Genesis 15:10 Komentář

In this chapter we have a solemn treaty between God and Abram concerning a covenant that was to be established between them. In the former chapter we had Abram in the field with Kings; here we find him in the mount with God; and, though there he looked great, yet, methinks, here he looks much greater: that honour have the great men of the world, but "this honour have all the saints." The covenant to be settled between God and Abram was a covenant of promises; accordingly, here is, I. A general assurance of God's kindness and good-will to Abram (Gen 15:1). II. A particular declaration of the purposes of his love concerning him, in two things: - 1. That he would give him a numerous issue (Gen 15:2-6). 2. That he would give him Canaan for an inheritance (Gen 15:7-21). Either an estate without an heir, or an heir without an estate, would have been but a half comfort to Abram. But God ensures both to him; and that which made these two, the promised seed and the promised land, comforts indeed to this great believer was that they were both typical of those two invaluable blessings, Christ and heaven; and so we have reason to think, Abram eyed them.

INTRODUCTION TO GENESIS 15 This chapter informs us of a gracious appearance of God to Abram, and of a kind promise made unto him, Gen 15:1; of Abram's request for an heir, Gen 15:2; of an answer to it, that he should have one, and even a numberless seed, Gen 15:4; which he gave credit to, Gen 15:6; upon which he has a fresh promise of the land of Canaan, Gen 15:7; of his inheriting of which he desires a sign, and this was given him, Gen 15:8; and at the same time it was predicted to him how long his posterity should be afflicted in a land not theirs, and afterwards come out with great substance, Gen 15:13; and the grant of the land of Canaan to his seed is renewed, Gen 15:17.

And when the fowls came down upon the carcasses,.... Upon the birds, as Aben Ezra and Ben Melech interpret it, whose carcasses were whole; or rather upon the divided carcasses of the animals, and indeed on both: this is to be understood of birds of prey, as eagles, vultures, kites, crows, &c. and are an emblem of the Egyptians chiefly, and other enemies of Israel, who came upon them to devour them; so the Targum of Jonathan,"and the idolatrous nations descended, who were like to an unclean fowl, to spoil the goods of the Israelites;''and likewise the Targum of Jerusalem,"this unclean fowl are the idolatrous kingdoms of the earth:" Abram drove them away: that they might not settle upon the carcasses, and devour them: the Septuagint version is, "Abram sat with them"; he sat by the carcasses and watched them, that no hurt came to them, and to take notice of them, and consider and learn what they were an emblem of. The Jews (l) also observe, that"Abram sat and waved over them with his napkin or handkerchief, that the birds might not have power over them until the evening.''This may respect not the merit of Abram, as the above Targums, by which his posterity were protected, and the designs of their enemies frustrated; but the effectual fervent prayer of Abram, his prayer of faith for them, in answer to which they were delivered out of the hands of the Egyptians, and other enemies, whom Abram foresaw they would be distressed with. (l) Pirke Eliezer, ut supra. (c. 28)

(Verses 10, 11.) And he placed them opposite each other: but he did not separate the birds. However, birds descended upon the carcasses and the divisions thereof, and Abram drove them away. It does not pertain to the present work to explain the sacrament. We only say this, because the Hebrew version has for these words: And birds descended upon the carcasses, and Abram drove them away. For he deservedly often delivered Israel from narrow straits.

And it is said, “But the birds divided he not,” because carnal people are divided among themselves. But those who are spiritual are not divided at all, whether they seclude themselves from the busy conversation of humankind, like the turtledove, or dwell among them, like the pigeon. For both birds are simple and harmless, signifying that even in the Israelite people, to which that land was to be given, there would be individuals who were children of the promise and heirs of the kingdom that is to remain in eternal felicity.

Now notice carefully Abraham is said to have divided the three animals into two parts and to have placed them one against the other. “The birds,” says Scripture, “he did not cut in two.” Why is this, brothers? Because in the church catholic, carnal people are divided but spiritual people are not. And, as Scripture says, they are separated one against the other. Why are carnal people divided and set against each other? Because all wicked lovers of the world do not cease to have divisions and scandals among each other. For this reason they are divided, since they are opposed to one another. However, the birds, that is, spiritual souls, are not divided. Why not? Because they have “one heart and one soul in the Lord.” To will and not to will is all one thing to them. Surely the turtledoves and pigeons that we mentioned above are like these souls. In the turtledove chastity is represented, and in the pigeon, simplicity. All God-fearing people in the church catholic clearly are chaste and simple, and with the psalmist they can say, “Had I but wings like a dove, I would fly away and be at rest.” And again: “The swallow finds a nest in which she puts her young.” Carnal people, who can be divided, are pressed down by the heavy fetters of vice. Spiritual people are raised on high by the wings of various virtues. As if by two wings, that is, the two precepts of love of God and charity toward the neighbor, they are lifted up to heaven. With the apostle they can say, “But our citizenship is in heaven.” As often as the priest says, “Lift up your hearts,” they can say with assurance and devotion that they have lifted them up to the Lord. However, very few and rare are the people in the church who can say this with confidence and truth. Therefore Abraham did not divide the birds, because spiritual souls who have one heart and soul, as I said, cannot be divided or separated from love of God and of neighbor. They exclaim with the apostle, “Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or distress or persecution?” Other words follow until it is said, “Nor any other creature will be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.” Therefore spiritual souls are not separated from Christ by torments. Carnal souls are sometimes separated by idle gossip. The cruel sword cannot separate the former, but carnal affections can remove the latter. Nothing hard breaks down spiritual people, but even flattering words can corrupt the carnal. For this reason Abraham divided those animals into two parts, but the birds he did not divide.

The Lord replied: "Take for me a three-year-old heifer, a three-year-old goat, and a three-year-old ram, also a turtledove and a pigeon." He took all these and divided them in half, and placed each half opposite the other, but he did not divide the birds. For the heifer may signify the people under the yoke of the law; the goat the same people who would be sinful, the ram the same people who would also reign. Therefore, these animals are called three because in the third age of the world that people matured and entered the land of promise. The first age is from Adam to Noah, the second from Noah to Abraham himself, the third from Abraham to David; in which the people were saved from Egyptian servitude and transferred to the land of promise. Or if these signify something else more fitting, I would by no means doubt that the spiritual are prefigured in the addition of the turtledove and the pigeon; and thus it is said: "But he did not divide the birds," because the carnal are divided among themselves, but the spiritual by no means, whether they remove themselves from the busy dealings of men like the turtledove, or dwell among them like the pigeon; yet both birds are simple and harmless, signifying that in the very Israelite people, to whom that land was to be given, there would be undivided peoples of promise and heirs of the kingdom remaining in eternal happiness.

God appears to Abram in a vision, and gives him great encouragement, Gen 15:1. Abram's request and complaint, Gen 15:2, Gen 15:3. God promises him a son, Gen 15:4; and an exceedingly numerous posterity, Gen 15:5. Abram credits the promise, and his faith is counted unto him for righteousness, Gen 15:6. Jehovah proclaims himself, and renews the promise of Canaan to his posterity, Gen 15:7. Abram requires a sign of its fulfillment, Gen 15:8. Jehovah directs him to offer a sacrifice of five different animals, Gen 15:9; which he accordingly does, Gen 15:10, Gen 15:11. God reveals to him the affliction of his posterity in Egypt, and the duration of that affliction, Gen 15:12, Gen 15:13. Promises to bring them back to the land of Canaan with great affluence, Gen 15:14-16. Renews the covenant with Abram, and mentions the possessions which should be given to his posterity, Gen 15:18-21.

Divided them in the midst - The ancient method of making covenants as well as the original word, have been already alluded to, and in a general way explained. See Gen 6:18. The word covenant from con, together, and venio, I come, signifies an agreement, association, or meeting between two or more parties; for it is impossible that a covenant can be made between an individual and himself, whether God or man. This is a theological absurdity into which many have run; there must be at least two parties to contract with each other. And often there was a third party to mediate the agreement, and to witness it when made. Rabbi Solomon Jarchi says, "It was a custom with those who entered into covenant with each other to take a heifer and cut it in two, and then the contracting parties passed between the pieces." See this and the scriptures to which it refers particularly explained, Gen 6:18. A covenant always supposed one of these four things: 1. That the contracting parties had been hitherto unknown to each other, and were brought by the covenant into a state of acquaintance. 2. That they had been previously in a state of hostility or enmity, and were brought by the covenant into a state of pacification and friendship. 3. Or that, being known to each other, they now agree to unite their counsels, strength, property, etc., for the accomplishment of a particular purpose, mutually subservient to the interests of both. Or, 4. It implies an agreement to succor and defend a third party in cases of oppression and distress. For whatever purpose a covenant was made, it was ever ratified by a sacrifice offered to God; and the passing between the divided parts of the victim appears to have signified that each agreed, if they broke their engagements, to submit to the punishment of being cut asunder; which we find from Mat 24:51; Luk 12:46, was an ancient mode of punishment. This is farther confirmed by Herodotus, who says that Sabacus, king of Ethiopia, had a vision, in which he was ordered μεσους διατεμειν, to cut in two, all the Egyptian priests; lib. ii. We find also from the same author, lib. vii., that Xerxes ordered one of the sons of Pythius μεσον διατεμειν, to be cut in two, and one half to be placed on each side of the way, that his army might pass through between them. That this kind of punishment was used among the Persians we have proof from Dan 2:5; Dan 3:29. Story of Susanna, verses 55, 59. See farther, Sa2 12:31, and Ch1 20:3. These authorities may be sufficient to show that the passing between the parts of the divided victims signified the punishment to which those exposed themselves who broke their covenant engagements. And that covenant sacrifices were thus divided, even from the remotest antiquity, we learn from Homer, Il. A., v. 460. Μηρους τ' εξεταμον κατα τε κνισοῃ εκαλυψαν, Διπτυχα ποιησαντες, επ' αυτων δ' ωμοθετησαν. "They cut the quarters, and cover them with the fat; dividing them into two, they place the raw flesh upon them." But this place may be differently understood. St. Cyril, in his work against Julian, shows that passing between the divided parts of a victim was used also among the Chaldeans and other people. As the sacrifice was required to make an atonement to God, so the death of the animal was necessary to signify to the contracting parties the punishment to which they exposed themselves, should they prove unfaithful. Livy preserves the form of the imprecation used on such occasions, in the account he gives of the league made between the Romans and Albans. When the Romans were about to enter into some solemn league or covenant, they sacrificed a hog; and, on the above occasion, the priest, or pater patratus, before he slew the animal, stood, and thus invoked Jupiter: Audi, Jupiter! Si prior defecerit publico consilio dolo malo, tum illo die, Diespiter, Populum Romanum sic ferito, ut ego hune porcum hic hodie feriam; tantoque magis ferito, quanto magis potes pollesque! - Livii Hist., lib. i., chap. 24. "Hear, O Jupiter! Should the Romans in public counsel, through any evil device, first transgress these laws, in that same day, O Jupiter, thus smite the Roman people, as I shall at this time smite this hog; and smite them with a severity proportioned to the greatness of thy power and might!" But the birds divided he not - According to the law, Lev 1:17, fowls were not to be divided asunder but only cloven for the purpose of taking out the intestines.

DIVINE ENCOURAGEMENT. (Gen. 15:1-21) After these things--the conquest of the invading kings. the word of the Lord--a phrase used, when connected with a vision, to denote a prophetic message. Fear not, Abram--When the excitement of the enterprise was over, he had become a prey to despondency and terror at the probable revenge that might be meditated against him. To dispel his fear, he was favored with this gracious announcement. Having such a promise, how well did it become him (and all God's people who have the same promise) to dismiss fears, and cast all burdens on the Lord (Psa 27:3).