Genesis 14:13 Kommentar

We have four things in the story of this chapter. I. A war with the king of Sodom and his allies (Gen 14:1-11). II. The captivity of Lot in that war (Gen 14:12). III. Abram's rescue of Lot from that captivity, with the victory he obtained over the conquerors (Gen 14:13-16). IV. Abram's return from the expedition (Gen 14:17), with an account of what passed, 1. Between him and the king of Salem (Gen 14:18-20). 2. Between him and the king of Sodom (Gen 14:21-24). So that here we have that promise to Abram in part fulfilled, that God would make his name great.

We have here an account of the only military action we ever find Abram engaged in, and this he was prompted to, not by his avarice or ambition, but purely by a principle of charity; it was not to enrich himself, but to help his friend. Never was any military expedition undertaken, prosecuted, and finished, more honourably than this of Abram's. Here we have, I. The tidings brought him of his kinsman's distress. Providence so ordered it that he now sojourned not far off, that he might be a very present help. 1. He is here called Abram the Hebrew, that is, the son and follower of Heber, in whose family the profession of the true religion was kept up in that degenerate age. Abram herein acted like a Hebrew - in a manner not unworthy of the name and character of a religious professor. 2. The tidings were brought by one that had escaped with his life for a prey. Probably he was a Sodomite, and as bad as the worst of them; yet knowing Abram's relation to Lot, and concern for him, he implores his help, and hopes to speed for Lot's sake. Note, The worst of men, in the day of their trouble, will be glad to claim acquaintance with those that are wise and good, and so get an interest in them. The rich man in hell called Abram Father; and the foolish virgins made court to the wise for a share of their oil. II. The preparations he made for this expedition. The cause was plainly good, his call to engage in it was clear, and therefore, with all speed, he armed his trained servants, born in his house, to the number of three hundred and eighteen - a great family, but a small army, about as many as Gideon's that routed the Midianites, Jdg 7:7. He drew out his trained servants, or his catechised servants, not only instructed in the art of war, which was then far short of the perfection which later and worse ages have improved it to, but instructed in the principles of religion; for Abram commanded his household to keep the way of the Lord. This shows that Abram was, 1. A great man, who had so many servants depending upon him, and employed by him, which was not only his strength and honour, but gave him a great opportunity of doing good, which is all that is truly valuable and desirable in great places and great estates. 2. A good man, who not only served God himself, but instructed all about him in the service of God. Note, Those that have great families have not only many bodies, but many souls besides their own, to take care of and provide for. Those that would be found the followers of Abram must see that their servants be catechised servants. 3. A wise man for, though he was a man of peace, yet he disciplined his servants for war, not knowing what occasion he might have, some time or other, so to employ them. Note, Though our holy religion teaches us to be for peace, yet it does not forbid us to provide for war. III. His allies and confederates in this expedition. He prevailed with his neighbours, Aner, Eshcol, and Mamre (with whom he kept up a fair correspondence) to go along with him. It was his prudence thus to strengthen his own troops with their auxiliary forces; and probably they saw themselves concerned, in interest, to act, as they could, against this formidable power, lest their own turn should be next. Note, 1. It is our wisdom and duty to behave ourselves so respectfully and obligingly towards all men as that, whenever there is occasion, they may be willing and ready to do us a kindness. 2. Those who depend on God's help, yet, in times of distress, ought to make use of men's help, as Providence offers it; else they tempt God. IV. His courage and conduct were very remarkable. 1. There was a great deal of bravery in the enterprise itself, considering the disadvantages he lay under. What could one family of husbandmen and shepherds do against the armies of four princes, who now came fresh from blood and victory? It was not a vanquished, but a victorious army, that he was to pursue; nor was he constrained by necessity to this daring attempt, but moved to it by generosity; so that, all things considered, it was, for aught I know, as great an instance of true courage as ever Alexander or Caesar was celebrated for. Note, Religion tends to make men, not cowardly, but truly valiant. The righteous is bold as a lion. The true Christian is the true hero. 2. There was a great deal of policy in the management of it. Abram was no stranger to the stratagems of war: He divided himself, as Gideon did his little army (Jdg 7:16), that he might come upon the enemy from several quarters at once, and so make his few seem a great many; he made his attack by night, that he might surprise them. Note, Honest policy is a good friend both to our safety and to our usefulness. The serpent's head (provided it be nothing akin to the old serpent) may well become a good Christian's body, especially if it have a dove's eye in it, Mat 10:16. V. His success was very considerable, Gen 14:15, Gen 14:16. He defeated his enemies, and rescued his friends; and we do not find that he sustained any loss. Note, Those that venture in a good cause, with a good heart, are under the special protection of a good God, and have reason to hope for a good issue. Again, It is all one with the Lord to save by many or by few, Sa1 14:6. Observe, 1. He rescued his kinsman; twice here he is called his brother Lot. The remembrance of the relation that was between them, both by nature and grace, made him forget the little quarrel that had been between them, in which Lot had by no means acted well towards Abram. Justly might Abram have upbraided Lot with his folly in quarrelling with him and removing from him, and have told him that he was well enough served, he might have known when he was well off; but, in the charitable breast of pious Abram, it is all forgiven and forgotten, and he takes this opportunity to give a real proof of the sincerity of his reconciliation. Note, (1.) We ought to be ready, whenever it is in the power of our hands, to succour and relieve those that are in distress, especially our relations and friends. A brother is born for adversity, Pro 17:17. A friend in need is a friend indeed. (2.) Though others have been wanting in their duty to us, yet we must not therefore deny our duty to them. Some have said that they can more easily forgive their enemies than their friends; but we shall see ourselves obliged to forgive both if we consider, not only that our God, when we were enemies, reconciled us, but also that he passeth by the transgression of the remnant of his heritage, Mic 7:18. 2. He rescued the rest of the captives, for Lot's sake, though they were strangers to him and such as he was under no obligation to at all; nay, though they were Sodomites, sinners before the Lord exceedingly, and though, probably, he might have recovered Lot alone by ransom, yet he brought back all the women, and the people, and their goods, Gen 14:16. Note, As we have opportunity we must do good to all men. Our charity must be extensive, as opportunity offers itself. Wherever God gives life, we must not grudge the help we can give to support it. God does good to the just and unjust, and so must we, Mat 5:45. This victory which Abram obtained over the kings the prophet seems to refer to, Isa 41:2, Who raised up the righteous man from the east, and made him rule over kings? And some suggest that, as before he had a title to this land by grant, so now by conquest.

INTRODUCTION TO GENESIS 14 This chapter gives an account of a war that was waged, and a battle fought between four kings on one side, and five on the other, and of the occasion and issue of it, who were the first kings, and this the first battle the Scriptures speak of, Gen 14:1; Lot and his goods being taken and carried off, with those of Sodom, by the conquerors, Abram hearing of it armed his men, and pursued after them, and overtook and overcame them, and rescued Lot and his goods, with others, and returned, Gen 14:12; when he was met by the kings of Sodom and Salem, who congratulated him on his victory, Gen 14:17; and what passed between him, and those great personages, is related, Gen 14:20.

And there came one that escaped,.... Both the sword of the enemy and the slimepits; either one of the inhabitants of Sodom, who had an acquaintance with Lot and a friendship for him, and knew his relation to Abram; or one of Lot's family, that might escape being taken and carried captive: for not Michael the prince, so called, because when the angels fell they would have drawn him with them, but God delivered him, and therefore his name was called or "one that escaped", as the Jews (z) say; nor Og, that escaped the waters of the flood, as they also say (a), and now from this war, and was the only one left of the Rephaim, or giants, whom Amraphel slew, which they gather from Deu 3:11; who they suppose came with the following message to Abram with an ill design, that he might go out to war with the kings, and be slain, and then he thought to marry his wife; but these are idle fancies, what is first suggested is right. And told Abram the Hebrew; that there had been a battle of four kings with five, that the latter were beaten, among whom were the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah; and that Lot, his kinsman, who dwelt in or near Sodom, was carried captive, with all his goods. Abram is called the Hebrew, either from his passing over or coming beyond the river Euphrates, from Chaldea into Canaan; with which the Septuagint version agrees, rendering it the "passer over"; and so Jarchi says he is called, because he came beyond the river: or rather from his having lived beyond it, as such as dwelt there were called; for it can hardly be thought that he should peculiarly have this name from that single action of his passing the river, which multitudes did besides him: but rather, why should he not be called Ibri, the word here used, from the place of his birth? For, according to the Talmudists (b), Ur of the Chaldees was called , "little Ibra"; though it is more generally thought he had this name from his being a descendant of Eber, and who was not only of his sons' sons, and spoke the same language, but professed the same religion, and which was continued in his posterity, who to the latest ages were called Hebrews, and sometimes Eber, Num 24:24; and which is the opinion of many Jewish writers (c), and seems most probable: for he dwelt in the plain of Mamre the Amorite; see Gen 13:18; it was about forty miles from Sodom, but from it to Dan, whither he pursued the four kings, and where he overtook, fought, and smote them, is by some computed one hundred and twenty four miles (d): this Mamre, from whom the plain or grove of oaks were called, was the brother of Eshcol, and brother of Aner; who are particularly mentioned, because of their concern in the following expedition: and these were confederate with Abram; or "were masters" or "authors of a covenant" (e) with him; they had entered into a league to defend one another, their persons and properties, from the insults of invaders and tyrants, or thieves and robbers: and it may be lawful to form such leagues with irreligious persons on such accounts, where there is no prohibition from God, as there was none as yet, though there afterwards was one; and the Israelites, were forbid to make covenants with the Canaanites, but that was after they were drove out of the land for their sins, Deu 7:1; besides, it is not improbable that these men were religious men, and worshipped the same God with Abram, for such there were among the Canaanitish princes, of which Melchizedek, after spoken of, is an instance; and as yet the sin of the Amorites was not full, of which tribe or nation these men were. (z) Pirke Eliezer, c. 27. (a) Targum Jon. & Jarchi in loc. Bereshit Rabba, sect. 42. fol. 37. 2. T. Bab. Niddah, fol. 61. 1. (b) T. Bab. Bava Bathra, fol. 91. 1. & Gloss. in ib. (c) Bereshit Rabba, sect. 42. fol. 37. 3. Sepher Cosri, par. 1. sect. 49. fol. 24. 2. Shalshalet Hakabala, fol. 75. 1. Aben Ezra on Exod. i. 16. (d) Bunting's Travels, p. 57. (e) , "Domini vel antores foederis", Piscator, Oleaster.

How was it that the patriarch had no knowledge that such forces of war were on the rampage? Perhaps he chanced to be at a great distance from the conflict and for that reason knew nothing of it. “Now, someone came and told Abraham the traveler,” the text says, to remind us that he got the news on his return from Chaldea. You see, because he had his camp across the Euphrates, consequently he was described also as traveler. Right from the outset his parents gave him this name, suggesting to him ahead of time his movement from there. In other words, he was also called Abram because he would one day cross the Euphrates and enter Palestine. Notice how his parents, all unaware, and unbelievers to boot, gave the child the name under the influence of God’s inventive wisdom, as was also the case when Lamech gave Noah his name. This, after all, is a characteristic of God’s loving kindness, oftentimes to foretell—even through unbelievers—of events due to happen a long time later. So, the text says, someone came and told the traveler what had happened, the capture of his nephew, the great power of those kings, the sack of Sodom and the shameful flight. “Now, he was camped near the oak of Mamre the Amorite, brother of Eschol and Aunan, who were confederates of Abram.” Perhaps at this point, however, someone might wonder, why was it that the just man Lot, alone of the fugitives from Sodom, was taken into captivity? Far from occurring idly or to no purpose, this was for Lot to learn through the events themselves the patriarch’s virtue, and that others might also be saved, and that he might learn not to hanker after pride of place but yield to his elders.

(Verse 13) And he who had fled, reported to Abram the passerby. And he himself was sitting by the oak of Mamre, the Amorite, the brother of Eschol, and the brother of Aner, who were allies of Abram. Concerning this, which we have set forth to the passerby, it is written in Hebrew as Ibri (), for this indeed signifies a passerby. But what he says: by the oak of Mamre, the Amorite, we read better in Hebrew as by the oak of Mamre, the Amorite, the brother of Eschol, and not the brother of Aner, as the Septuagint translated, but of Aner, so as to show that Mamre and Eschol, and Aner, were Amorites and brothers, allies of Abram.

And behold, one who had escaped came and reported to Abraham the Hebrew. It is evident from this passage that they err greatly who think that the people called Hebrews are named so from Abraham as if Ebrea, since Abraham himself is called a Hebrew; evidently from Heber, son of Joktan, in whose times the division of languages happened. However, "Hebrew" is interpreted as "passer" or "one who crosses over," which clearly matches the faith and merits of Abraham. For he indeed transcended temporal desires and hastened to pass from the present world to future joys. The holy man, after all, is not a resident of the earth, but a traveler and stranger, saying to his Creator, "for I am a sojourner with you, a stranger like all my ancestors." It is not in vain that, although both brothers, Abraham and Lot, descended from the line of Heber, not both are called Hebrews, but only Abraham; and he also left this name to the people of God born from him; but because he surpassed the world more perfectly, his crossing or passing was, as it were, an inheritable right that he passed on to his descendants, it is indicated by the surname what more he had received in grace than his brother. And aptly, Abraham is here first called a Hebrew, that is, a passer or crosser, as he was about to rescue his brother from the enemies, so that the Scripture might silently intimate that it is proper for those to save others from the perils of temptations by their teaching or intercession who themselves do not succumb weakly to the temptations of vices but know how to transcend them with a lively spirit. Moreover, Abraham freed his brother Lot, a man devoted to God, from the enemies, and also freed the Sodomites, people much odious to God, so that it might mystically prefigure that through his merits and intercessions often both the elect in the people of Israel and the reprobate are to be liberated from temporal evils: since only the elect can be saved from eternal destruction. It should also be noted that while the province of Sodom remained and was not yet punished, Lot the righteous was afflicted with temporal losses because of the reprobates, and the reprobates were delivered from temporal hardships by God’s mercy because of Lot the righteous. But when the judgment of ultimate strictness fell upon the reprobate citizens, then the just was in no way touched by the punishments of the wicked, nor could anyone of the wicked participate in his miraculous salvation, but then only the good were saved, only the wicked were lost: in which clearly the state and the end of the whole world is expressed, for doubtlessly in this life, sometimes the good are temporally afflicted because of the nearness of the wicked, and because of the nearness of the good the wicked are temporarily delivered from adversities. But at the moment of final judgment, only the wicked will be eternally lost, only the just will be eternally freed.

The war of four confederate kings against the five kings of Canaan, Gen 14:1-3. The confederate kings overrun and pillage the whole country, Gen 14:4-7. Battle between them and the kings of Canaan, Gen 14:5, Gen 14:9. The latter are defeated, and the principal part of the armies of the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah slain, Gen 14:10; on which these two cities are plundered, Gen 14:11. Lot, his goods, and his family, are also taken and carried away, Gen 14:12. Abram, being informed of the disaster of his nephew, Gen 14:13, arms three hundred and eighteen of his servants, and pursues them, Gen 14:14; overtakes and routs them, and recovers Lot and his family, and their goods, Gen 14:15, Gen 14:16; is met on his return by the king of Sodom, and by Melchizedek, king of Salem, with refreshments for himself and men, Gen 14:17, Gen 14:18. Melchizedek blesses Abram, and receives from him, as priest of the most high God, the tenth of all the spoils, Gen 14:19, Gen 14:20. The king of Sodom offers to Abram all the goods he has taken from the enemy, Gen 14:21; which Abram positively refuses, having vowed to God to receive no recompense for a victory of which he knew God to be the sole author, Gen 14:22, Gen 14:23; but desires that a proportion of the spoils be given to Aner, Eshcol and Mamre, who had accompanied him on this expedition, Gen 14:24.

Abram the Hebrew - See note on Gen 10:21. It is very likely that Abram had this appellation from his coming from beyond the river Euphrates to enter Canaan; for העברי haibri, which we render the Hebrew, comes from עבר abar, to pass over, or come from beyond. It is supposed by many that he got this name from Eber or Heber, son of Salah; see Gen 11:15. But why he should get a name from Heber, rather than from his own father, or some other of his progenitors, no person has yet been able to discover. We may, therefore, safely conclude that he bears the appellation of Hebrew or Ibrite from the above circumstance, and not from one of his progenitors, of whom we know nothing but the name, and who preceded Abram not less than six generations; and during the whole of that time till the time marked here, none of his descendants were ever called Hebrews; this is a demonstration that Abram was not called the Hebrew from Heber; see Gen 11:15-27. These were confederate with Abram - It seems that a kind of convention was made between Abram and the three brothers, Mamre, Eshcol, and Aner, who were probably all chieftains in the vicinity of Abram's dwelling: all petty princes, similar to the nine kings before mentioned.

WAR. (Gen. 14:1-24) And it came to pass--This chapter presents Abram in the unexpected character of a warrior. The occasion was this: The king of Sodom and the kings of the adjoining cities, after having been tributaries for twelve years to the king of Elam, combined to throw off his yoke. To chastise their rebellion, as he deemed it, Chedorlaomer, with the aid of three allies, invaded the territories of the refractory princes, defeated them in a pitched battle where the nature of the ground favored his army (Gen 14:10), and hastened in triumph on his homeward march, with a large amount of captives and booty, though merely a stranger.

there came one that had escaped--Abram might have excused himself from taking any active concern in his "brother," that is, nephew, who little deserved that he should incur trouble or danger on his account. But Abram, far from rendering evil for evil, resolved to take immediate measures for the rescue of Lot.

A fugitive (lit., the fugitive; the article denotes the genus, Ewald, 277) brought intelligence of this to Abram the Hebrew (העברי, an immigrant from beyond the Euphrates). Abram is so called in distinction from Mamre and his two brothers, who were Amorites, and had made a defensive treaty with him. To rescue Lot, Abram ordered his trained slaves (חניכיו, i.e., practised in arms) born in the house (cf. Gen 17:12), 318 men, to turn out (lit., to pour themselves out); and with these, and (as the supplementary remark in Gen 14:24 shows) with his allies, he pursued the enemy as far as Dan, where "he divided himself against them, he and his servants, by night," - i.e., he divided his men into companies, who fell upon the enemy by night from different sides - "smote them, and pursued them to Hobah, to the left (or north) of Damascus." Hobah has probably been preserved in the village of Noba, mentioned by Troilo, a quarter of a mile to the north of Damascus. So far as the situation of Dan is concerned, this passage proves that it cannot have been identical with Leshem or Laish in the valley of Beth Rehob, which the Danites conquered and named Dan (Jdg 18:28-29; Jos 19:47); for this Laish-Dan was on the central source of the Jordan, el Leddan in Tell el Kady, which does not lie in either of the two roads, leading from the vale of Siddim or of the Jordan to Damascus. (Note: One runs below the Sea of Galilee past Fik and Nowa, almost in a straight line to Damascus; the other from Jacob's Bridge, below Lake Merom. But if the enemy, instead of returning with their booty to Thapsacus, on the Euphrates, by one of the direct roads leading from the Jordan past Damascus and Palmyra, had gone through the land of Canaan to the sources of the Jordan, they would undoubtedly, when defeated at Laish-Dan, have fled through the Wady et Teim and the Bekaa to Hamath, and not by Damascus at all (vid., Robinson, Bibl. Researches).) This Dan belonged to Gilead (Deu 34:1), and is no doubt the same as the Dan-Jaan mentioned in Sa2 24:6 in connection with Gilead, and to be sought for in northern Peraea to the south-west of Damascus.