride, superstition, prejudice, etc., as well, Joh. 6:63.
__that of the ministration of death, 2Co. 3:7; that is, the Law passes the death sentence on all who disobey it, 1Co. 15:56, Rom. 5:12.
that of the ministration of the spirit, Rom. 7:6; Rom. 8:6; Joh. 6:63; 2Co. 3:6.
__that of the ministration of condemnation, 2Co. 3:9; the system of thou-shalt nots, disobedience to which was sin, and usually incurred the death penalty, e.g., Num. 15:32-36; Joh. 8:5.
__that of the ministration of righteousness, i.e., justification, Rom. 5:1-11. Cf. also Rom. 2:27-29; Rom. 7:6; Rom. 8:11; Gal. 5:8, 1Co. 15:45. Joh. 8:5the Law would stone the adulteress; the Gospel said to her, Go, and sin no more.
__that of a system of shadows or types, Heb., chs. 9, 10; cf. Rom. 5:14, 1Pe. 3:19-21.
__that of the antitypes, the realities of heavenly things, Heb. 8:5, also ch. 10.
__that system under which the gifts and powers of the Holy Spirit were bestowed only on individuals to qualify them for tasks which God commissioned them to perform, Gen. 20:7, Neh. 9:9-30, Isa. 63:10-15; Num. 11:17; Num. 11:25-30; Num. 27:18-23; Exo. 35:30-35; Jdg. 4:4; Jdg. 3:10; Jdg. 11:29; Jdg. 14:6; Jdg. 14:14; Jdg. 14:19; 1Sa. 11:6; 1Sa. 16:13; 2Sa. 23:1-2; 1Ch. 28:11-12; cf. Neh. 9:20, 2Pe. 1:21, 1Pe. 1:10-12; hence, imperfect in the sense that it lacked the promises connected with the Gospel, Jer. 31:31-34, Heb. 8:7-12; Heb. 9:11-15; Heb. 10:1-18.
__that system under which all obedient believersthe churchshare the indwelling of the Spirit, Joh. 7:37-39, Act. 2:38, Rom. 5:5, 1Co. 3:16; 1Co. 6:19; Rom. 8:11, 1Co. 12:13, Rom. 14:17, 1Pe. 1:2; hence, said to be enacted upon better promises, viz., remission of sins, the indwelling of the Spirit, and eternal life, Act. 2:38; Rom. 5:5; Rom. 8:9-11, 2Co. 1:22; Eph. 4:30; Eph. 5:18; Mat. 25:46, Rom. 6:23, Joh. 3:16.
Farrar (PC, Second Corinthians, 58): In other words, not of the Law, but of the Gospel; not of that which is dead, but of that which is living; not of that which is deathful, but of that which is life-giving; not of bondage, but of freedom; not of mutilation, but of self-control; not of the outward, but of the inward; not of works, but of grace; not of menace, but of promise; not of curse, but of blessing; not of wrath, but of love; not of Moses, but of Christ. This is the theme which St. Paul develops especially in the Epistles to the Romans and the Galatians (see Rom. 2:29; Rom. 3:20; Rom. 7:6-11; Rom. 8:2; Gal. 3:10; Gal. 5:4, etc.).
On Gal. 4:22-25, Mackintosh (NG, 181) writes: The flesh is, in this important passage, contrasted with promise; and thus we not only get the divine idea as to what the term flesh implies, but also as to Abrahams effort to obtain the seed by means of Hagar, instead of resting in Gods promise. The two covenants are allegorized by Hagar and Sarah, and are diametrically opposite, the one to the other. The one gendering to bondage, inasmuch as it raised the question as to mans competency to do and not to do, and made life entirely dependent upon that competency. The man that doeth these things shall live in them. This was the Hagar-covenant. But the Sarah-covenant reveals God as the God of promise, which promise is entirely independent of man, and founded upon Gods willingness and ability to fulfill it. When God makes a promise, there is no if attached thereto. He makes it unconditionally, and is resolved to fulfill it; and faith rests in Him, in perfect liberty of heart. It needs no effort of nature to reach the accomplishment of a divine promise. Here was precisely where Abraham and Sarah failed. They made an effort of nature to reach a certain end, which end was absolutely secured by a promise of God. This is the grand mistake of unbelief. By its restless activity, it raises hazy mist around the soul, which hinders the beams of the divine glory from reaching it. He could do there no mighty works, because of their unbelief. One great characteristic virtue of faith is, that it ever leaves the platform clear for God to show Himself; and truly, when He shows Himself, man must take the place of a happy worshiper. Again: Hence, therefore, a man who tells me, You must be so and so, in order to be saved, robs the cross of all its glory, and robs me of all my peace. If salvation depends upon our being or doing aught, we shall inevitably be lost. Thank God, it does not; for the great fundamental principles of the gospel is that God is ALL: man is NOTHING. It is not a mixture of God and manit is all of God. The peace of the Gospel does not repose in part on Christs work and in part on mans work; it reposes wholly on Christs work, because that work is perfectperfect forever; and it renders all who put their trust in it as perfect as itself (p. 183). (Cf. Joh. 1:29).
The law addresses man, tests him, proves him a wreck, puts him under a curse. It not only puts him there, but keeps him there as long as he is occupied with it. The Gospel, on the other hand, recognizes that man is lost, in need of a Savior. So the Gospel reveals God as He isthe Savior of the lost, the Pardoner of the guilty, the Quickener of the dead. It exhibits Him as extending His ineffable grace in offers of redemption. There is nothing in manfor who could expect anything out of a bankrupt?that might enable him to achieve redemption no matter how strenuously he might tug at his own bootstraps. There is no provision in any law for self-redemption: redemption can occur only when the true owner buys back his own property. God is the owner of all thingsthe earth and the fulness thereof, all things non-living and living, including man. Therefore, since man has chosen to mortgage himself in sin, he simply cannot be redeemed unless and until his original owner pays the ransom price and so buys him back: that ransom price was paid on Calvary. God must independently exhibit His own grace to the fallen creatures (Rom. 3:23, Col. 1:21-22; Rom. 6:6; Rom. 7:14; Eph. 2:1, Gal. 4:3, Heb. 2:17, Mat. 20:28, 1Ti. 2:5-6, etc.). And the Galatians, like Abraham of old, were going away from God, and depending upon the flesh. They were returning to bondage, and to go back unto the Law was to put themselves back under the curse of sin, cf. Gal. 3:1-14.
While the birth of Isaac filled Sarahs heart with laughter, it also brought out the true character of the bondwomans son. So the inauguration of the New Covenant brought out by way of contrast the true character of the Old. The Old was the tutor leading us unto Christ: it served the ideals of its day. But the New is of Christ, and therefore we who are in Christ (Rom. 8:1) are no longer under the Old. The birth of Isaac proved to be to Abrahams household what the implantation of a new heart is to the soul of the sinner. The son of the bondwoman could never be anything but that. He might become a great archer; he might dwell in the wilderness; he might become the ancestor of twelve princesbut he was still the son of a bond-woman. On the other hand, no matter how despised, how weak, how powerless Isaac might be, he was still the son of the freewoman. Their very natures were different (cf. Joh. 3:6, Rom. 8:1-11).
The bondwoman represents the Covenant of Law, and her son represents the works of the Law. This is very plain. The former genders only to bondage; she can never bring forth a free man, because she herself is a bondwoman. The Law of Moses never gave liberty, as long as the individual was alive and it ruled him. I can never be truly free if I am under the dominion of the Law. I can be free only under grace, appropriated by faith (Act. 15:11, Eph. 2:8, Tit. 2:11, Rom. 3:26). Wherefore, when the New Covenant was ratified, it was necessary that the Old be cast out (abrogated). (Cf. Col. 2:13-15, Heb. 8:13, Gal. 3:23-25). Thus, in the casting out of the bondwoman, Hagar, the allegory of Sarah and Hagar is complete. (See again art., The Two Covenants, Part Thirty, supra. Read also Augustines great work, The City of God; cf. Gal. 4:26, Rev. 21:1-4.)
Infant Baptism
(Review Circumcision of the Heart, Part Thirty, supra. The following is added verbatim from the dialectic of the little book, On the Rock (pp. 43, 44), by D. R. Dungan, pioneer preacher of the Restoration Movement, It should be considered as complementary, and conclusive (I should say) to any study of the Covenants.)
I will give you a few, as I think, valid reasons for not baptizing infants:
1. It is without Scriptural authority, Neither Christ nor any one of the apostles ever commanded it.
2. It supplants believers baptism, which the Lord did command.
3. It has a tendency to subvert true conversion, by bringing persons into the church in infancy, causing them to trust to that for salvation.
4. It deprives one of the pleasure of obedience.
5. It involves uncertainty as to having been baptized.
6. It teaches baptismal regeneration. Indeed, baptismal regeneration gave rise to infant baptism.
7. It changes the order of Christs commission to His apostles; their first duty according to that, was to teach, or preach the gospel; but, according to this doctrine, their first duty was to baptize.
8. To be baptized is an act of obedience, but an infant can not obey an authority it knows nothing about.
9. Peter says that baptism is the answer of a good conscience, but the infant can have no conscience in the matter.
10. Baptism is coupled with repentance and faith, but infants are incapable of either.
11. Baptism was coupled with calling on the name of the Lord by those who were baptized, but infants cannot do that.
12. Those baptized by divine authority gave satisfactory evidence of faith, by a confession, before they were baptized, but infants can not.
13. Infant baptism is generally employed to bring them into the church, a place in which they are in no way qualified to be. Church members in the days of the apostles, first, gave heed to the apostles teaching; attended to the fellowship; third, partook of the Lords Supper; fourth, engaged in prayer; fifth, did not dare to willfully neglect the assembly of the saints; sixth, exhorted one another; seventh, engaged in the public charities that were imposed upon them at the time; eighth, exhibited the fruits of the Spirit. Now infants can do none of these things, and hence can not be members of the church.
14. It set at naught all change of heart as necessarily preceding baptism.
(To this we add: infant christening, commonly called infant baptism, is really infant aspersion (sprinkling), or infant affusion (pouring). Real infant baptism is infant immersion, the practice of Greek Orthodoxy from the first.)
REVIEW QUESTIONS ON PART THIRTY-THREE
1.
Locate the Negeb, Gerar, the way of Shur. What mining operations were carried on in this area in patriarchal times?
2.
To what area did Abraham migrate after the destruction of the Cities of the Plain? What probably prompted this move?
3.
What evidence do we have that the Philistines were in this area even before patriarchal times?
4.
From what Mediterranean areas did the Philistines come?
5.
Explain Caphtor and Caphtorian.
6.
What did the word Abimelech signify?
7.
What probably was Abimelechs motive for taking Sarah into his harem?
8.
What affliction did God put on the house of Abimelech because of this action?
9.
What does this account indicate about Abimelechs general moral standards?
10.
Name the outstanding dream experiences related in the Bible.
11.
List some of the more important Biblically-related vision-experiences.
12.
How did these differ from theophanies?
13.
What were the functions of a prophet? In what sense was Abraham a prophet?
14.
What did God order Abimelech to do by way of restitution for the wrong he had committed?
15.
How did Abraham account for his own action with respect to Abimelech and Sarah?
16.
What were the details of Abimelechs response (restitution) ?
17.
What was the result of Abrahams intercession for Abimelech?
18.
How does Abimelech compare with Pharaoh in the similar incident recorded in ch. 12?
19.
What seems to have been Gods over-all design in His dealing with the persons involved?
20.
In what three chapters of Genesis do we find this theme of a sister-wife relationship recorded, and who were the persons involved in each case?
21.
What added explanation did Abraham make to Abimelech that he had not made to Pharaoh? How account for this added disclosure?
22.
On what grounds do we reach the conclusion that these three accounts involving sister-wife relationships were accounts of three different episodes?
23.
List the circumstantial differences in the two narratives.
24.
Is it reasonable to assume a priori that similar events are necessarily identical?
25.
How does Dr. Speiser relate Human customary law to these sister-wife episodes?
26.
What are some of the objections to this view?
27.
In what sense was Isaacs conception and birth a special demonstration of Divine power?
28.
How old was Abraham when Isaac was born? How long had he waited for the fulfillment of the Divine promise?
29.
What did the name Isaac mean? What was the basis for giving the boy this name?
30.
What aroused Sarahs resentment against Hagar and her son? What did she demand of Abraham?
31.
How does Skinners explanation of Sarahs attitude differ from that of Leupold et al?
32.
How does Gal. 4:29 give us the determination of this problem?
33.
What was Abrahams personal reaction to Sarahs demand that Hagar and her son be cast out?
34.
What reassurance did God give Abraham about the future of Ishmael and his progeny?
35.
What is the simplest and obvious meaning of Gen. 21:14?
36.
How does Haley explain Gen. 21:14-18?
37.
How does Genesis describe Hagars and Ishmaels condition in the wilderness of Beer-sheba?
38.
How did Divine succor come to Hagar and her son? What did God promise with regard to Ishmaels future? What circumstances of his future are disclosed here?
39.
Locate geographically the Wilderness of Beersheba, the Wilderness of Paran, and the Wilderness of Zin.
40.
What role does Beersheba play in the story of the patriarchal age?
41.
How long did Abraham continue to sojourn in the region of Beersheba?
42.
What kind of covenant did Abimelech now seek with Abraham? What apparently prompted him to propose this covenant?
43.
What seems to have been the cause of the strained relationship between the patriarch and the king?
44.
What was the importance of wells in these countries?
45.
In what way was the covenant confirmed in this instance?
46.
What was the purpose of Abrahams gift of the seven ewe-lambs?
47.
Give Dr. Speisers explanation of the etymology of the name Beersheba.
48.
What claim apparently was validated by Abimelechs acceptance of the seven ewe-lambs?
49.
In what sense is Beersheba said to have been in the land of the Philistines?
50.
Explain the significance of Abrahams planting of the tamarisk tree in Beersheba. Is there any significant evidence that this was in a grove or that the place was the locus of a pagan cult?
51.
What general forms do memorials take in Scripture? That is, what are the different kinds?
52.
Explain the significance of the name El Olam.
53.
Restate Langes exposition of the significance of this name.
54.
How many years did Abraham spend in this region, in comparison with the length of his sojourn near Hebron?
55.
Why is the word sojourn so significant in explaining Abrahams movements?
56.
Explain what is meant by the Allegory of Sarah and Hagar. List the essential features of this allegory.
57.
Review the section of Part Thirty which has to do with circumcision of the heart, showing precisely what Scripture teaches spiritual circumcision to be.
58.
What reasons are given by Dungan for not practising what is called infant baptism? How is infant baptism related to spiritual circumsision?
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
ABIMELECHS COVENANT WITH ABRAHAM.
(22) Abimelech and Phichol.Abimelech, that is Father-King, was the title not only of the king of Gerar, but of the kings of the Philistines generally (Gen. 26:1; 1Sa. 21:10, marg.; Psalms 34, tit.). In like manner Phichol, mouth of all, seems to have been the official designation of the prime minister, and commander-in-chief. This visit of the king and his vizier appears to have taken place some considerable time after the beginning of the sojourn of Abraham at Gerar; for the friendly feelings which then existed had evidently given way to a coolness, occasioned by the quarrels between their herdsmen. In this narrative, Abraham appears as a chieftain powerful enough for a king to wish to make an alliance with him; and thus his abandonment of Sarah, and his receiving of presents in compensation for the wrong done her, seems the more unworthy of him. Abimelech, on the other hand, acts generously as of old, and shows no signs of ill-will at the growing power of one whose expectation was that his race would possess the whole land.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
COVENANT BETWEEN ABRAHAM AND ABIMELECH, Gen 21:22-34.
22. At that time The time of Ishmael’s expulsion . Phichol, which means mouth of all, is supposed to be, like the name Abimelech, an official title . Here, and at Gen 26:26, the name is given to the chief captain of his host, a sort of prime officer and minister to the king.
God is with thee This fact had been strikingly manifest to Abimelech in the matters related in chap. 20, and probably other incidents of God’s care for Abraham had been made known to him. He, therefore, desired a closer alliance with him.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘And so it was at that time that Abimelech, and Phicol the captain of his host, spoke to Abraham saying, “God is with you in all that you do. Now therefore swear to me here by God that you will not deal falsely with me, nor with my son, nor with my son’s son. But in accordance with the kindness that I have done to you, you shall do to me and to the land wherein you have sojourned ”.’
While it is clear that this has in mind Abraham’s reputation as a ‘prophet’, who thus has extraordinary powers and influence with the divine, gained in Genesis 20, it would not have arisen unless Abraham’s family tribe with its private army had been seen as a real threat (Gen 21:23), and that clearly indicates that the ‘host’ over which Phicol is captain is not all that large. They are not speaking as a powerful nation but as a fair sized but vulnerable group (compare Gen 26:16).
The names Abimelech and Phicol occur again in Genesis 26 (see especially Gen 26:26). This may be because young men have grown old, or because the names Abimelech and Phicol were titles assumed by the leader and military captain of the group. We can compare the Egyptian title ‘Pharaoh’ which was used as a name and how ‘Tartan’ was the name applied to Assyrian generals (2Ki 18:17; Isa 20:1) – as we know from inscriptions.
Abimelech is a Semitic name meaning ‘Melech (or ‘the divine king’ – later known as Molech to the Israelites because the vowels were changed to indicate abomination) is my father’. It is used of Achish, the Philistine king of Gath, in the superscription to Psalms 34, demonstrating its connection with the Philistines. It would be prudent for the leader of foreign traders to have a Semitic sounding name. Phicol is of unknown provenance.
“God is with you in all that you do”. Abraham’s local reputation as a prophet has never been forgotten. The group are somewhat afraid of his divine connections.
“Now therefore swear to me here by God –”. The specific aim of the approach is a treaty, confirming the previous treaty and expanding it. In return for certain rights yet to be agreed the tribe were to swear friendship with Abimelech and his people. ‘The kindness that I have shown to you’ covers some of those rights.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Abraham’s Covenant with Abimelech Gen 21:22-34 gives the account of Abraham’s covenant with Abimelech.
Gen 21:22 And it came to pass at that time, that Abimelech and Phichol the chief captain of his host spake unto Abraham, saying, God is with thee in all that thou doest:
Gen 21:23 Gen 21:24 Gen 21:25 Gen 21:26 Gen 21:27 Gen 21:28 Gen 21:29 Gen 21:30 Gen 21:31 Gen 21:31
Comments – We find that the place was named Beersheba because Abraham made a covenant with Abimelech there, and because Isaac made a covenant with him as well (Gen 26:26-33).
Gen 26:33, “And he called it Shebah: therefore the name of the city is Beersheba unto this day.”
Gen 21:31 “because they sware both of them” – Comments – To swear means to give one’s word, to bind oneself with an oath. The origin of the verb “sware” is the noun “sheba,” which means “seven.” To swear meant either to “completely bind oneself,” that is, to repeat some detail of the oath seven times. Perhaps this is why Abraham gave seven lambs to Abimelech here as a part of the oath.
Gen 21:32 Thus they made a covenant at Beersheba: then Abimelech rose up, and Phichol the chief captain of his host, and they returned into the land of the Philistines.
Gen 21:33 Gen 21:34 The Covenant Between Abraham and Abimelech
v. 22. And it came to pass at that time that Abimelech and Phichol, the chief captain of his host, spake unto Abraham, saying, God is with thee in all that thou doest; v. 23. now, therefore, swear unto me here by God that thou wilt not deal falsely with me, nor with my son, nor with my son’s son, but according to the kindness that I have done unto thee thou shalt do unto me and to the land wherein thou hast sojourned. v. 24. And Abraham said, I will swear. v. 25. And Abraham reproved Abimelech because of a well of water which Abimelech’s servants had violently taken away. v. 26. And Abimelech said, I wot not who hath done this thing, neither didst thou tell me, neither yet heard I of it but today. v. 27. And Abraham took sheep and oxen and gave them unto Abimelech; and both of them made a covenant. v. 28. And Abraham set seven ewe lambs of the flock by themselves.
v. 29. And Abimelech said unto Abraham, What mean these seven ewe lambs which thou hast set by themselves? v. 30. And he said, For these seven ewe lambs shalt thou take of my hand, that they may be a witness unto me that I have digged this well. v. 31. Wherefore she called that place Beersheba, because there they sware both of them. v. 32. Thus they made a covenant at Beersheba. Then Abimelech rose up and Phichol, the chief captain of his host, and they returned in to the land of the Philistines, v. 33. And Abraham planted a grove in Beersheba, and called there on the name of the Lord, the everlasting God.
v. 34. And Abraham sojourned in the Philistines’ land many days. EXPOSITION
Gen 21:22
And it came to pass at that time,possibly in immediate sequence to the incident of the preceding chapter, but, “according to the common law of Hebrew narrative, probably not long after the birth of Isaac.” (Murphy)that Abimelechthe king of Gerar (Gen 20:2; Gen 26:1, Gen 26:16)and Phi-cholif the name be Shemitic, “mouth of all,” i.e. spokesman of all (Murphy), ruler of all (Gesenius); or “the distinguished” (Furst); believed to have been a titular designation of the Philistine monarch’s grand vizier or prime minister (Lange, ‘Speaker’s Commentary’), who was alsothe chief captain of his host (i.e. the commander-in-chief of his forces) spake unto Abraham (having come from Gerar for the purpose), saying, God is with thee in all that thou doesta conviction derived from his former acquaintance with the patriarch (Gen 20:1-18.), his knowledge of Isaac’s birth, and his general observation of the patriarch’s prosperity.
Gen 21:23
Now therefore swear unto me here by Godthe verb to swear is derived from the Hebrew numeral seven, inasmuch as the septennary number was sacred, and oaths were confirmed either by seven sacrifices (Gen 21:28) or by seven witnesses and pledgesthat thou wilt not deal falsely with me,literally, if thou shalt lie unto me; a common form of oath in Hebrew, in which the other member of the sentence is for emphasis left unexpressed (cf. Rth 1:17, and vide Gen 14:23). As a prince, Abimelech was afraid of Abraham’s growing power; as a good man, he insures the safety of himself and his dominions not by resorting to war, but by forming an amicable treaty with his neighbornor with my son, nor with my son’s son: (LXX.); posteri et stirps (Vulgate); offspring and progeny (Kalisch); kith and kin (Murphy)but according to the kindness that I have done unto thee (vide Gen 20:15), thou shalt do unto me, and to the land wherein thou hast sojournedthe land being put for the people (cf. Num 14:13).
Gen 21:24
And Abraham said, I will swear. Only before concluding the agreement there was a matter of a more personal character that required settlement.
Gen 21:25
And Abraham reproved (literally, reasoned with, and proved to the satisfaction of) Abimelech (who was, until informed, entirely unacquainted with the action of his servants) because of a well of water, which Abimelech’s servants had violently taken away. The greatest possible injury of a material kind that could be done to a nomads chief was the all faction of his water supplies. Hence “the ownership of wells m Palestine was as jealously guarded as the possession of a mine in our own” (Inglis). Contests for wells “are now very common all over the country, but more especially in the southern deserts”.
Gen 21:26
And Abimelech said, I wet not who hath done this thing. There is no reason to question the sincerity of the Philistine monarch in disclaiming all knowledge of the act of robbery committed by his servants. Neither didst thou toll me, neither yet heard I of it, but today. The prince rather complains that Abraham had done him an injustice.
Gen 21:27
And Abraham took sheep and oxen, and gave them unto Abimelech As the usual covenant presents (cf. 1Ki 15:19; Isa 30:6; Isa 39:1). And both of them made a covenant. As already Mature, Aner, and Eshcol had formed a league with the patriarch (vide Gen 14:13).
Gen 21:28-30
And Abraham set seven ewe lambs of the flock by themselves (designing by another covenant to secure himself against future invasion of Isis rights). And Abimelech said unto Abraham, What mean these seven ewe lambs which thou hast set by themselves? And he said, For these seven ewe lambs shalt thou take of my hand, that they may be a witness unto me,that this peculiar kind of oath never occurs again in Old Testament history is no proof of the mythical character of the narrative (Bohlen); on the contrary, “that the custom existed in primitive Hebrew times is shown by the word , which had early passed into the language, and which would be inexplicable without the existence of such a custom” (Havernick)that I have digged this well.
Gen 21:31
Wherefore he called that place Beersheba. I.e. “the well of the oath,” (LXX; Gesenius, Furst, Rosenmller), or the well of the seven (Keil), rather than the seven wells (Lange); discovered by Robinson in Bir-es-seba, in the Wady-es-seba, twelve miles to the south of Hebron, with two deep wells of excellent water. “The great well has an internal diameter at the mouth of twelve feet six inches, or a circumference of nearly forty feet. The shaft is formed of excellent masonry to a great depth until it reaches the rock, and at this juncture a spring trickles perpetually. Around the mouth of the well is a circular course of masonry, topped by a circular parapet of about a foot high; and at a distance of ten or twelve feet are stone troughs placed in a concentric circle with the well, the sides of which have deep indentions made by the wear of ropes on the upper edges The second well, about 200 yards farther south, is not more than five feet in diameter, but is formed of equally good masonry, and furnishes equally good water”. Because there they aware both of them.
Gen 21:33
And Abraham plantedas a sign of his peaceful occupation of the soil (Calvin); as a memorial of the transaction about the well (‘Speaker’s Commentary’); or simply as a shade for his tent (Rosenmller); scarcely as an oratory (Bush, Kalisch)a grovethe wood, plantation (Targum, Vulgate, Samaritan, Kimchi); a field, (LXX.)was probably the Tamarix Africanae (Gesenius, Furst, Delitzsch, Rosenmller, Kalisch), which, besides being common in Egypt and Petraea, is mid to have been found growing near the ancient Beershebain Beersheba, and called there (not beneath the tree or in the grove, but in the place) on the name of the Lord,Jehovah (vide Gen 12:8; Gen 13:4)the everlasting Godliterally, the God of eternity (LXX; Vulgate, Onkelos); not in contrast to heathen deities, who are born and die (Clericus), but “as the everlasting Vindicator of the faith of treaties, and as the infallible Source of the believer’s rest and peace” (Murphy).
Gen 21:34
And Abraham sojourned in the Philistines’ land many days. The apparent contradiction between the statement of this verse and that of Gen 21:32 may be removed by supposing either,
(1) that as the land of the Philistines had no fixed boundary toward the desert, Beersheba may at this time have been claimed for the kingdom of Gerar (Keil); or,
(2) that as Beersheba was situated on the confines of the Philistines’ territory, Abraham must frequently have sojourned in their country while pasturing his flocks (Rosenmller).
HOMILETICS
Gen 21:22-34
Abimelech and Abraham, or ancient covenanters.
I. THE POLITICAL ALLIANCE.
1. The contemplated object. Peace. What modern monarchs mostly desire at the close of exhausting campaigns is here sought before campaigns begin.
2. The covenanting parties. Two powerful princes, in their conduct exemplifying the spirit of unity and peace which should bind together private persons in their daily intercourse, as well as kings and nations in their political alliance.
3. The impelling motives. Worldly policy may have urged Abimelech to cement a league with the powerful chieftain in his neighborhood, but religions affinity would also seem to have exercised an influence in drawing him to seek the friendship of one who appeared to enjoy celestial protection. Good men mostly desire to have the saints as friends, and even the wicked can perceive an advantage in being allied to the righteous. Abraham’s acquiescence in the king’s proposal was no doubt dictated by a peaceable disposition, a sense of equity, a spirit of contentment, and an unwavering confidence in God.
4. The public ceremonial. The alliance was contracted
(1) by means of amicable conference, and
(2) with the sanctions of religion.
II. THE FRIENDLY REMONSTRANCE.
1. The palpable injury. The herdsmen of the king had appropriated Abraham’s well. God’s people, though expected meekly to suffer wrong, cannot always help seeing that it is wrong they suffer. Nor are they called upon to bear what by lawful means they are able to redress. A godly man is entitled to be careful of his property, to preserve it from damage, protect it from theft, and recover it when stolen or lost.
2. The mistaken charge. Abraham, thinking the herdsmen had acted on their master’s orders, reproved Abimelech. This, however, was an error, which shows
(1) that a person cannot always be held responsible for what his servants do,
(2) that it is wrong to judge on insufficient evidence with reference to the characters and conduct of others, and
(3) that in making charges or preferring complaints it is well to avoid both heat of temper and severity of language.
3. The satisfactory explanation. Abimelech declared himself perfectly unacquainted with the wrong which had been done to Abraham, and immediately returned the well, which discovers how easily misunderstandings might be removed if, instead of harboring enmity, men would resort to friendly conference. It is as much the duty of him who has a grievance to reveal it, as it is the duty of him who has caused the grievance to remove it.
4. The prudent measure Abraham gave Abimelech seven ewe lambs as a witness that he had digged the well, and consequently had a right to its possession. Seemingly betraying a secret suspicion of the prince’s veracity, the act aimed at preventing any recurrence of the grievance, and in this light it appears to have been regarded by Abimelech. Good men should not only rectify the wrongs they do to one another, but adopt all wise precautions against their repetition.
III. THE PLEASING RESULT.
1. Peace established, Abimelech and Phichol, having accomplished their mission, returned to Philistia. “Blessed are the peace-makers,” and “beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him that publisheth peace.”
2. Peace commemorated. Abraham instituted two memorials of the important transactions, naming the well Beersheba, and planting a tamarisk beside his tent. It is good to remember God’s mercies, of which national and civil quietude is one of the greatest, and it is becoming to erect memorials of both privileges and obligations.
3. Peace enjoyed. Abraham called on the name of the everlasting God. As a planter of tamarisks, the patriarch has been styled the father of civilization; it is more important to remark that he never neglected to worship God himself and publish his salvation to others. Happy they who can do both in peace!
HOMILIES BY J.F. MONTGOMERY
Gen 21:22-34
A covenant between the patriarch and the Philistine king.
Abraham a sojourner in that land, afterwards the troubler of Israel; for his sake as discipline, for their sakes as opportunity.
1. God’s care for those beyond the covenant. A Beersheba in a heathen land.
2. The things of this world made a channel of higher blessings. The covenant arising out of bodily wants a civil agreement. The oath a testimony to God where reverently made.
3. He is not far from every one of us. The neighborhood of Beersheba, the revelation of Jehovah, the little company of believers.
4. The blessing made manifest. The days spent in Philistia left behind them some enlightenment.
5. Adaptation of Divine truth to those to whom it is sent. Abraham’s name of God, Jehovah El Olam; the two revelations, the God of nature and the God of grace. The name of the Lord itself an invitation to believe and live. Paul at Athens adapted himself in preaching to the people’s knowledge while leading them to faith.R.
Gen 21:22. Came to pass at that time, &c. Hence it is plain that Abraham had continued in the country of the Philistines for a considerable time; when Abimelech, struck with God’s providential regard to him, was desirous of entering into a league and alliance with him.
Gen 21:22 And it came to pass at that time, that Abimelech and Phichol the chief captain of his host spake unto Abraham, saying, God [is] with thee in all that thou doest:
Ver. 22. God is with thee in all that thou doest. ] Natural conscience cannot choose but stoop to the image of God stamped upon the natures and works of the godly. When they see in them that which is above ordinary, they are afraid of the name of God called upon by them. Their hearts even ache and quake within them. Deu 28:10
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Gen 21:22-26
22Now it came about at that time that Abimelech and Phicol, the commander of his army, spoke to Abraham, saying, “God is with you in all that you do; 23now therefore, swear to me here by God that you will not deal falsely with me or with my offspring or with my posterity, but according to the kindness that I have shown to you, you shall show to me and to the land in which you have sojourned.” 24Abraham said, “I swear it.” 25But Abraham complained to Abimelech because of the well of water which the servants of Abimelech had seized. 26And Abimelech said, “I do not know who has done this thing; you did not tell me, nor did I hear of it until today.”
Gen 21:22 “Abimelech and Phicol” These same two names are mentioned in Gen 26:26 in connection with Isaac and problems over this very same well at Beersheba. The names are general names for the king and the commander, these men lived quite a long time, or there has been confusion in the Hebrew text of Genesis (i.e., editors).
“God is with you in all that you do” This is said not only of Abraham, but also of Isaac (cf. Gen 26:28).
Gen 21:25 “but Abraham complained to Abimelech” The word here seems to be “chided” (BDB 406, KB 410, Hiphil PERFECT). The controversy over wells was common in this semi-arid desert region. Abimelech’s answer shows that he was not aware of the problem and still wanted a covenant with Abraham (“swear,” BDB 989, KB 1396, Niphal IMPERATIVE, Gen 21:23).
Abraham and Abimelech Covenant
Gen 21:22-34
Abimelech was impressed with Abrahams growing prosperity. He felt that it could not be explained on merely natural grounds. God is with thee in all that thou doest. He sought, therefore, to secure the well-being of himself and his kingdom by forming an amicable treaty. Abraham immediately indicated that, while willing to meet him, they must first have a clear understanding about a certain injustice which he had suffered. As our Lord taught afterward, he showed Abimelech his fault as between them alone, Mat 18:15. The matter was easily adjusted by the kings frank disavowal of his servants action. In lieu of written documents the seven lambs would be a perpetual sign and token of Abrahams claim to the well, henceforth known as the well of the oath. The tamarisk was the second of these natural title-deeds. Wherever the religious man dwells he should pray, and leave behind him trees and wells.
am 2118, bc 1886
Abimelech: Gen 20:2, Gen 26:26
God: Gen 20:17, Gen 26:28, Gen 28:15, Gen 30:27, Gen 39:2, Gen 39:3, Jos 3:7, 2Ch 1:1, Isa 8:10, Isa 45:14, Zec 8:23, Mat 1:23, Rom 8:31, 1Co 14:25, Heb 13:5, Rev 3:9
Reciprocal: Gen 23:6 – a mighty prince Gen 26:1 – Abimelech Gen 26:29 – the blessed Gen 31:3 – with thee Gen 31:44 – let us Gen 39:21 – the Lord 2Sa 5:10 – the Lord 2Ki 18:7 – And the Lord
Gen 21:22-34. Abraham and Abimelech Make a Covenant at Beersheba.Probably from JE. The analysis is uncertain; perhaps Gen 21:25 f., Gen 21:28-30, Gen 21:32-34 belong to J, the rest to E. One narrative represents Abraham as making a covenant of friendship with Abimelech at the kings request, the other as securing a recognition from Abimelech of his claim to the wells of Beersheba. The point of Gen 21:25 f. is probably that whenever Abraham reproved Abimelech, as he did on various occasions, he could get no satisfaction from him. It does not continue Gen 21:24, but begins an independent narrative, which is continued in Gen 21:28-30. The variant in Gen 26:13-33 should be compared. There are two suggestions as to the origin of the name Beersheba. One is that it refers to the seven ewe lambs (Gen 21:28-30), the other that it means well of the oath (Gen 21:31). The true meaning is probably well of seven, the reference being to the seven wells at Beersheba. A dispute about wells is very common in those regions (p. 32). For seven as a sacred number cf. Num 22:41 to Num 23:6*.
13. Abimelech’s treaty with Abraham 21:22-34
"This scene occurs at the same time as the events of Scene 6 [Gen 21:1-21] but focuses on different characters and tensions. This second conflict with Abimelech creates a bracket around the Isaac birth narrative. Whereas the first conflict, Scene 5 (Gen 20:1-18), concerned jeopardy of the seed, the second conflict, Scene 7 (Gen 21:22-34), concerns jeopardy of the land (i.e., well rights)." [Note: Waltke, Genesis, p. 298.]
God’s blessing of Abraham resulted in his material prosperity. In response to Abimelech’s initiative Abraham agreed to make a covenant of peaceful coexistence. This treaty enabled Abraham to serve and worship God freely in the Promised Land.
The writer may have included this incident in the text partially because it records the testimony of a Gentile king to God’s faithfulness (Gen 21:22) and Abraham’s strong testimony to God’s faithfulness (Gen 21:32-33). It also sets the stage for Isaac’s dealings with Abimelech (ch. 26).
Since Abraham had become a powerful individual in the land by God’s blessing, Abimelech initiated a bilateral treaty with him for his own protection. This was evidently the same Abimelech that Abraham had dealt with previously (ch. 20). They made a parity covenant (i.e., between equals, Gen 21:31-32). This was a remarkable admission of Abraham’s standing and blessing by God and an expression of Abimelech’s confidence in the future existence of the patriarch’s family.
The birth of Isaac seems to have produced a much stronger faith in Abraham (cf. Gen 21:14). Note his immediate response to God’s instructions to him from then on (cf. Gen 22:3).
"Phicol" (Gen 21:22) seems to have been a title rather than a proper name, probably of Anatolian origin. [Note: On the origin of Phicol, Abimelech’s army commander, see J. D. Ray, "Two Etymologies: Ziklag and Phicol," Vetus Testamentum 36:3 (July 1986):358-59; and Wenham, Genesis 16-50, pp. 91-92. Cf. 26:26.]
Wells were extremely important in the life of semi-nomads like Abraham (Gen 21:25). [Note: See Clark Youngblood, "Wells," Biblical Illustrator (Fall 1986), pp. 41-49.]
Beersheba, one of the more important sites throughout Old Testament times, meaning "oath of seven" or "oath-well," became Abraham’s possession with the payment of seven ewe lambs (Gen 21:28; cf. Gen 26:33). [Note: See William G. Dever, "Beersheba," Biblical Illustrator (Spring 1983), pp. 56-62.]
Critics of the historicity of the patriarchal narratives have pointed out references to the Philistines in Genesis (Gen 21:32; Gen 21:34; Gen 26:1) as evidence that the Bible contains errors. It is common knowledge that the Philistines did not invade Palestine until about 1200 B.C. whereas Abraham evidently lived about 800 years earlier. One explanation is that since the Philistines of Genesis were peaceful and those of Judges and later were warlike perhaps the same name describes an earlier group of people. They may have resembled the later thirteenth-century Philistines who also emigrated from the Aegean area into Palestine. [Note: Kitchen, Ancient Orient . . ., p. 80; Edward E. Hindson, The Philistines and the Old Testament, pp. 94-95.] On the other hand perhaps the Philistines of 2000 B.C. were Minoan and peaceful whereas those of 1200 were Mycenean and warlike. [Note: Barker, p. 134. See also Vassos Karageorghis, "Exploring Philistine Origins on the Island of Cyprus," Biblical Archaeology Review 10:2 (March-April 1984):16-28.]
"I suggest that the Philistines of Genesis represent the first wave of Sea Peoples from the Aegean, and that the later Philistines represent the last wave (cf. 1200 B.C.)." [Note: Hamilton, The Book . . . Chapters 18-50, p. 94.]
By planting a tree Abraham indicated his determination to stay in that region. Tamarisk trees (Gen 21:33) were long-lived and evergreen. [Note: Mathews, Genesis 11:27-50:26, p. 282.] This tree was an appropriate symbol of the enduring grace of the faithful God whom Abraham recognized as "the Everlasting God" (El Olam). Abraham now owned a small part of the land God had promised him.
"By granting Abraham rights to a well, Abimelek had made it possible for Abraham to live there permanently and had acknowledged his legal right at least to water. In other words, after so many delays the promises of land and descendants at last seem on their way to fulfillment." [Note: Wenham, Genesis 16-50, p. 94.]
In contrast to Abraham’s fear of Abimelech (ch. 20) we now see him boldly standing up to this powerful king. His changed attitude evidently resulted from God’s grace in blessing the patriarch as He had promised.
"The reader is forced to ask why the author constantly draws attention to the fact that Abraham was dwelling with the Philistines during this time [cf. Gen 21:34]. The purpose of such reminders may be to portray Abraham as one who had yet to experience the complete fulfillment of God’s promises." [Note: Sailhamer, The Pentateuch . . ., p. 177.]
Peaceful interpersonal relationships with those who acknowledge God enable the believer to proclaim his or her faith freely (cf. 1Ti 2:1-4).
Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
Fuente: The Complete Pulpit Commentary
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley
Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)