Genesi 13:8 Commento

In this chapter we have a further account concerning Abram. I. In general, of his condition and behaviour in the land of promise, which was now the land of his pilgrimage. 1. His removes (Gen 13:1, Gen 13:3, Gen 13:4, Gen 13:18). 2. His riches (Gen 13:2). 3. His devotion (Gen 13:4, Gen 13:18). II. A particular account of a quarrel that happened between him and Lot. 1. The unhappy occasion of their strife (Gen 13:5, Gen 13:6). 2. The parties concerned in the strife, with the aggravation of it (Gen 13:7). III. The making up of the quarrel, by the prudence of Abram (Gen 13:8, Gen 13:9). IV. Lot's departure from Abram to the plain of Sodom (Gen 13:10-13). V. God's appearance to Abram, to confirm the promise of the land of Canaan to him (Gen 13:14, etc.).

INTRODUCTION TO GENESIS 13 This chapter gives an account of the return of Abram from Egypt to the land of Canaan, and to the same place in it he had been before, Gen 13:1 and of a strife between the herdsmen of Abram and Lot, and the occasion of it, Gen 13:5 which was composed by the prudent proposal of Abram, Gen 13:8 upon which they parted; Abram continued in Canaan, and Lot chose the plain of Jordan, and dwelt near Sodom, a place infamous for wickedness, Gen 13:10 after which the Lord renewed to Abram the grant of the land of Canaan to him, and to his seed, Gen 13:14 and then he removed to the plain of Mamre in Hebron, and there set up the worship of God, Gen 13:18.

And Abram said unto Lot,.... Being either an ear witness himself of the contentions of their servants, or having it reported to him by credible persons, he applied himself to Lot, in order to make peace, being a wise and good man; and though he was senior in years, and superior in substance, and higher in the class of relation, and upon all accounts the greatest man, yet he makes the proposal first, and lays a scheme before Lot for their future friendship, and to prevent quarrels, and the mischievous consequences of them: let there be no strife, I pray thee, between me and thee; there had been none yet, but it was very likely there would, if the dissension should go on between their servants; they could not well avoid interesting themselves in it, when it related to their respective properties; and there must be a right and wrong in such cases to be looked into and adjusted, which might occasion a difference between them; and this Abram was desirous of preventing, and therefore bespeaks his kinsman in this loving, affectionate, and condescending language: and or between my herdmen and thy herdmen; as he understood there was, and which, if not timely put an end to, might be of bad consequence to them both, especially as to their peace and comfort, giving this excellent reason to enforce his request: for we be brethren; or "men brethren we be" (u); we are men, let us act like such, the rational and humane part; they were brethren being men, so by nature all are brethren; by natural relation, Lot being the son of his brother Haran; brethren in religion, of the same faith in the one true and living God, and worshippers of him; and therefore on all accounts, by the ties of nature, relation, and religion, they were obliged to seek and cultivate peace and love. (u) "viri fratres vos", Pagninus Montanus, Drusius, Schmidt.

Rightly, then, devotion has claimed first place for itself. Let us consider now also the adornment of the other virtues. Holy Abraham enjoyed the presence of his nephew, to whom he showed fatherly affection. A conflict occurred between the servants of the nephew and those of the uncle. As a truly wise man Abraham was aware that disagreements among servants often break the peace among their masters. He broke the thread of discord so that the contagion might not spread. He thought it preferable that the two separate than that good harmony among them be broken. This is what you should do whenever you find yourself in a similar situation, to forestall a hotbed of discord. In fact, you are not stronger than Abraham. He thought it best to withdraw from the servants’ disputes, not to treat them with contempt. And if you are strong enough, take care lest someone weaker than you gives ear to the whisperings of the servants. It often happens that by their undivided service they sow discord among relatives. Better it is to separate from each other so that friendship might remain. When two cannot live together in a house with common property, is it not better graciously to withdraw than to live together in discord?

Abraham made the division, because “the territory”—says Scripture—”was insufficient to contain them both,” because they were too rich. It is a worldly vice that land is always insufficient for the rich. Nothing satisfies the greed of the rich. The richer one is, the more greedily one desires possessions. The rich man is eager to extend the boundaries of his field, to exclude his neighbor. Is this what Abraham was like? Not at all, although at the beginning he too was imperfect. For where could perfection have come from before the coming of Christ? He had not yet come who was to say, “If you will be perfect, go, sell everything you possess and give it to the poor and come follow me.” However, Abraham offers the choice, quite unlike what a greedy person would do. Like a just man he forestalls strife.

“Let there be no strife,” he says, “between you and me and between your herdsmen and my herdsmen; for we are human beings and brothers.” We have seen that Abraham is Lot’s uncle and Lot is his nephew. Why then does he call him brother? Notice that the motives invoked by the wise man are those of concord. For this reason he first speaks of their common humanity as “human beings.” All human beings are children of a single nature, conceived deep within the inward parts, nourished and brought into this world by one womb. For this reason we are bound to one another by a certain family law, like brothers, begotten of one father and borne into this world by one mother, like uterine brothers. And so, since we are the offspring of a rational nature, we should love one another with a mutual love like brothers and not be fighting with one another and persecuting one another. But much more properly the term brothers refers to the soul which is one, the soul whose rational dimension is joined, as we said above, to the senses of the irrational, but being the rational part it is also united to the virtues. For this reason the vices and the virtues of a person are united by fraternal necessity. In fact, the vices are carnal; the virtues belong to the rational soul. But the flesh and the soul, which are the human components, are united as it were by conjugal law. Humanity therefore must make a treaty of sorts between its component parts and impose a peace on them, as it were. But no one is endowed with such great power as to conquer the flesh. And for this reason came “our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down the dividing wall of hostility, by abolishing in his flesh the law of commandments and ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of two, so making peace, and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby bringing hostility to an end.” Rightly then the apostle described himself as “homo infelix,” because he had to endure such a great war within himself, the flames of which he was unable to extinguish. Indeed, Solomon, speaking only of one small part of the passions, namely, anger, says, “The wise man is better than the strong, and he who rules his spirit than he who takes a city.” Happy then is one who escapes from this war, who is no longer a stranger and a pilgrim but a fellow citizen of the saints and member of the household of God, who though still on earth is not battered by things of the earth.

See the extraordinary degree of his humility; see the height of his wisdom. The elder, the senior, addresses his junior and calls his nephew “brother,” admits him to the same rank as himself and retains no special distinction for himself. Instead, he says, “Let there be no trouble between you and me, nor between my herdsmen and yours.” Nor would it be proper, after all, for this to happen, he says, since we are brothers. Do you see him fulfilling the apostolic law, which says, “Already, then, the verdict has completely gone against you for having lawsuits with one another. Why not rather suffer wrong? Why not rather be defrauded? Instead, you do wrong and defraud, and this to your own brothers.” All these admonitions the patriarch observes in fact by saying, “Let there be no trouble between my herdsmen and your herdsmen, because we are brothers.” What could be more peace-loving than such a spirit as this? It wasn’t idly, of course, or to no purpose that I mentioned at the outset that his reason for preferring solitude to the whole civilized world was a love for peace and quiet. See him in this case too, when he noticed the herdsmen completely at odds, how right from the beginning he tried to quench the fire that threatened to break out and put a stop to the rivalry. You see, it was important for him in his role of teacher of wisdom sent to the inhabitants of Palestine, far from providing any bad example or offering any encouragement, rather to give them all the clearer instruction through the clarion call of his restraint in manners and to convert them into imitators of his own virtue.

Notice how he addresses Lot on terms of equality—and yet I have the impression that the outbreak of trouble had no other origin than in the refusal of the patriarch’s herdsmen to allow Lot to enjoy the same privileges as they. The just man, however, handles everything with restraint, demonstrating the remarkable degree of his own good sense and teaching not only those present at the time but also every one in the future never to settle their differences with our relatives by feuding. Their squabbling brings great disgrace on us, and instead of trouble being attributed to them, the blame reverts to us. So what fittingness could there be for brothers, sharing in fact the same nature, the same links of kinship and due at that point to dwell near to each other, to engage in hostilities when it was expected of them to play the role of teaching all these people restraint, gentleness and complete good sense? Let people who believe they are above such reproach give heed to this example when on the grounds of relationship they connive at their relatives’ larceny, rapacity, scheming beyond measure, in the city and in the country, confiscation of one person’s farm and another’s home, and on that basis they show such scoundrels even greater favor.

But Lot also, who was with Abram, had flocks of sheep, and herds, and tents; nor could the land bear them so that they might dwell together: for their substance was great, and they could not dwell together: hence there was a quarrel between the herdsmen of Abram's flocks and Lot's, and it is detailed how Lot departed from Abraham with their love preserved, preferring to separate physically from his dearest and most holy brother rather than to remain with him amidst scandals and disputes, which were troubling the weak ones; yet he in no way let his bodily separation from him separate him from the deepest love of his mind, as the following sacred history most clearly proves: where having been captured by enemies, he saved him with all his might with his men, and rightly so because Lot himself did not at all alter the course of virtue and faith, which he had been accustomed to practice with his elder brother, even living apart.

Abram and his family return out of Egypt to Canaan, Gen 13:1, Gen 13:2. He revisits Beth-el, and there invokes the Lord, Gen 13:3, Gen 13:4. In consequence of the great increase in the flocks of Abram and Lot, their herdsmen disagree; which obliges the patriarch and his nephew to separate, Gen 13:5-9. Lot being permitted to make his choice of the land, chooses the plains of Jordan, Gen 13:10, Gen 13:11, and pitches his tent near to Sodom, while Abram abides in Canaan, Gen 13:12. Bad character of the people of Sodom, Gen 13:13. The Lord renews his promise to Abram, Gen 13:14-17. Abram removes to the plains of Mamre, near Hebron, and builds an altar to the Lord, Gen 13:18.

For we be brethren - We are of the same family, worship the same God in the same way, have the same promises, and look for the same end. Why then should there be strife? If it appear to be unavoidable from our present situation, let that situation be instantly changed, for no secular advantages can counterbalance the loss of peace.

RETURN FROM EGYPT. (Gen. 13:1-18) went up . . . south--Palestine being a highland country, the entrance from Egypt by its southern boundary is a continual ascent.

Abram, having returned from Egypt to the south of Canaan with his wife and property uninjured, through the gracious protection of God, proceeded with Lot למסּעיו "according to his journeys" (lit., with the repeated breaking up of his camp, required by a nomad life; on נסע to break up a tent, to remove, see Exo 12:37) into the neighbourhood of Bethel and Ai, where he had previously encamped and built an altar (Gen 12:8), that he might there call upon the name of the Lord again. That ויּקרא (Gen 13:4) is not a continuation of the relative clause, but a resumption of the main sentence, and therefore corresponds with ויּלך (Gen 13:3), "he went...and called upon the name of the Lord there," has been correctly concluded by Delitzsch from the repetition of the subject Abram.

To put an end to the strife between their herdsmen, Abram proposed to Lot that they should separate, as strife was unseemly between אחים אנשׁים, men who stood in the relation of brethren, and left him to choose his ground. "If thou to the left, I will turn to the right; and if thou to the right, I will turn to the left." Although Abram was the older, and the leader of the company, he was magnanimous enough to leave the choice to his nephew, who was the younger, in the confident assurance that the Lord would so direct the decision, that His promise would be fulfilled.