1. Gen. 2:4 “the generations of the heavens and the earth”
2. Gen. 5:1 “the generations of Adam”
3. Gen. 6:9 “the generations of Noah”
4. Gen. 10:1 “the generations of the sons of Noah”
5. Gen. 11:10 “the generations of Shem”
6. Gen. 11:27 “the generations of Terah”
7. Gen. 25:12 “the generations of Ishmael”
8. Gen. 25:19 “the generations of Isaac”
9. Gen. 36:1 “the generations of Esau”
10. Gen. 37:2 “the generations of Jacob”

1. As for the expansion of the universe, this fact only confirms that the universe had a beginning. Some have wondered if such expansion is comprehended in the statement that God “stretcheth out the heavens” (repeated ten times in scripture), although those words could very well be poetic.
2. “I believe the tendency in the material world is for motion to become diffused, and that as a whole the reverse of concentration is gradually going on – I believe that no physical action can ever restore the heat emitted from the Sun, and that this source is not inexhaustible; also that the motions of the Earth and other planets are losing vis viva which is converted into heat…” – Lord Kelvin
3. “The entropy of the universe tends to a maximum.” – Rudolf Clausius
4. Kelly, William. In the Beginning. New Edition, Revised 1894.
5. Parts of this chart are borrowed from a similar chart by Eric James.
6. "Evolution is but scientific mythology in contempt of scripture..." - Kelly, William. In the Beginning. New Edition, Revised 1894.
7. It has been well remarked that in Ephesians Christ is never spoken of as the image of God; He is so, very expressly, in Colossians. If we may discriminate, what we have in Ephesians is more Christ showing me what God is — not His image, but His moral likeness reflected in Christ. Hence it is said, "Be ye imitators of God, as dear children, and walk in love, as Christ also hath loved us." It is more the notion of resemblance than representation. Still, although you can say of Christ, He is the image of God, He is never said to be in the likeness of God, just because He is God. In Colossians we hear repeatedly of the image of God. Here, for instance, the new man is said to be "after the image of him that created him"; as in the first chapter Christ is said to be the image of the invisible God. The two ideas of likeness and image may often be confounded in our minds, but not so in Scripture, where likeness simply means that one person resembles another; image means that a person is represented, whether it be like him or not — both of course may be together. - Kelly, William. The Epistle to the Colossians.

1. Wigram, George V. What raised the wondrous thought? Hymns for the Little Flock: #330. 1805-1879.

The Serpent’s Subtlety and the Act of Disobedience (3:1-6)

1. Satan spoke to Eve, not Adam. Satan was very crafty, and he spoke to the woman. The apostle Paul picks up on this in 1 Tim. 2:13-4, saying; “Adam was formed first, then Eve: and Adam was not deceived; but the woman, having been deceived, was in transgression.” This is brought out in connection with the woman’s place, which is not to teach or usurp authority over the man, but to be in quietness. Satan tried to draw Eve, the “weaker vessel” (1 Pet. 3:7), out of her place. We have no reason to believe Adam was absent… he very well could have been standing by her side. Adam’s failure was in not taking the place of headship. He was not deceived.
2. Satan cast doubt on the Word of God. The enemy of our soul is always looking to cast doubt on the simple declarations of God. “Hath God said?” is the age old technique of Satan. Before this, the matter of the forbidden fruit was very simple. Satan seeks to complicate it. The apostle Paul picks up on this when writing to the Corinthians; “But I fear lest by any means, as the serpent deceived Eve by his craft, so your thoughts should be corrupted from simplicity as to the Christ” (2 Cor. 11:3). The command from God to man was simple, but Satan’s line of attack was to fabricate some hidden plot (vv.4-5), to complicate and confuse the matter.
3. Satan twisted the Word of God. Satan knows how to use the Word of God, but to present it in a twisted way. He says, “Is it even so, that God has said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?” Satan turned the commandment of God around backwards… God had given general permission, saying “Of every tree of the garden thou shalt freely eat”, with one prohibition (Gen. 2:16). He turned the Word of God around backward, into a general prohibition. We see Satan doing the very same thing in the temptation of Christ (Matt. 4:6). We need to be warned about the danger of twisting God’s Word.

1. Open denial of the Word of God. Satan openly denied the Word of God by saying “Ye will not certainly die”. God had said “in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die” (Gen. 2:17). The enemy of our souls doesn’t come in immediately with a flat denial or contradiction. He added to the Word of God in v.1, and he takes away from the Word of God in v.4.
2. Casting doubt on the goodness of God. Satan purported that God had lied to Adam and Eve, and that He was holding something good back from them. The opposite was true! God had met every need and given them every pleasure, but had prohibited the one thing that could spoil it all. How clever was the serpent! Eve should not have continued talking with this one that questioned the goodness of God.
3. Promoting Self-exaltation. Satan tempted Eve with the very thought that was in his own heart; “I will be like the Most High” (Isa. 14:14), and he tempted Eve by saying, “ye will be as God”. We see the very opposite in our Lord Jesus Christ… He was “equal with God”, but in humility and obedience took “his place in the likeness of men”. Christ Jesus did not seek His own glory, but God has “highly exalted him” (Phil. 2:5-9). What a contrast between Adam and Christ!
4. Telling only a Partial Truth. Jesus said of Satan that “he is a liar, and the father of it” (John 8:44). The serpent was correct that they would be as God in knowing “good and evil”, but he did not tell Eve that they would be powerless to choose the good, or to refuse the evil. Satan often holds out higher knowledge as a temptation to man; “your eyes will be opened”. To be preserved from this we must be ready to cast down “imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God”, and lead captive “every thought to the obedience of Christ”, which is the same obedience that Christ had to His Father (2 Cor. 10:5).

The Aftermath: Conscience and the Curse (3:7-20)

Man’s conscience (v.7)

God Seeks Hiding Man (vv.8-13)

1. Conscience. No person had told Adam that he was naked. He knew because he had a conscience. It was a bad conscience.
2. The Word of God. Adam had directly transgressed a known commandment. It is called in Rom. 5:14, “the similitude of Adam’s transgression”. A transgression is a double sin, because it is not only lawlessness, but positive disobedience.

The Serpent Cursed (vv.14-15)

The Woman Cursed (v.16)

The Man Cursed (vv.17-20)

God Works because of Sin in His Creation (3:21-24)

Coats of Skin (v.21)

Expulsion from the Garden (vv.22-24)

1. “Only God can have in Himself the knowledge of good and evil, without leaving the good and falling under the power of the evil. If the creature, left to itself, have the knowledge of good and evil, the result is that the evil overpowers and carries him away: he gives up the good, and falls a prey to the evil.” – Kelly, William. Glory and virtue. The Bible Treasury, Volume 13, pp.12-14.
2. Sandeman, R. See mercy, mercy from on high. Little Flock Hymnbook #186. 1718-1771.

1. Cain was a wicked person; but, as appearance went, he was doing what was right in paying what he owed to God. But really it was bringing the sign of the curse; it was going to God as if nothing had happened; it was the most perfect hardness of heart, because, if I come to God at all, why have I such toil and labour? why give the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul, except I am away from God, and something as happened? — Darby, J.N. Hints on the Book of Genesis.
2. It is striking enough, that until you come to the institution of the law, you never get sin-offerings, except in the case of Cain, of which I do not doubt myself (though I know it is a question of interpretation), that it is, “a sin-offering lieth at the door.” Sin and sin-offering is the same word; that word is never used again in that way, till the law – we get burnt-offerings and peace-offerings often. – J.N. Darby. The Burnt Offering.
3. Should it be “sin,” or “sin-offering,” lieth at the door? I am disposed to think it a sin-offering; only that the sin-offering is never mentioned historically until we come to Leviticus, under Moses. It is in this kind of way, “If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and unto thee shall the desire of thy younger brother be, and thou shalt rule over him; but if thou failest to do well, there is a remedy, and therefore thou oughtest not to be wroth,” “Lieth at the door” means crouching. It is not the expression, “It is at your door,” as we say; and therefore I was inclined to take it, “If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted?” (“and if thou doest not well,” there is a remedy, in parenthesis) “and unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.” I have no quarrel with the other view, because sin did lie at his door. — Darby, J.N. Hints on the Book of Genesis.
4. It was Dr. John Lightfoot who first, as far as I am aware, suggested “sin offering” here rather than “sin,” as preferred in the ancient and most modern versions. Many since that great Hebraist have followed in his wake, notably Abp. Magee in his well-known work on the Atonement, who argues from the admitted and peculiar form of the connected verb (couching) as strongly confirming an animal ready for offering, and not the sin calling for it, which he regards as, to say the least of it, “a bold image.” Then he summons to his aid the grammatical fact of the substantive, which is feminine, with a verb of the masculine, which he follows Parkhurst in thinking perfectly consistent with the supposition of a sin offering, the victim, and not the thing “sin.” This however is a slender proof, for in the passages cited the words stand as subject and predicate, and therefore do not require sameness of gender, as anyone can see by examination not only of Hebrew, but of Greek and Latin and perhaps almost all if not all languages. There is no doubt that, besides the primary sense of sin, the word admits of the secondary meanings of sin suffering (i.e., punishment) and sin offering… It is a question of context, as we may observe in ver. 13 of our chapter, where the Sept. gives aitia, a charge, fault, or crime; as the Auth. and Rev. Versions have “punishment” in the text, “iniquity” in the margin. It is therefore legitimate to conceive that a sin offering may be meant in ver. 7, especially as Jehovah uttered the words, though it was reserved to the law to define and demand them in due time, for by law is full knowledge or acknowledgment of sin… The question is whether Jehovah simply charges home the conviction of sin on the wrong-doer, or intimates a sacrificial means of getting cleared, according to the proposed correction. In this case a burnt offering would not be in place, since it is generally expressive of man’s actual state in approaching God, not a specific bearing away of positive and personal wrong-doing as is here implied. Even if certainly thus, what believer can doubt that the mind of Jehovah has in these words Christ and His cross before Him? What grace in bringing sin to the door! — Kelly, William. In the Beginning. New Edition, Revised 1894.
5. Kelly, William. In the Beginning. New Edition, Revised 1894.
6. Darby, J.N. Hints on the Book of Genesis.

As to any consecutive meaning in these names, certain people have made something out of them; but I think nothing of this and the like spinning of webs out of the imagination. We must look for scriptural warrant, at least for the principle and this is lacking here.

1. Kelly, William. In the Beginning. New Edition, Revised 1894.

Jehovah’s Reasons for Judging the Earth (6:1-8)

1. “It is not the change of mind in God, but when the thing changes, God does not like it; not because God changes, but because He Himself does not change.” — Darby, J.N. Synopsis of the Books of the Bible. G. Morrish, 1940.

1. Hayhoe, Gordon. Long Ago a Flood Was Coming. Echoes of Grace Hymnbook # 363.
2. “All in whose nostrils is the breath of life” included man and beast; all go together in that kind of language. – Darby, J.N. Hints on the Book of Genesis.

1. Details were not given; but God established government, as a root-principle, in man’s hand, responsible to him as from Him he received the charge. – Kelly, Kelly, William. In the Beginning. New Edition, Revised 1894.
2. Have they not dwelt, too, in the tents of Shem, not as mere conquerors, but, among other ways perhaps, as sharers in that blessing which was shadowed so finely in Israel’s “own olive-tree.” – Kelly, W. Early Chapters of Genesis.
3. As to the colour, especially black, I do not pretend to account for it in mankind. The Egyptians were not black; they are always painted red in the hieroglyphics. Their pictures in Nubia are seen with prisoners all black. What Livingstone found in Africa was, that if there was a wet country along with heat, there the people got black. The Portuguese are black in certain hollow islands. As to what people have stated about races, I have no hesitation in saying that there is nothing solid about it whatever. – Darby, J.N. Hints on the Book of Genesis.

1. The origin of each nation in the book of Genesis.
2. The intersection of each nation with Israel in history.
3. The final destiny of each nation in prophecy.

In the Bible there is not a more important chapter than Genesis 10 as regards the providential arrangement of tongues, families, and nations. Here alone is given the rise of different races, with their sources. Who else could have told us how and when the earth was thus divided?²³

Chapter 10 is not history, but a survey of the whole earth. There were no tongues or nations at all until Babel; if you try to put this chapter into time, you will go all astray.²⁴

The Sons of Noah (10:1)

The Generations of Japheth: Europe and Western Asia (10:2-5)

1. Gomer was the father of the Celtic peoples, who settled first in the north of India, then migrated to Europe (Germany). The name Gaul is taken from Gomer. A branch of the Gauls invaded Turkey, and gave their name to that province: Galatia. Gomer is mentioned in Ezek. 38:6 as being confederate with Magog in the great northern confederacy that will descend on Palestine at 1335 days from the middle of Daniel’s 70th week. Gomer is mentioned with “all his bands”, indicating that they were composed of a number of tribes. This all fits with what we know of the Germanic tribes.²⁵
2. Magog was the father of what we call Russia today, known as Scythia and Tartary. We read in Ezek. 38:2 that Magog is “the prince of Rosh” (Russia). The land of Magog is called Gog. Gog will form an alliance with many other nations, and will play a large role in future prophetic events. Read more… Magog is also possibly the head of the Mongols and Orientals.
3. Madai is the father of the Medes, who settled in northwest Iran and southeast Turkey. Madai is the Hebrew name for Media. The Medes later became closely intertwines with the Persians, who come from the line of Shem. In Ezek. 38 we find that Persia also (likely with the Medes) will be found in the alliance of Gog and Magog.
4. Javan is the father of the Ionian peoples, ‘Javan’ being the Hebrew name for Greece. They are mentioned in Ezek. 27:13 as being a maritime people, taken up with commerce “they bartered with thee the persons of men, and vessels of bronze.” Greece will be allied with the Beast (Revived Roman Empire) in future prophetic events. Read more…
5. Tubal is the father of the Tibareni people, occupying vast areas in Scythia, but pushed at times to a small area located on the eastern coast of the Black Sea. The Russian city of Tobolsk takes its name from Tubal. 
6. Meshech is the father of the Moschi people, who settled the mountainous region of Georgia. The Russian city of Moscow likely takes its name from Mechech. Both the Tibareni and the Moschi are mentioned by the Greek historian Herodotus and by the Jewish historian Josephus. Both Meshech and Tubal are found in Ezekiel 38:2 as closely connected with Magog, the prince of Russia.
7. Tiras is a name we know little about. Based on the similarity of the names, Tiras could be the father of the Thracian people, who occupied modern-day Bulgaria and Romania. We cannot be certain who Tiras is, but God knows.

1. Ashkenaz settled the region of Armenia, and they are connected in Jer. 51:27 with Ararat and Minni, which were also in that region. Later some migrated to Europe and settled in modern day Germany; e.g. the Teutons, a Germanic tribe that the Romans knew and wrote of.
2. Riphath is not mentioned elsewhere in the Bible, but is believed to have occupied Asia Minor along with Ashkenaz.
3. Togarmah settled in Armenia, between the Black Sea and Caspian Sea. The “house of Togarmah” is mentioned in Ezek. 38:6 as being confederate with the northern enemy, and identified as coming “of the north quarters” with “all his bands”. They are also mentioned in history as supplying the markets of Tyre “with horses, and horsemen, and mules” (Ezek. 27:14).

1. Elishah was the father of the Ionian race, who settled in Asia Minor. We read in Ezek. 27:7 that dyed cloth “blue and purple” was a product made in “the isles of Elishah”. It is interesting the Lydia from Thyatira (Acts 16:14) was a seller of purple. The Ionian peoples eventually spread to the Peloponnesus, and inhabited Greece generally. They were known for “commercial prosperity, but for excellence in art and poetry, in history and philosophy”, characteristics which would later symbolize Greek culture.²⁶
2. Tarshish was an original settlement on the south shore of Spain. Tarshish had an “abundance of all substance; with silver, iron, tin, and lead” by which they furnished the markets of Tyre (Ezek. 27:12). It would appear that there was another place called Tarshish somewhere on the coast of India. We read that Solomon’s ships sailed from Ezion-Geber (1 Kings 9:26, 2 Chron. 9:21) and returned with ivory, and asses, and peacocks. These exotic things were not apparently available in Spain. The route around the horn of Africa (Cape of Good Hope) was probably not known, making India a more likely destination for Solomon’s ships. Which Tarshish did Jonah flee to? Probably the Indian port city. Yet whichever way, Jonah was fleeing a long distance from Joppa.
3. Kittim or Chittim refers to the twin Peninsulas of Europe, which are Greece and Italy.²⁷ Chittim is spoken of in reference to Greece in Maccabees 1:1; 8:5, and a reference to Rome in Daniel 11:30. In Daniel 11, the “ships of Chittim” is clearly a reference to the fleet of Gaius Popillius Laenas, the newly appointed Roman consul, who intercepted Antiochus Epiphanes (the king of the north) outside of Alexandria and thwarted his attack on the king of the south. We know from the prophecy of Balaam (Num. 24:24) that the “ships of Chittim” will sail again, referring to the Beast’s navy that will sail from the west and “afflict Asshur”, before coming to destruction. We read of the “isles” of Kittim in Jer. 2:10 and Ezek. 28:6, which fits will with the geography of Greece and Italy. Josephus thought Chittm was Cyprus, and many have followed his lead, although it does not seem to fit with scripture.
4. Dodanim is possibly a reference to the Dardanians, who were closely associated with the Trojans (Troas being a region in northwestern Asia Minor). The exact meaning of Dodanim is uncertain.

The Generations of Ham: the Middle East and Africa (10:6-20)

1. Cush became the father of great empires. His family separated into two branches: the African and the Asiatic Cush.²⁸ We read in Isaiah 18:1 of the “rivers of Cush”, which are the Nile (African) and Euphrates (Asiatic). Those rivers represent the nations on the frontiers of Israel that had oppressed them, Egypt, Assyria, and Babylon. The “land” spoken of in Isa. 18 is beyond those rivers, a country unknown at the time when Isaiah lived. We have a similar expression in Zeph. 3:10. The name “Cush” is frequently translated “Ethiopia”.
2. Mizraim is the Hebrew name for Egypt. As the word ends with ‘im’, it is more than singular. In this case it is a dual word, and may refer to upper and lower Egypt. The name also includes a reference to earthworks of some kind. It may be that Mizraim was the first to embank the Nile river, turning that region into rich land for growing wheat. This thought would agree with Ezek. 29:9, which, speaking of the king of Egypt, says “he hath said, The river is mine, and I have made it”.
3. Phut refers to the degraded African tribes south and west of Egypt. 
4. Canaan refers to the peoples that inhabited Palestine before Israel drove them out. They were Israel’s Adversaries, deeply entrenched in idolatry, and known for their wicked ways. Canaan was cursed because of Ham’s sin (Gen. 9). Canaan seized on the good land of Palestine early, and held it for hundreds of years until Israel came up from Egypt. The Bible makes it clear that the sin of the Canaanites was the reason they were driven out.

The Sons of Cush (vv.7-11)

1. Seba settles on the Nile but farther south than Mizraim. It is the region we know today as Sudan. It was a civilization known as Meroe. They are mentioned in Psa. 72:10 as those who will offer tribute to Christ in the Millennium.
2. Havilah refers to southern Arabia, which is modern day Yemen. It is the region we read of in Gen. 2:30 as containing much gold, and identified in Gen. 25:18 as a place where Ishmael’s family later settled.
3. Sabtah is never otherwise mentioned, but is believed to have settled in modern-day Yemen. Pliny the elder wrote of a city Sabtecha in that area. They are not mentioned specifically elsewhere in scripture.
4. Raamah settled in the Persian Gulf side of Arabia. They are mentioned in Ezekiel as being traffickers in precious commodities; “The trafficking of Sheba and Raamah, they were thy traffickers; they traded for thy wares with chief of all spices, and with all precious stones and gold” (Ezek. 27:22).
5. Sabtecha is mentioned here only. We know nothing of where his family settled, only that is was probably with the rest of his family in Africa or Arabia.

1. Sheba settled the Persian gulf area of Arabia. There is another Sheba mentioned in the Shemitic line. The two Shebas are distinguished in Ezek. 27. The first is the Cushite Sheba (Ezek. 27:22), whose merchandise was spices and precious stones. The second is the Shemitic Sheba mentioned with Asshur (Ezek. 27:23), whose merchandise was fine clothing. It would seem that Sheba was the father of Nimrod (v.8).
2. Dedan also settled in the Persian gulf area of Arabia, and at one time there was an inland named for him. As with Sheba, we have a Shemite Dedan also mentioned in this chapter (v.20). The Cushite Dedan is mentioned in Ezek. 27:15 as supplying “horns of ivory, and ebony”, while we have the Shemite Dedan connected with a region to the south of Edom in Ezek. 25:13.

The Sons of Mizraim (vv.13-14)

The Sons of Canaan (vv.15-19)

1. Sidon means “fishing”, and his family settles the Mediterranean coast in what is modern-day Lebanon. They were a seagoing people (Ezek. 27:8), familiar with cutting trees for ships (1 Kings 5:6). They oppressed Israel in the days of the judges (Judges 10:12), and Israel (through Solomon) imported the worship of “Ashtoreth the goddess of the Zidonians” (1 Kings 11:1-5).
2. Heth was the father of the Hittites, who became a great kingdom at one time, stretching from Turkey almost to Arabia. Their young woman were troublesome to Isaac and Rebecca (Gen. 27:46). However, one of David’s mighty men, Urijah, was a Hittite.
3. The Jebusite possessed Jerusalem, and the children of Israel were unable to dispossess them (Josh. 15:63) until David in 2 Sam. 5. It is recorded there that the Jebusites insulted David at that time, although later we read of Ornan the Jebusite who offered his threshing-floor to David.
4. The Amorite settled the land which was later given to Judah, but also occupied the land east of Jordan. There was great strength among the Amorites, “whose height was as the height of the cedars, and he was strong as the oaks” (Amos 2:9), and also much wickedness. God told Abraham that his descendants would go down into Egypt for four generations before coming up, because at that time “the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet full” (Gen. 15:16). When approaching the land, Israel defeated two great Amorite kings; Sihon king of Heshbon, and Og king of Bashan, “two kings of the Amorites… on this side the Jordan, toward the sun-rising” (Deut. 4:46-47). Later, Joshua dealt with the five Amorite kings to the west of Jordan (Josh. 10:5).
5. The Girgashite has disappeared, but God still knows where they are.
6. The Hivite interacted with Israel on a number of occasions, most notably when the men of Gibeon deceived the men of Israel (Josh. 9).

The Generations of Shem: the Middle East (10:21-31)

1. Elam settled in the province of Persia, whose capital later became Shushan or Susa (Esther 1:2, 5; Neh. 1:1; Dan. 8:2). Before the chest and arms of silver (Dan. 2), we read of considerable strength in Elam. We read in Gen. 14 of Chedorlaomer, king of Elam, who subjected the cities of the plain to his rule, and amassed an army to (unsuccessfully) quell a rebellion. Elam will be found in the confederacy of Magog in the last great conflict (Ezek. 38:5). However, there will be a part of that nation that is restored in the Millennium (Jer. 49:39).
2. Asshur strictly refers to Assyria (northern Iraq and southern Turkey). Assyria developed into a great empire, peaking in the days of the later kings of Israel. We read of Pul, Tiglathpileser, Shalmaneser, and Sennacherib, all kings of Assyria. As Assyria rose to prominence, it began to threaten the power of Egypt. We read of Israel being caught in the middle between the two superpowers (2 Kings 17:4) who fought at times (2 Kings 23:29). In the Millennium, Assyria and Egypt will be restored and blessed, but they will no longer dominate Israel; “In that day shall Israel be the third with Egypt and with Assyria, even a blessing in the midst of the land” (Isa. 19:24-25).
3. Arphaxad was the father of the Chaldees, who lived between the Tigris and Euphrates. He is also the father of the chosen people.
4. Lud was the father of the Lydians of Asia Minor. This people is not to be confused with the Hamite race in Africa called the Ludim.
5. Aram is the Hebrew name for Syria, and includes Lebanon, and the whole table-land to the northeast of Palestine. There are a number of districts within Aram that are mentioned in scripture: Aram-Dammesek (Syria of Damascus, 2 Sam. 8:5, 6; 1 Chron, 18:5, 6), Aram-Zobah (northeast, 1 Sam. 14:47), Arambeth-Rehob (2 Sam. 10:6, 8), Aram-Maachah (2 Sam. 10:6), Geshur in Aram (2 Sam. 15:8), and Paddan-Aram (Gen. 28:7). Damascus became the prominent city in Syria.

Conclusion (10:32)

• Genesis_of_the_Nations.pptx

1. Kelly, W. Lectures on the Pentateuch.
2. Darby, J.N. Hints on the Book of Genesis.
3. But there is no good reason for doubting that those we call Germans were of Gomer, no less than the Kelts. – Kelly, W. Early Chapters of Genesis.
4. Kelly, W. Early Chapters of Genesis.
5. There is no difficulty as to Kittim, which is a term beyond controversy applied to two of the peninsulas of Europe, first Greece [or Macedon], then Rome or Italy. – Kelly, W. Early Chapters of Genesis.
6. Even Homer (Od. ii. 23, 24) speaks of Ethiopians as divided into two parts, the most distant of men, some at the setting sun, and some at the rising. – Kelly, W. Early Chapters of Genesis.
7. Morrish, G.A. Concise Bible Dictionary. Entry: Asshur.
8. This is the position of William Kelly. See Kelly, W. Early Chapters of Genesis.
9. J.N. Darby took the opposite position: “Babel was the beginning of his [Nimrod’s] kingdom; others he went out and built, or conquered.” – Darby, J.N. Synopsis of the Books of the Bible.

The Tower of Babel (11:1-9)

The Generations of Shem (11:10-26)

The Generations of Terah (11:27-32)

Terah Family Tree

1. Calculated from the lifespan of Peleg, in whose days “was the earth divided” (Gen. 10:25).

The Prior Call and Promise to Abram (12:1-3)

CHAPTER 12

1 And Jehovah had said to Abram, Go out of thy land, and from thy kindred, and from thy father’s house, to the land that I will shew thee. 

 

v.1 The Call of Abraham. It is important to see when the call of Jehovah came to Abram. It is in a past tense; “Jehovah had said to Abram”. Acts 7:2-3 makes it clear that “The God of glory appeared unto our father Abraham, when he was in Mesopotamia, before he dwelt in Charran, and said unto him, Get thee out… etc.” The call of God is individual. Isaiah said “Look unto Abraham your father, and unto Sarah that bare you: for I called him alone, and blessed him, and increased him” (Isa. 51:2). Others accompanied Abraham when he left Ur of the Chaldees (Terah, Lot), but the call was to Abraham individually.

• A sovereign choice. Election is the choice of one out of many. When God chose Abram, there was nothing in the man that was worthy of being chosen. It was God’s sovereign grace to chose Abram, an idolater at the time, and separate him to Himself. We read of this choice in Neh. 9:7; “Thou art the Same, Jehovah Elohim, who didst choose Abram and broughtest him forth out of Ur of the Chaldees, and gavest him the name of Abraham”. As Christians, we also have been chosen by God. Our election is “in Christ, before the foundation of the world”! Calling follows election. God calls those whom He has chosen.³⁵
• A separating call. The call of God would separate Abram. He must leave three things: he must go “out of thy land, and from thy kindred, and from thy father’s house”.  This is difficult for us to do, as it was for Abram. The call of God supersedes every earthly tie. It is the highest claim upon us. Abraham was not asked to try to restore or reform that which had become corrupted by idolatry, but rather to leave it! Separation is not merely negative, it is positive also. There was a land ahead, which God would show Abram. In the same way, God gives us an object to separate to. For the believer, it is the person of Christ!
• It required faith. God purposely did not give all the details to Abram at once. He said, go to “the land that I will shew thee”. Abraham wasn’t going to get more light until he obeyed the Word of God. We read of no more revelations to Abram in Haran. He had to obey what was originally given to him in order to have more light. This is because God wants us to walk by faith. Such is the pronouncement of the Spirit in Heb. 11:8; “By faith Abraham, being called, obeyed to go out into the place which he was to receive for an inheritance, and went out, not knowing where he was going.”
• A hindered response. Terah, Abram’s father went with him, and this became a hindrance to Abram. They “came as far as Haran, and dwelt there”. Haran or Charran was a city on the Euphrates river in Syria (Aram). It was half-way on the thousand-mile path to Canaan. They remained in Haran until Terah died, and only then did Abram continue to the land of Canaan. It is a lesson for us, that we need to be careful not to let family ties hinder us from responding to the call of God. While Abram tried to answer both the call of nature and the call of God, progress stalled. He obeyed only in part. Terah seemed to take the lead (he “took” Abram and Lot), which meant that Abram was not really answering the call of God. Terah may have tried to apply the call to himself, but it was for Abram. The call of God (Gen. 12:1-3) involved leaving his kindred and his father’s house. He left his “land”, but did not leave his “father’s house” until Terah died, and he did not leave his “kindred” until separating from Lot in ch.13, when there was strife between the herdsmen.

Historical Note. There is a Jewish tradition which is contrived to soften the words of Joshua 24:2, which implicate the family of Terah in idolatry. The legend insinuates that Abraham served Jehovah from his youth, and was persecuted by Nimrod for refusing to worship the pagan idols. The legend becomes very extravagant. At one point Nimrod builds a huge fire, and punishes Abram by putting him in the flames, but Abram comes out unharmed. This is all totally unsupported, and even contradicted, by the Word of God. What turned Abraham from darkness to light? “The God of glory appeared unto our father Abraham, when he was in Mesopotamia, before he dwelt in Charran, and said unto him, Get thee out… etc.” (Acts 7:2-3). It was the sovereign, effectual call of God that converted Abraham! It is the same for us today; “through the knowledge of him that has called us by glory and virtue” (2 Pet. 1:3).

 

2 And I will make of thee a great nation, and bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing. 3 And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee; and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.

 

vv.2-3 The First Promises. The calling of God is always accompanied by the promises of God. Here we have the promises God gave to Abram when he was still in Mesopotamia, on the other side of the river Euphrates. These promises were unconditional, not like those given to Israel under the old covenant. They begin with “I will”.

• Father of the Chosen People. A great nation would spring from Abraham. “I will make of thee a great nation” refers to the children of Israel, who will one day be the leading nation on earth in the Millennium.
• Personal Blessing. Abraham would be personally blessed; “and bless thee”. Not only would he be materially blessed, with flocks and herds, and trained servants, etc. but also he enjoyed special communion with God, and special intelligence that flows from communion.
• A Great Name. A total contrast to the Tower of Babel, where men sought to make themselves a name, God here promised to make Abram’s name great! Other than Christ, there is perhaps no greater name in history than Abraham’s; “and make thy name great”.
• A Channel of Blessing to Others. Even greater than being personally blessed, Abraham would become a blessing to others; “and thou shalt be a blessing”. He becomes the center of earthly blessing. It is in this sense that Abraham is the root of the olive tree of promise (Romans 11:16-27).
• Divine Protection. Abraham would have the special protection of God; “I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee”. Those who show kindness to Abraham’s family will be blessed (materially), and those who curse them will likewise be cursed.³⁶
• A Channel of Blessing to the Gentiles. Abraham would even become a channel of blessing to those who were not his biological descendants, as Paul teaches in Gal. 3:7-8. It is by faith that this takes place; “and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed”.

  The grace of God is too great to be limited to just one nation. It goes out to "all nations".³⁷

Nevertheless, none of these promises rise up to the spiritual blessings that the believer has “in Christ”. They all have to do primarily with blessing on the earth. Compare with Ephesians 1.

 

 

Abram & Company Come to Canaan (12:4-8)

4 And Abram departed as Jehovah had said to him. And Lot went with him. And Abram was seventy-five years old when he departed out of Haran. 5 And Abram took Sarai his wife, and Lot his brother’s son, and all their possessions that they had acquired, and the souls that they had obtained in Haran, and they went out to go into the land of Canaan; and into the land of Canaan they came.

 

vv.4-5 Departing Haran. Considering that Abram and Lot acquired many possessions in Haran, they must have been there for some time. Abram was now taking the lead, but he was not yet ready to leave his kindred, as the Lord had told him. It says “Abram took… Lot”. It’s possible to draw along others, who don’t have our faith, with us in our calling. It can lead to trouble. Rather then lift them up, they will drag us down. The call was to Abram, not to Lot. We also read of “all their possessions that they had acquired, and the souls that they had obtained”. All this substance was a hindrance to the man of faith as well. But at last he departs the “half-way” place, and “into the land of Canaan they came”.

 

6 And Abram passed through the land to the place of Shechem [‘shoulder, saddle’], to the oak of Moreh [‘teacher’]. And the Canaanite was then in the land.

 

v.6 Arrival in the Land. Abraham came to Shechem, a city in the north of Israel, where he would later buy a sepulchre (Acts 7:16), and where the bones of Joseph were buried. There was apparently a grove of tall, strong oaks, called “the oak of Moreh” where the Lord appeared to Abram. It says, “the Canaanite was then in the land”, because Abram did not yet have the object of the promises. It required faith to continue in the promised land while the Canaanite was there. The Canaanites were the descendants of the son of Ham, cursed in Gen. 9. They had taken root in this fruitful land. The cities of Sodom and Gomorrah were Canaanite cities, known for their immorality. But God told Abram in Gen. 15:16 that “the iniquity of the Amorites”, who inhabited the land of Canaan proper, “is not yet full”. They would later grow in wickedness, sacrificing their children in the fire, etc. to the point where God determined to drive them out. In the typical teaching of Exodus to Joshua, the land of Canaan represents the believer’s heavenly portion in Christ. We find that Israel was going to have to drive out the Canaanites in order to possess their inheritance. Abram was not told to fight the Canaanite, but their presence in the land is marked.

 

7 And Jehovah appeared to Abram, and said, Unto thy seed will I give this land. And there he built an altar to Jehovah who had appeared to him.

 

v.7 Promise to Abram in the Plain of Moreh. The Lord appears to Abram, and gives him a promise, which is not only a confirmation of the original promise given while Abram was still in Ur of the Chaldees, but also covered new ground. The Lord now promises the land of Canaan to Abram’s seed. This is the second of a number of times when the Lord appeared or directly spoke to Abraham: (1) Gen. 12:1 and Acts 7:3, (2) Gen. 12:7, (3) Gen 13:14, (4) Gen. 15:1, (5) Gen. 17:1, (6) Gen. 18:1, (7) Gen. 22:11. Abraham built an altar to the Lord, and this became a pattern for him. The original communication to Abram (when afar off) was for the obedience of faith, the second communication (when in the land) was for communion and worship!

 

8 And he removed thence towards the mountain on the east of Bethel [‘House of God’], and pitched his tent, having Bethel toward the west, and Ai [‘heaps and ruins’] toward the east; and there he built an altar to Jehovah, and called on the name of Jehovah.

 

v.8 Abram’s Tent and Altar. We find two things that characterize the walk of Abram. He had a tent and an altar. The tent speaks of our character in this world as “strangers and pilgrims” (1 Pet. 2:11). A tent is a temporary home. Abram had just been promised the land for his seed, but “by faith he sojourned in the land of promise, as in a strange country, dwelling in tabernacles with Isaac and Jacob, etc.” (Heb. 11:9). A stranger is not at home, a pilgrim is on his way home. Abram’s tent was between Bethel, which means ‘House of God’, and Ai, which means ‘heaps and ruins’. This is our pathway as strangers and pilgrims. On one hand we see everything around us in this world as heaps and ruins. On the other hand, we enjoy fellowship with God! The altar speaks of communion (Heb. 13:10; 1 Cor. 10:18). It takes time to build an altar, and it takes time to develop communion with God. It is striking that we read of no tent or altar in Egypt. Both the pilgrim character and communion with God are incompatible with the world.

 

Abram in Egypt (12:9-20)

1. Abram failed in faith during the famine, much like the Church who ceased to trust God for every provision.⁴³
2. Abram went to Egypt, much like how the Church ceased to be separate from the world, and settled down in it.⁴⁴
3. Abram denied his true relationship with Sarah, and instead got Hagar, much the way the Church lost the ground of her relationship with God (grace) and fell under the bondage of the law.⁴⁵
4. Sarah was taken into Pharaoh’s house, much like how the Church, outwardly at least, has been lured into associations with Satan himself (Rev. 2:13).⁴⁶
5. Abram became enriched while Sarah was in Pharaoh’s house, much like the Church which has profited immensely from association with the world.
6. Abram was delivered from Egypt through the providential judgments of God, much like the Church who will be taken out from this world which is under judgment.⁴⁷

1. The broad abstract principles finish with chapter 14. … After chapter 14 is the place of the break really, because there we get to the millennium; then come the details in connection with Abraham’s conduct and the promise of the seed. … Abraham’s sacrifice of Isaac at Mount Moriah begins a new series (chap. 22). – Darby, J.N. Hints on the Book of Genesis.
2. We can see at a glance that Gen. 22 introduces a series of truths altogether new. … A corresponding pledge of the coming kingdom came before us in Genesis 14, which concluded that series, as this [Gen. 21] concludes the later series. … Thus [Gen. 21] the second division of Abraham’s history terminates with the figure of the kingdom in manifested power of glory. – Kelly, William. Abram: the Friend of God.
3. We have then, in the calling of God, the assertion of a paramount claim on God’s part upon an individual in grace, leaving everything out of which he was called without further change; only calling him out of it. This is one very strong, distinct, and new principle, not previously revealed, consequent upon, and acting in, an especial and paramount way, in reference to the existing relationships, which had arisen out of what was previously ordered and appointed. – Darby, J.N. Abram. Collected Writings Volume 19.
4. “Election” means choosing. And the calling is of those whom He has chosen; it is the making good their election. – Darby, J.N. Hints on the Book of Genesis.
5. I believe it would be inconsistent with Christian intelligence to seek material blessing in the Church period by befriending Israel. All of our blessings are “spiritual” and in “heavenly places in Christ Jesus”. William Kelly remarked that these blessings are “of course, on the earthly side”.
6. The final fulfillment of the promise given to Abraham will be in the Millennium, when the nations are blessed, though in subservience to Israel. But the principle of it applies today in the gospel, as Paul shows in Galatians 3.
7. Watering with “the foot” possibly refers to the practice of removing soil with the foot to form small channels to carry water from canals to each plant.
8. How must every camel, every servant, every ox, as it passed before his eyes, with the stamp of Pharaoh’s kindness upon it, have smitten Abram’s heart with the thought, “But where is my wife, I have sold my wife for this!” Did he not know that she was so? Had his feeble falsehood to others dimmed his own thoughts and feelings? Had he forgotten in his love of sheep’ and oxen, etc., that the wife given him of the Lord was sold for their sake? Could he persuade himself that she was his sister, and might be Pharaoh’s wife, and not his? Where was his trust in God? where the integrity of his way? – Darby, J.N. Abram. Collected Writings Volume 19.
9. Had Abram intended this? No! it was an unlooked-for circumstance; it was unbelief, which continually produces in judgment the evil which it seeks to avoid. – Darby, J.N. Abram. Collected Writings Volume 19.
10. Pharaoh knew well enough that he had no right to take the woman, even if she were Abram’s sister. He was taking advantage of his position to claim what did not belong to him. – Kelly, W. Abram: the Friend of God.
11. Darby, J.N. Abram. Collected Writings Volume 19.
12. But it was the first step that was wrong – Abram went down into Egypt. He went down without God out of the land of faith and promise. – Darby, J.N. Abram. Collected Writings Volume 19.
13. He came into the regions of the prince of this world for his own comfort to satisfy his present need, not of faith in God. The consequence was, the immediate denial of the holy separation from the world and union with Christ which belonged to the church. – Darby, J.N. Abram. Collected Writings Volume 19.
14. Whenever, therefore, the world comes in, it merely produces, and in result is identified with, bondage (where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty). For the world in its results is developed by bringing an expectation and an endeavor to procure the inheritance by a covenant of works. Such has been the actual fact in the church. – Darby, J.N. Abram. Collected Writings Volume 19.
15. The church was taken into the world’s house, the house of the prince of this world. – Darby, J.N. Abram. Collected Writings Volume 19.
16. The merciful interposition of that God, who, when we have wearied Him with our sins, acts and delivers for His own name’s sake, and vindicates., in righteous dealing toward the world, what the unrighteousness of man had plunged unfaithfully into its power. – Darby, J.N. Abram. Collected Writings Volume 19.
17. There may be a certain typical reference to Israel while in the world and away from God. – Darby, J.N. Synopsis of the Books of the Bible. Genesis 12.

Abram receives the Call to Walk the Land (13:14-17)

1. Anstey, Bruce. Lessons from the Lives of Abraham and Lot. Christian Truth Publishing, 2002.

A War between Two Confederacies (14:1-7)

CHAPTER 14

1 And it came to pass in the days of Amraphel the king of Shinar, Arioch the king of El-lasar, Chedorlaomer the king of Elam, and Tidal the king of nations, 2 that they made war with Bera the king of Sodom, and with Birsha the king of Gomorrah, Shinab the king of Admah, and Shemeber the king of Zeboim, and the king of Bela, which is Zoar. 3 All these were joined in the vale of Siddim, which is the salt sea.

 

vv.1-3 Two Confederacies at War. We are presented with a Divine record of two sides of a great conflict that took place roughly four-thousand years ago! There were two confederacies: (1) an eastern confederacy led by four kings whose lands surrounded the Euphrates and Tigris river basin, and (2) a western confederacy led by five kings whose cities surrounded the Salt (or, Dead) Sea. As we have remarked in previous chapters, Shinar refers to Babylonia (modern Iraq), and Elam to Persia (modern Iran). The king of Persia, named Chedorlaomer, seemed to take the lead in the eastern confederacy. Excavations in Susa in the year 1901 revealed that Amraphel, King of Shinar, is the same person as Hammurabi, whose famous code of Babylonian law (“the code of Amraphel”, or Hammurabi) ruled Babylonian life for 800 years or more. Of the five cities in “the vale of Siddim”, four were later destroyed by God for their wickedness. Bera, the king of Sodom, seemed to take the lead of the western confederacy. The only king not named is the king of Zoar. Perhaps this is because Zoar was a “little” city (Gen. 19:20), the least prominent of the five.

 

4 Twelve years had they served Chedorlaomer; and in the thirteenth year they rebelled. 5 And in the fourteenth year came Chedorlaomer and the kings that were with him, and smote the Rephaim in Ashteroth-karnaim, and the Zuzim in Ham, and the Emim in Shaveh-Kirjathaim, 6 and the Horites on their mount Seir, to El-Paran, which is by the wilderness. 7 And they returned, and came to En-mishpat, which is Kadesh, and smote all the country of the Amalekites, and also the Amorites that dwelt at Hazazon-Tamar.

vv.4-7 The Cause of the War. Fourteen years before the event in this chapter, the four kings had subjected the five kings to their rule. After serving for twelve years (probably paying tribute), the cities of the plain rebelled in the thirteenth year. The next year, Chedorlaomer and his allies came across, probably a similar route to Abram’s migration, to punish the rebels. Before engaging with the armies of Sodom, etc, Chedorlaomer went south, along the eastern side of Jordan, subduing enemies to the east and south.

 

 

The Battle of the Vale of Siddim: Lot Taken (14:8-12)

8 And the king of Sodom and the king of Gomorrah, and the king of Admah, and the king of Zeboim, and the king of Bela, which is Zoar, went out, and they joined battle with them in the vale of Siddim, 9 with Chedorlaomer the king of Elam, and Tidal the king of nations, and Amraphel the king of Shinar, and Arioch the king of Ellasar — four kings with the five. 10 And the vale of Siddim was full of pits of asphalt. And the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah fled, and fell there: and they that remained fled to the mountain. 11 And they took all the property of Sodom and Gomorrah, and all their victuals, and departed. 12 And they took Lot and his property, Abram’s brother’s son, and departed. For he dwelt in Sodom. 

 

vv.8-10 The Five Kings Fall, Lot Taken. The battle between the four kings and the five commenced in the vale or valley of Siddim. It was a treacherous place to fight, because “the vale of Siddim was full of pits of asphalt”. The five kings became entrapped, and the four kings had unrestricted access to the spoils of Sodom and Gomorrah. Lot, who was living in Sodom, was vulnerable to an easy attack. Earlier we read that Lot had pitched his tent towards Sodom, and now we find that he was living in the city. His abduction by Chedorlaomer ought to have been a warning to Lot, but he didn’t listen. Next time we read that he had a house there. We cannot live in the world and maintain a pilgrim character. We will be affected eventually. Lot was a target because of where he lived. Abram was not a target, because he was separate from the world.

 

Abram Rescues Lot (14:13-16)

13 And one who had escaped came and told Abram the Hebrew. And he dwelt by the oaks of Mamre the Amorite, the brother of Eshcol, and the brother of Aner. And these were Abram’s allies.

 

v.13 Abram’s Dwelling. Abram was immune to the war. He was living on the high plains of Mamre, which speak of rich communion with God. The war between the five kings and the four kings had nothing to do with Abram, and, if Lot had not been captured, Abram would never have been involved. “Let the potsherd strive with the potsherds of the earth” (Isa. 45:9). For the believer, it ought to be the same. There were huge movements of people and armies below, but Abram was above it all. Only in the matter of Lot was Abram affected by the commotion. Abram didn’t make an alliance with the king of Sodom, but he did have allies; Mamre, Eshcol, and Aner. These ones are later called “young men”. They perhaps observed the life of Abram, and respected him. The one who escaped from the battle “came and told Abram the Hebrew”. So it is for the people of this world. They have no use for the Christian, until disaster strikes. When disaster strikes, people are suddenly envious of the Christian’s peace, they turn to the believer for help.

 

14 And Abram heard that his brother was taken captive; and he led out his trained servants, born in his house, three hundred and eighteen, and pursued them as far as Dan. 15 And he divided himself against them by night, he and his servants, and smote them, and pursued them as far as Hobah, which is to the left of Damascus.

 

vv.14-15 Abram Pursues Lot. Abram’s life of separation from the world didn’t make his heart cold. When he heard about Lot, he responded immediately. The scripture calls Lot Abram’s brother here, although he was really Abram’s nephew. It brings out the affection that Abram had for Lot, even though Lot had chosen a different path. It was no small effort put forth by Abram to do this, as the journey was around 200 miles, in addition to risking their lives. Abram had quite a number of servants, and he took ones that were born in his house, and well trained. It doesn’t say they were trained in warfare. Obedience and loyalty were what was required. The battle was over and done with when Abram smote Chedorlaomer’s army at night. His trained servants were like an arrow that the enemy never expected. Whether Abram killed the kings is unknown. The expression in Hebrews 7:1 “the slaughter of the kings” is better translated “combat with the kings”. We find weakness with Lot, but power with Abram. Why? One was walking in communion with God and separation from the world, and the other was living in Sodom. Communion is the secret power in the Christian life. It is important to understand that Abram lived in another dispensation than Christians. We must not think it was wrong for Abram to lead out his trained servants in physical combat. What Abram does in this chapter has the stamp of Divine approval upon it. But the Christian, who has a heavenly calling, ought not to be engaged in physical violence against others. But Abram lived in a different day, before grace and truth had come in the Person of Jesus Christ.

 

16 And he brought back all the property, and brought again his brother Lot and his property, and the women also, and the people.

 

v.16 Abram Recovers All. When we think of Abram’s victory, it is really amazing. Here we have a shepherd, with his servants, who attacks the king of Persia and his allies, and successfully recovers all of the spoils of a major raid in Sodom and Gomorrah! He also rescued Lot, and Lot’s property, who seemed to be fully invested in Sodom. Now Abram returns from the north, towing behind him all the citizens and wealth of Sodom! It is interesting that we read of no communication between Lot and Abram. Abram rescued Lot, but they really still could have no true fellowship, because their lives were focused around different objects.

 

 

A Spiritual Battle: The King of Salem and the King of Sodom (14:17-24)

17 And the king of Sodom went out to meet him after he had returned from smiting Chedorlaomer, and the kings that were with him, into the valley of Shaveh, which is the king’s valley.

 

v.17 The kings converge on Abram. Before the battle, the kings of the plain had no value for Abram, but now he is suddenly of great importance to them, because of what he had with him. The world is the same today. The world has no love for the Christian, but if the Christian becomes rich or powerful, suddenly they will be very popular in this world. We find these kings converging on Abram in the valley of the kings. The king of Sodom goes out to meet Abram, but before they meet, another king comes forth.

 

18 And Melchisedec king of Salem brought out bread and wine. And he was priest of the Most High God. 19 And he blessed him, and said, Blessed be Abram of the Most High God, possessor of heavens and earth. 20 And blessed be the Most High GOD, who has delivered thine enemies into thy hand. And he gave him the tenth of all.

 

vv.18-20 Melchisedec meets Abram. Another king comes forth to meet Abram, and he doesn’t come asking, but giving. The time that Abram spent with Melchisedec prepared Abram for the great temptation he would face when the king of Sodom arrived. But first, we must spend a few moments on the person of Melchisedec as a type of Christ, as the writer of Hebrews said, “of whom we have much to say” (Heb. 5:11).

 

Melchisedec. It is amazing that with only a brief historical reference to Melchisedec in Genesis 14 and a brief prophetic reference in Psalm 110, there could be such a rich unfolding of doctrine concerning Melchisedec in Hebrews 5 - 7. In Genesis 14 we find that Melchisedec was the king of Salem, which later became Jerusalem. The writer of Hebrews remarks about his name and title; "first being by interpretation King of righteousness, and after that also King of Salem, which is, King of peace" (Heb. 7:2). The order is important: what Christ is in His own Person (righteousness) must come before the effect of His work (peace). Melchisedec is a type of Christ in the Millennium, who will function as a priest, standing between heaven and earth; "and the work of righteousness shall be peace" (Isa. 32:17). It says in Gen. 14:18 that Melchisedec was "priest of El Elyon", that is, "the Most High God". The name El Elyon is a Millennial name of God. Read more... Where Melchisedec came from, we are not told. Again, the writer of Hebrews remarks that Melchisedec was "Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God" (Heb. 7:3). Of course Melchisedec had a father and mother, but his genealogy is not given; he just appears majestically on the scene. He was neither angelic nor Divine, but he is introduced in an abrupt and peculiar way, such that he serves as an excellent type of Christ, the eternal Son of God.⁵⁰

 

Priest and King. As both king and priest, Melchisedec combined two great offices of the Messiah. We see it again in David, when he danced before the ark, wearing a linen ephod. In David's person the roles of king and priest were combined. He symbolized the relationship between God and His people, as much as He symbolized the sword of Jehovah's government. God used David to pen that thrilling Psalm 110, in which we find that Christ is both king and priest "after the order of Melchisedec". Both Melchisedec and David are shadows of the coming Royal Priest, the Lord Jesus Christ. In prophecy we find that Christ will be King of kings and Lord of Lords, but also the Priest of the Most High God! "He shall be a priest upon his throne" (Zech. 6:13). Christ will wear both the crown and the mitre, so to speak. We who are associated with the rejected Christ, are given to share in those offices. Rev. 1:6 tells us that Christ has "made us a kingdom, priests to his God and Father".

 

The Melchisedec Priesthood. After accomplishing the work of Calvary, the Lord Jesus ascended into heaven where the Father said to Him, "Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek" (Psa. 110:4). What does it mean, that Christ is a priest forever "after the order of Melchisedec"? In the book of Hebrews, the priesthood of Christ is contrasted with the priesthood of Aaron. The Aaronic priesthood was occupied with continually offering sacrifices for sin, which could never really take away sin. The Aaronic priests could never really make intercession for the people, because they themselves were sinners. The priesthood of Christ is characterized by one offering that has perfected forever those who are sanctified, and then by one who ever lives to make intercession for His people. Christ fulfils and surpasses all Aaron's priesthood could ever be. The inspired writer quotes Psa. 110 and Genesis 14 to show that Christ is of a different order altogether than Aaron. The Aaronic order was transient and temporal, constantly interrupted by death. Melchisedec pictures one who is eternal and unchanging, with a priesthood that is not derived from another or transferrable; "but this man, becuse he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood" (Heb. 7:24). Christ is currently functioning as a priest in the character of Aaron; i.e. to intercede on the basis of sacrifice, but He Himself is of a higher order, the order of Melchisedec. This is why Melchisedec is later dropped in Hebrews; because Christ is not yet functioning as Melchisedec, though He is of that order. We see the character of the Melchisedec priesthood in Genesis 14. He brought forth "bread and wine" to Abram, the returning conqueror. Bread in scripture pictures sustenance (Ezek. 4:16), and wine pictures joy (Judges 9:13). Melchisedek brings not just what was needed for Abram, but what was suitable to the occasion. He then blesses Abram, "Blessed be Abram of the Most High God, possessor of heavens and earth", and finally blesses God, "and blessed be the Most High GOD, who has delivered thine enemies into thy hand." Melchisedec's blessing reaches downward, to Abram on the earth, and upward, to God in heaven. We have a twofold work in what Melchisedec did: he blessed Abraham and God and then received tithes of all. Christ's Millennial priesthood will do the same. The glorified Son of man as the Royal Priest will lead the united Millennial earth in the worship of the Most High God, and be the link through which God's resources flow out in universal blessing; "Verily, verily, I say unto you, Hereafter ye shall see heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of man" (John 1:51).⁵¹ In the Millennial day, the earth will know the God is not only possessor of heaven, but also of the earth. They will also know that the Person who is the channel of all blessing to man, the Living Link between heaven and earth, is the man Christ Jesus!

 

Consider How Great This Man Was. The writer of Hebrews remarks on the fact that Abram gave tithes (10%) of all the spoils to Melchisedec. Abraham was the greatest of the patriarchs, and clearly Melchisedec was greater than him. Levi, of whom the Aaronic priesthood came, was "in the loins" of Abraham when this took place. If Israel gave tithes to the Levites, and Abram gave tithes to Melchisedec, how much greater the priesthood of Christ must be than that of Aaron! Not only so, but the less (Abram) was blessed by the greater (Melchisedec).

 

21 And the king of Sodom said to Abram, Give me the souls, and take the property for thyself.

 

v.21 The King of Sodom’s Offer. Bera, the king of Sodom, offered to let Abram take the property for himself, and only to return the citizens of Sodom. Abram had taken everything from the enemy, after the king had lost it all. Abram was not obligated to return anything, but Bera says “give me the souls”, and “take the property”. He was thankful to Abram for recovering all, and offers the goods in pretended generosity. This was a test for Abram. All that the world had was now offered to him. Would he take it? Lot certainly had already made his choice. This was the second battle that Abram faced in this chapter, and it was the more serious of the two. The king of Sodom might picture to us Satan, the god of this world, who offers to us the things of this world. Like Bera, Satan often comes to us when we have had a victory, when the danger of self-confidence is highest.

 

22 And Abram said to the king of Sodom, I have lifted up my hand to Jehovah, the Most High GOD, possessor of heavens and earth, 23 if from a thread even to a sandal-thong, yes, if of all that is thine, I take anything …; that thou mayest not say, I have made Abram rich; 24 save only that which the young men have eaten, and the portion of the men that went with me, Aner, Eshcol, and Mamre, let them take their portion. 

 

vv.22-24 Abram’s Response. Abram was able to refuse the king of Sodom’s offer because he was in the enjoyment of his relationship with Jehovah as “the Most High God, possessor of heaven and earth”. The blessing of Melchisedec was fresh in Abram’s thoughts. Abram would never have said that if it had not been for Melchisedec, because Abram did not previously know God as Most High. What were the possessions of Sodom in comparison with the possession of heaven and earth? “The full soul loatheth an honeycomb” (Prov. 27:7). Lifting up the hands is an expression of dependence on the Lord (e.g. 1 Timothy 2:8; 1 Kings 8:22). Yet there was another reason Abram refused Bera’s offer. He knew that if he took anything from the king of Sodom, “from a thread even to a sandal-thong”, it would give the king grounds to claim “I have made Abram rich”, and it would thereby tarnish his testimony. But when it came to the young men, Aner, Eshcol, and Mamre, for them Abram asked that they be allowed to take the portion that was due them, in payment for their services. How wonderful to see that Abram didn’t want anything for himself, yet wanted others to be compensated. He also wouldn’t push his conviction, about taking goods from the king of Sodom, on the young men who followed him. This is a helpful practical lesson. It is important to set a good example for the younger ones, but not to have dominion over their faith, by enforcing our convictions on others.

 

A Prophetic Type. We see in this chapter a wonderful type of coming events in prophecy. We have a confederacy of people in the land of Canaan who are wicked and sinners before the Lord exceedingly. This represents the apostate nation of Israel, led by Antichrist. There is a great confederacy from the east, who sweep down from the north and defeat the five kings. This pictures the Assyrian of the Old Testament prophets. It is the “overflowing scourge” (Isa. 28:15, 18) that God has prepared to punish the rebellious nation. The Lord will appear with the armies of heaven and destroy that confederacy, and will later employ the faithful among Israel to judge what remains of their enemies. Abram represents the Lord as a Warrior, along with the faithful of Israel, and his allies represent those nations who favor the Jews in the tribulation. Lot represents the nation of Israel, “trodden down” (Isa. 5:5; 18:2; Luke 21:24) by the Gentiles because of Israel’s history of unfaithfulness, but rescued by the Lord when He appears. After the judgment is complete, Christ will come forth in blessing to the earth, pictured by Melchisedec. The whole world will give Christ His rightful place, just as Abram gave Melchisedec tithes of all the spoil of Sodom. The Lord will then divide the spoils with those who have been His allies (Isa. 53:12), just as Abram did with the young men that came with him.

1. Some have speculated that Melchisedec was the same person as Shem, mentioned under a different name. There is absolutely no evidence to support that, nor would it be likely to find Shem in the land of Canaan, the son of Ham. W. Kelly remarked, "And one whose ancestry or descendants are expressly hidden stands in full contrast with Shem." - Kelly, W. Abram, the Friend of God.
2. It is the final triumph in that way, looked at typically, with Christ as Melchizedek coming out to bless upward and bless downward: just what Christ will be in that day. - Darby, J.N. Hints on the Book of Genesis.

The Word of Jehovah Comes to Abram (15:1)

CHAPTER 15

1 After these things the word of Jehovah came to Abram in a vision, saying, Fear not, Abram; I am thy shield, thy exceeding great reward.

 

v.15 Abram’s Shield and Reward. The expression “After these things” marks this chapter as a new subject, although chronologically it follows the events of ch.14. This is also the first time in scripture that we have the expression “the word of Jehovah”, which later occurs 242 times in the Old Testament, always in connection with Divine revelation, and often as a test for faith; e.g. 1 Sam. 15:23; 1 Kings 20:35; Psa. 105:19; and frequently in the prophets, typically in the form of; “the word of the Lord came unto ____ saying,” or some similar expression. This will characterize the next few chapters of Abram’s history; i.e. faith tested by the Word of God. What are we going to do when the word of the Lord comes to us? Believe it like Abram, or reject it like Saul? Abram had just successfully refused the offer of the king of Sodom, who would have rewarded Abram with all the goods of Sodom. The Lord tells Abram not to fear, and that He would be his “shield”, for protection against the Canaanites or any of the Mesopotamian kings that might retaliate against him, and his “exceeding great reward” in lieu of the goods he had refused to take from the king of Sodom’s hands. Often the Lord will do this. He will confirm some truth to us after we have acted by faith!

 

Seed-Promise Confirmed (15:2-6)

2 And Abram said, Lord Jehovah, what wilt thou give me? seeing I go childless, and the steward of my house is this Eliezer of Damascus. 3 And Abram said, Lo, to me thou hast given no seed, and behold, a son of my house will be mine heir.

 

vv.2-3 The Need for A Seed. The word of the Lord to Abram brought certain thoughts into Abram’s mind about the future. God had made promises to Abram in general terms, but the fulfillment of them was obscure. Abram wanted more details. What good were the promises of land and blessing if Abram had no seed? He had three-hundred and eighteen servants, but no son. Abram knew it would all go to his servant, “this Eliezer of Damascus”. What are we to think of Abram’s question? It wasn’t the highest expression of faith, but it was faith communicating out of weakness. Yet we see that Abram’s thoughts are rising up to the thoughts of God concerning the promised seed. All the blessing was contingent on Abram having a son.

 

4 And behold, the word of Jehovah came to him, saying, This shall not be thine heir, but he that will come forth out of thy body shall be thine heir.

 

v.4 Abram’s Own Seed to Inherit the Promise. A servant would not do. Abram would have a biological son, and this son would be the heir of the promises. God had not yet explained that the heir would come from Sarai as well. In the next chapter, Abram and Sarai try to bring about the fulfillment of the promise through a surrogate mother.

 

5 And he led him out, and said, Look now toward the heavens, and number the stars, if thou be able to number them. And he said to him, So shall thy seed be!

 

v.5 An Innumerable Seed. Not only would Abram have a son, but his descendants would be as innumerable as “the stars” of the heavens. Every time Abram looked up into the night sky he would be reminded of God’s promise. This is an expansion of the earlier promise that Abram’s seed would be as “the dust of the earth” (Gen. 13:16). In Gen. 22:17 “the sand which is upon the sea shore” is added in connection with the stars.

 

Seed as the Dust, Sand, Stars. The first figure God uses to convey the numerous seed promised to Abram is the "dust of the earth", then "the stars of the heavens" and then "the sand of the sea". All three of these figures are simply used to convey to Abram that his descendants would be innumerable. The seed mentioned in each case refers to the children of Israel. When the seed is mentioned without any figure applied in Gen. 22:18, it refers to Christ. The figure of the sand does not refer to Gentiles, as some believe. Gentile blessing is only included two times: in Gen. 12:3 they are to be blessed in Abram, and in Gen. 22:18 they are to be blessed through Christ.⁵²It is interesting that when we come to Isaac, we find that only "the stars of the heaven" is applied. Isaac represents the heavenly man on the other side of resurrection. Then when we come to Jacob, the "dust of the earth" is applied. Jacob is the father of Israel, who are called after his new name. Some conclude from this that the seed "as the dust of the earth" refers to the Jews, the seed "as stars of the heavens" refers to the Church, and that the seed "as the sand of the sea" refers to the Gentiles.⁵³⁵⁴⁵⁵ I have no difficulty with taking this view as an application, but I do not see it to be the actual interpretation of the passages cited. If we compare the following references, the previous definitions do not fit. In Gen. 15:5, when the focus is Jewish and earthly promises, seed as the "stars" are mentioned. In Gen. 22:17 ,"stars" are mentioned when the connection is earthly, possessing the gate of their enemies. In Gen. 26:4 "stars" are again mentioned in connection with possessing countries; i.e. not a heavenly hope. Then in Gen. 32:12, seed as "the sand of the sea" is mentioned, referring to Jacob's family, the father of Israel. Furthermore, in numerous other scriptures, the figure of the stars is shown to be fulfilled in Israel, not the Church (Deut. 1:10; 10:22; 28:62; 1 Chron. 27:23; Neh. 9:23; Jer. 33:22; Heb. 11:12). In Revelation 12, the woman who gives birth to the man-child (Christ) has a crown of twelve stars on her head; an obvious reference to Israel. The same can be said of Joseph's dreams. In the second dream, the stars bowed down to Joseph, referring to his natural brethren, the children of Israel (Gen. 37:9-10). The dream was repeated twice using first sheaves then stars for confirmation, much like the dreams of Pharaoh; "as regards the double repetition of the dream to Pharaoh, it is that the thing is established by God, and God will hasten to do it" (Gen. 41:32). In conclusion, while it may be helpful to view the dust, stars, and sand as the three people groups that will come into blessing through Abraham, we should realize that it is only an application. The strict interpretation of those figures is to the Jews alone.⁵⁶

 

6 And he believed Jehovah; and he reckoned it to him as righteousness.

 

v.6 Abram Justified by Faith. God had just made Abram a promise that seemed totally impossible to the natural man. How could Abram have innumerable descendants if he had no biological son? Yet Abram “believed Jehovah”. This is faith (see John 3:33). It is the first mention of faith in the Bible, although not the first time we see faith in action. This verse is quoted three times in the New Testament (see Rom. 4:3; Gal. 3:6; Jam. 2:23). In Romans and Galatians, Paul refers back to this chapter in Genesis to show that justification is through faith alone, without the works of the law. The point is that Abram did no works, but simply believed God’s word, and God reckoned him righteous by grace. This is also the first mention we have of justification. Read more… Abram got what we call “imputed righteousness”, which is a righteous status that we are given by God if we have faith. God reckons men righteous who by practice are not righteous, but have faith in what God has said.

 

Is Old Testament justification the same as New Testament justification? Abraham was “justified,” but not in the full New Testament sense of justification, which involves being brought into a new position before God “in Christ” risen (Gal. 2:17). However, the principle of faith on which Old Testament saints and New Testament saints are blessed is the same, which is Paul's point here. The Old Testament saints received absolution for each sin they committed; but never were brought into a new position through the blood of Christ, because it hadn’t been shed yet. They were shut out from entering into the holiest by the separating veil. However, while justification was not revealed before the cross, God did justify anticipatively. David only knew of sins being covered (held in abeyance for one more year) as the Day of Atonement indicates (Lev. 16). But today, with the work of Christ having been accomplished, we have a fuller revelation through the Gospel as to what God has done with our sins. We know that our sins are taken away, not just covered (1 John 3:5). And now, a new and living way has been opened for us! The “offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all” is complete, and we have “no more conscience of sins”!

 

Land-Promise Confirmed (15:7-17)

7 And he said to him, I am Jehovah who brought thee out of Ur of the Chaldeans, to give thee this land to possess it. 8 And he said, Lord Jehovah, how shall I know that I shall possess it?

 

vv.7-8 Asking for a Confirmation of the Land Promise. The Lord reminded Abram that it was He, Jehovah, who had appeared to Abram in Ur and brought him out, who had promised the land of Canaan to Abram for a possession. Abram asks the Lord for a confirmation of the promise; “how shall I know that I shall possess it?” Naturally we would think that it would be harder to believe the seed-promise than the land-promise, yet Abram seems to struggle a bit more with the land-promise. It shows us the focus turning toward the earth, to Jewish hopes, and “Jews indeed ask for signs” (1 Cor. 1:22). Perhaps this is connected with God announcing Himself as “I am Jehovah”, which was characteristic of His relationship to Israel, not with Abram (Exodus 6:2-3). Perhaps if Abram’s faith was stronger he would not have needed a confirmation, however, I do not think Abram asked this in unbelief. It is similar to Gideon, who asked the Lord for a sign that He would save Israel by Gideon’s hand. It wasn’t strong faith, yet it was real faith. It is wonderful that Abram’s justification is connected with a time of imperfect faith, rather than a high point such as Gen. 22. Our gracious God only requires a little faith for justification.

 

9 And he said to him, Take me a heifer of three years old, and a she-goat of three years old, and a ram of three years old, and a turtle-dove, and a young pigeon. 10 And he took all these, and divided them in the midst, and laid the half of each opposite its fellow; but the birds he did not divide. 11 And the birds of prey came down on the carcases; and Abram scared them away.

 

vv.9-11 The Sacrifice. Abram was to take three herd-animals that were three years old, and two birds, and offer them as a sacrifice. This sacrifice was a seal of the promise Jehovah had made. For the meaning of the animals divided in half, read Jer. 34:18-19. The promise would be made good to Abram’s seed through death. The animals that were killed represent the Lord Jesus Christ, who was sacrificed on the cross. In a general way, this gives us the principle that all promised blessing comes through the death of Christ. Each animal represents Christ or His work in a different aspect. The heifer represents Christ as a sinless victim (Deut. 21:1-9), the she-goat represents Christ as the sin-bearer (Num. 15:27), and the ram represents Christ as consecrated, or fully devoted to God (Ex. 29:15-26). These three represent Christ offered in death. They were three years old, perhaps representing the Divine completeness of the work. They were divided in half, with the pieces facing one another, to form a path between them. The turtle-dove and pigeon were common birds in Canaan, and they were the offerings of the poorest Israelites (Lev. 1:14; 14:22; Luke 2:24). They represent Christ’s humility, and were not divided because there were two birds. Once the pieces were arranged, the “birds of prey came down on the carcases”, attempting to scavenge from them. The animals Abram was told to offer were clean animals, but the scavengers were unclean. These birds represent the agents of Satan (Matt. 13:4,19; Rev. 18:2),⁵⁷ who are seeking to defile and diminish the sacrifice of Christ. Abram worked to scare the birds away, being protective of the sacrifice which Jehovah had commanded. As an application to us, knowing that the work of Christ is the basis of all blessing, how careful we should be that nothing would come in and tarnish it!

  

12 And as the sun was just going down, a deep sleep fell upon Abram; and behold, a horror, a great darkness, fell upon him.

 

v.12 A Great Darkness. As the sun was going down, God caused Abram to pass into a deep sleep, and a horror, that Abram might experience the awfulness of death, without actually dying. He was experiencing the valley of the shadow of death. He doesn’t get the blessing (vv.18-21) until he passes through the darkness. It shows that the promised blessing would come to Abram’s seed after much suffering, which the Lord explains in the following verses. It also shows us that God would make a way for Abram’s seed to inherit the promises only after death to nature had taken place. The ruin of the first man had to be exposed first, before God would allow the fulfillment of the promises. This is the subject Paul takes up in Galatians 3. He shows that the law came in, not to annul the promise, but for a specific reason; “for the sake of transgressions”. The law was given to make man see that he had nothing in himself to deserve the promises, and that all must be attributed to God’s grace. In a prophetic sense, the Tribulation must precede the Millennium.

 

13 And he said to Abram, Know assuredly that thy seed will be a sojourner in a land that is not theirs, and they shall serve them; and they shall afflict them four hundred years. 14 But also that nation which they shall serve I will judge; and afterwards they shall come out with great property.

 

vv.13-14 Prophecy of Israel in Egypt. Here we find the prophecy of Israel going into a strange land and being oppressed by the people of that land. Although the land is not named, we find at the end of Genesis that it was Egypt. The prophecy predicts that Israel would go down into Egypt as strangers, and become oppressed by the Egyptians. The 400 years began when Isaac was persecuted by Ishmael, the son of Hagar the Egyptian, and concluded when God brought Israel out of Egypt with a victorious deliverance (see note). Egypt was judged by God because of the oppression of Israel, which was fulfilled in the ten plagues of Moses, and also the Red Sea. It was even foretold that they would come up out of Egypt with “great property”, which was fulfilled in Exodus 12:35-36.

 

How long was Israel in Egypt? Galatians 3:17 says that there were 430 years between the promise and the giving of the law. If Abram was 75 years old when the promise was given, and 100 when Isaac was born, and if Isaac was 60 when Jacob was born, and if Jacob was 130 when he stood before Pharaoh, then the years from the promise to Israel’s time in Egypt were 25 + 60 + 130 = 215 years. Therefore the years of Israel’s sojourn in Egypt proper were 430 – 215 = 215 years. This agrees with Genesis 15:16, which says “in the fourth generation they shall come up hither”.  In Ex. 6:16-20 we find the four generations: Jacob’s son Levi, his son Kohath, his son Amram, and his son Moses. If Moses was eighty years old at the Exodus, and he was born when his mother was forty-seven years of age, then we are left with 215 – 80 – 47 = 88 years for Levi to have Kohath, and Kohath to have Jochebed, which is quite reasonable. But then in Ex. 12:40 we read, “Now the sojourning of the children of Israel, who dwelt in Egypt, was four hundred and thirty years.” The 430 years must include the total time of the sojourning of Abram until the Exodus from Egypt.⁵⁸ What then does the 400 years of Genesis 15:13 refer to? It refers to the full time in which Abram’s seed was afflicted by the Egyptians. The 400 years began thirty years after the promise, which lines up with the time when Isaac was five years old, and was persecuted by Ishmael, the son of Hagar the Egyptian! If a discrepancy seems to appear, it is our minds that are at fault, not the

Word of God.

 

  

An Alternate View. There is another view of these dates that would be helpful to explain, although I tend to think it is not correct. There are some who take the 430 years of Ex. 12:40 to be the time of Israel’s actual time in Egypt, because it appears to sound like that if we read the verse without the rest of scripture. That leaves them with the 400 years (Gen 15:13, Acts 7:6) being the time of bondage, meaning they enjoyed freedom in Egypt for 30 years, before another king arose who knew not Joseph. One difficulty with this view is that Paul quotes from Gen. 15 in Galatians 3, showing that the law was given 430 years after the promise to Abraham. Those who take this view hold that the “covenant”, which begins the 430 years, refers to the confirmation of the Abrahamic Covenant to Jacob when he was preparing to enter Egypt (Gen. 46:1-4). The problem with this is that Paul was clearly referring to the promise made to Abraham, the father of faith, not Jacob. Further, by doing the math, you would be forced to have four generations in 430 years, which is problematic. We know Levi had Kohath before coming to Egypt, because he entered Egypt with three sons (Gen 46:8, 11). The problem is that the lifespan of Kohath (133) and Amram (137) combined with the age of Moses at the Exodus (80) cannot possibly cover the 430 years; i.e. even if Kohath begat Amram in his last year, and Amram begat Moses in his last year, Moses would be 80 years old only 350 years after Jacob stood before Pharaoh, which disagrees with Exodus 7:7. This view simply does not work.

 

15 And thou shalt go to thy fathers in peace; thou shalt be buried in a good old age.

 

v.15 Abram’s Death Foretold. All of this was told to Abram 215 years before Israel went into Egypt! Abram would not live to see it, although he would live to a good old age. This would have been a great revelation to Abram. Nothing before this had suggested that the possession of Canaan would take place after Abram’s death. The pilgrim character would characterize Abram his entire pathway. The same is true for Christians. We are not home yet, and we are never free, in this life, to settle down on the earth.

 

16 And in the fourth generation they shall come hither again; for the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet full.

 

v.16 Israel’s Conquest of Canaan. Not only would the oppressors of the Israelites be judged, but the usurpers of the land would be as well. The Egyptians were judged for the sake of Israel, but the Canaanites were judged for the sake of Jehovah, because they had defiled His land. The Canaanite tribes that inhabited the land of Canaan during the 400 years became exceedingly wicked. We find that Aner, Eschol, and Mamre were associates of Abram, but their children strayed further and further from the paths of righteousness. Yet God was patient with them, and allowed the chosen people to remain in bondage for “four generations”, until “the iniquity of the Amorites” became full. This verse is tremendously helpful in understanding the ways of God in the conquest of Canaan.

 

The Morality of the Conquest of Canaan. One of the most popular attacks made by unbelievers against the Bible has to do with God commanding the children of Israel to drive out the Canaanites. It is stated that the God of the Bible is “a god that commands the slaughter of innocent women and children”. How could the same god that commanded such bloodshed also command, “thou shalt not kill”? While not the full answer to the question, this verse gives us an important truth about the conquest of Canaan, which God gave as a divine gift to the children of Israel (Dent. 32:8). God used the children of Israel to judge the Canaanite tribes for their wickedness. God’s care for the Gentiles and reluctance to judge is seen in many places, such as when communing with Abram about Sodom, and in sending Jonah to Nineveh. “I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live” (Ezek. 33:11). God waited patiently for 400 years, but the Amorites only grew more debauched and immoral. The slaughter of these tribes was necessary because of their extreme wickedness, not only worshiping idols, but sacrificing their children in the fire to false gods (Deut. 12:30-31). Years later, when Israel turned away from Jehovah, and fell into the same wickedness as the Canaanites (Psalm 106:34-39), He sent the Assyrians and the Babylonians to drive them out, as they had driven out the Canaanites centuries earlier. In both cases, whether the Israelites or the Assyrians, both were the instruments of Divine justice. In the case of the Assyrians, it was an infidel power operating in the permissive will of God, and they were later judged for it. In the case of Israel, they were operating directly at the command of God, and they were blessed as a result. But what about the children of the Canaanite tribes? Had they any personal guilt in what their tribes were carrying on with? No. But this raises a deeper accusation from the atheists: that it is immoral for God to kill. This is not true. God is the Creator and Giver of life, and it is His sovereign prerogative to take life. There is absolutely no moral issue with God taking the life of any person, whether young or old! Nevertheless, as the “judge of all the earth” (Gen. 18:25), He does what is right, and He always has a purpose in what He does. This moral right to take life is extended in the use of the children of Israel to drive out the Canaanites, and to kill any that remained. The children that were exterminated in the conquest of Canaan were no doubt taken instantly to heaven, and spared a life of wickedness and governmental judgment. But what made their deaths moral was that God commanded it. Killing is not murder if God has commanded it. A utilitarian decision on their part to kill their enemies would have been immoral. The children of Israel lived under the dispensation of the law, in which God sometimes commanded them to kill their enemies. It would have been disobedience for them to refuse, as we see with King Saul and the Amalekites (1 Sam. 15). Christians live in a different dispensation, in which God does not sanction even the killing of enemies (Rom. 12:20). So we can see that the conquest of Canaan was morally justified (1) because God, who has the sovereign prerogative to give and take life commanded it, and also (2) because it was God’s judgment on the Canaanites for their wickedness.

  

17 And it came to pass when the sun had gone down, and it was dark, that behold, there was a smoking furnace, and a flame of fire which passed between those pieces.

 

v.17 The Furnace and the Flame. By symbol and type, the Lord shows Abram how his seed would possess the land of Canaan. God appears between the pieces of the sacrifice as a smoking furnace and a burning torch. Typically speaking, the promised blessing would come “between the pieces”; i.e. on the basis of the sacrifice of Christ. It would come through “a smoking furnace”; i.e. a time of purifying trial. Note that Egypt is connected in scripture with a furnace (Deut. 4:20). Yet there would be “a flame of fire”; i.e. the lamp of God’s guidance through the trial. Prophecy functions as “a lamp shining in an obscure place” (2 Pet. 1:19), not only for those who live before the events at the end of the age, but also for those who will actually pass through them. The path to the inheritance is through affliction’s furnace, but all along the light of prophecy is there to encourage and guide.

 

The Boundaries of the Land Promised to Abraham (15:18-21)

18 On the same day Jehovah made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed I give this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the river Euphrates; 19 the Kenites, and the Kenizzites, and the Kadmonites, 20 and the Hittites, and the Perizzites, and the Rephaim, 21 and the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Girgashites, and the Jebusites. 

 

v.18 The Abrahamic Covenant. Jehovah then makes a covenant with Abram, which is more specific than any of the prior promises. It gives the exact boundaries of the land promised to his seed. (Note: the River of Egypt is not the Nile. Rather, it is a small river to the south of Israel.) In history, Israel only possessed a small part of this land. But in Isaiah 27:12 we learn that, in the Millennium, Israel will finally possess the boundaries promised to Abram in this verse!

 

1. In Genesis 22, the two things are quite distinct. Where the seed is spoken of without allusion to number, the blessing of the Gentiles comes in; but where they are said to be multiplied as the stars and the sand, then the character is unequivocally Jewish precedence. Such is, I believe, the argument of the apostle. - Kelly, William. Lectures on the Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Galatians.
2. Not a word about the sand of the sea. He is as ever exclusively connected with what is heavenly as far as the figure goes. In the case of Abraham appears the double figure: the children were to be as the stars of the sky, but also as the sands of the sea. Isaac has the peculiar place. Abraham takes in both; as we know, he is connected with that which is heavenly, but also with what is earthly. - Kelly, W. Notes on the Book of Genesis.
3. God speaks of multiplying Isaac's descendants “as the stars of heaven.' He does not tell Isaac, as He does Jacob later, that his seed would be “as the dust of the earth” (Gen. 28:14), for Jacob is seen as the father of Israel, while Isaac, typifying Christ, is prominent for His relationship to Rebekah, a type of the church. - Grant, L.M. The Book of Genesis.
4. So Abraham received the promises in this order-dust, stars and sand. When God gave confirmation to Isaac as to his seed, He said it would be "as the stars of heaven" (Gen. 26:4). Later, when God confirms it to Jacob, he tells him, "and thy seed shall be as the dust of the earth" (Gen. 28:14). Isaac is typical of the heavenly company and Jacob is typical of the earthly. So to Isaac the stars are mentioned and to Jacob the dust. - Davison, George. Matthew 12:38-50
5. The stars of heaven are the Jews only, as Moses says, "Behold ye are this day as the stars of heaven for multitude," Deut. 1. It is a great thing to see what the Lord is pointing out in a passage. And He takes two illustrations of a great number - what we see in the heavens, and what lies on the sea-shore. - Darby, J.N. Notes of Readings on 2 Corinthians
6. We find birds employed in scripture in various ways. The raven and dove on Noah’s ark represent the old and new natures. The Holy Spirit is likened to a dove, which descended and rested upon Jesus at His baptism. In Ezek. 17, the two great eagles represent the kings of Babylon and Egypt. The “eagles” or “vultures” of the Olivet discourse represent the enemies of Israel, employed by God in His governmental judgment on “the carcase”; i.e. the apostate nation of Israel. The birds in Matthew 13 that gobbled up the good seed are clearly identified by our Lord as the servants of Satan. In each case the context can illuminate the meaning of the symbol.
7. It is interesting that the Septuagint and the Samaritan Pentateuch read that they were in “Egypt and Canaan” for 430 years. It could be that the words “and Canaan” were omitted from the Masoretic text on accident. However, the same words could have been added in the other documents to try to account for an “apparent discrepancy”. We cannot know for sure.

1. Darby, J.N. Hints on the Book of Genesis.
2. However, such a thing was not counter-cultural. The Hammurabi Code (governing Sumer, in 18th century B.C.), includes direct references to surrogate mothers. It was perhaps a practice that was somewhat common in the ancient world.
3. Grant, L.M. The Book of Genesis.

The Abrahamic Covenant Enriched (17:1-8)

Circumcision: The Sign of the Covenant (17:9-14)

Sarai’s Name Changed, the Promise of a Son (17:15-22)

Abraham Circumcises His Household (17:23-27)

1. God therefore imparts the richest revelation ever made known up to that time. “I am the Almighty God; walk before me, and be thou perfect. And I will make my covenant between me and thee, and will multiply thee exceedingly.” – Kelly, W. Abraham, the Friend of God.
2. Circumcision here [Genesis 17] accordingly is not introduced in a legal way, any more than the sabbath in Genesis 2. It is really the answer in man to the grace of God. - Kelly, W. Abram: The Friend of God.
3. Abraham’s was the laughter of joy, I believe; but Sarah was ashamed of her laughing, because it was unbelief. – Darby, J.N. Hints on the Book of Genesis.
4. Abraham’s faith was too weak to accept what God had positively spoken. He laughed inwardly, just as Sarah did later (Gen. 18:12). – Grant, L.M. The Book of Genesis.

The Wickedness of the Men of Sodom (19:4-11)

Lot’s Reluctant Evacuation of Sodom (19:12-22)

The Destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah (19:23-29)

Lot’s Incestuous Progeny (19:30-38)

1. At one time William Kelly did not see the distinction between the married daughters and the virgin daughters: “Lot meanwhile was brought out, and his daughters without their unbelieving husbands” (Kelly, William. Genesis. Lectures on the Pentateuch). Later he was asked about it and clarified the issue. “It would seem that besides the two maiden daughters in his house Lot had others with his sons-in-law outside, whom he sought in vain to save from the doomed city. In the “Introductory Lectures on the Pentateuch” this oversight is said to have been made. That the confusion has been often made by excellent men is of no weight against the simple force of the word.” – Kelly, William. Questions and Answers. Bible Treasury, New Volume 4. January 1902.
2. So we have Enoch, the heavenly man, and Noah, the earthly remnant; now we have Abraham the heavenly man, and Lot the earthly remnant. This is a second witness. – Darby, J.N. Hints on the Book of Genesis.
3. There in the wilderness, in this time of tribulation, God takes care of her. She makes her escape from the tribulation, the figure being employed that she receives this great power of flight, as if the wings of an eagle: and God secures her, not as He did Abraham who saw the destruction of Sodom from the top of the mount, but as He secured Lot who was saved by flight. The people in heaven rejoicing are like Abraham on the top of the mount; while the woman upon the earth is like Lot, saved by God giving her the great wings of an eagle to escape while all this great rage and power of Satan is being displayed. – Darby, J.N. Lectures on the Second Coming of Christ. Lecture 3.

Communion: Abraham Cooks a Meal for the Strangers (18:1-8)

1. quality time (“pass not away, I pray thee”)
2. cleansing (“Let now a little water be fetched, that ye may wash your feet”) – the washing of water by the Word.
3. rest (“rest yourselves under the tree”) – perhaps it speaks of resting under the work of the cross. We rest where God Himself rests, under the tree.
4. sustenance (“I will fetch a morsel of bread”) – feeding on Christ.
5. refreshment (“and refresh yourselves”)

Blessing: Promise of a Son for Sarah, Her Laughter (18:9-15)

Intelligence: The Lord’s Plan to Judge Sodom & Gomorrah Revealed (18:16-22)

Intercession: Abraham Intercedes for the Righteous in Sodom (18:23-33)

1. The peculiar privilege here was that God Himself deigned to be the guest of Abraham: yea, and more than that, for He treats him as His intimate, stamping on the patriarch for ever that remarkable designation, “the friend of God,” which is founded on this very chapter. – Kelly, W. Abraham, the Friend of God.
2. Sarah, no doubt, was an honoured woman, but her state was spiritually different from that of Abraham. We hear of her during this conversation behind the door. I dare say she ought not to have been there, but there she was; and if she was where she ought not to have been, need we wonder that she indulges in feelings that little became her? She laughed in her doubt of the word. Could any of us imagine Abraham behind a door? Was there not a simple dignity in him incapable of hiding and listening behind a door? We can understand easily an eastern wife’s temptation to conceal herself in more modern times, when woman was more of a prisoner, and otherwise degraded; but it is evident that in those early days no such reason operated, and no excuse could thence be for anything of the kind. For we find Rebekah, and others far later, going to the well, without any idea of impropriety. Sarah must no doubt have enjoyed no less a degree of freedom, but would have from her circumstances much more. She, the matron, by no means young now, was under no conceivable custom of keeping out of sight. Wherever such manners as those before us are resorted to, never expect anything good or worthy. – Kelly, W. Abraham: The Friend of God.
3. … We should search ourselves, and see whether there are grounds for the Lord to speak so about ourselves and our households. For you generally find that a saint’s ways are shown, not merely in his own personal conduct, but even more in the relation of his family all round to the Lord, as the fruit of his faith or the lack of it. This is the reason why (in the New Testament), no matter what gift a man had, no matter how much he might be personally excellent, if his household were unruly and not in subjection, such an one could not be an elder or bishop. How could a person rule the church of God, if he could not rule his own home ~ Because, where moral power would be shown most is, not in a discourse, or in company, or in a visit, but where a man unbends, where he is no longer the teacher or preacher, where he can either familiarly bring in God or habitually leave Him out, where he can have a free and constant circulation of that name, with all its fruitful consequences, in the family, or he proves that his heart is in ease. Show or money for them is really for himself. The Lord assuredly looks for a reflex in the household of the ways of God with the head of it; because there it is that God should manifestly be owned, and habitually govern; and there it is that the one who stands at the head is responsible to God for showing what his mind and heart value. – Kelly, William. Abraham, the Friend of God.

Abraham goes to Gerar and Calls Sarah his Sister (20:1-2)

God Appears to Abimelech (20:3-8)

Abimelech reproaches Abraham (20:9-16)

Abraham Prays for Abimelech (20:17-18)

1. The kings of the Philistines were called “Abimelech”, a title meaning “my father is king”. At some points, the kings of Israel were named after this title, and it was not to their credit.
2. Rav Chisda. Talmud: Baba Metzia. 87a
3. What a veil Abraham had been to his poor wife! He had better buy a veil for her with the thousand pieces of silver. It was a keenly cutting condemnation — a rebuke no doubt addressed to Sarah, but how it must have touched Abraham to the quick! – Kelly, William. Lectures Introductory to the Pentateuch.

Birth of Isaac (21:1-7)

Dismissal of Hagar and Ishmael (21:8-21)

Covenant with Abimelech (21:22-34)

Abraham Offers Isaac on Mt. Moriah (22:1-19)

The Genealogy of Rebecca (22:20-24)

1. "First-begotten", used in Hebrews 1, conveys more the thought of preeminence, while "only-begotten" conveys uniqueness in affection.
2. Rule, Don. Second Reading. Carrollton Bible Conference 2023.
3. In Genesis 22, the two things are quite distinct. Where the seed is spoken of without allusion to number, the blessing of the Gentiles comes in; but where they are said to be multiplied as the stars and the sand, then the character is unequivocally Jewish precedence. Such is, I believe, the argument of the apostle. - Kelly, William. Lectures on the Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Galatians.
4. Thus the Seed with no number or multiplicity annexed to it is shown to be Christ, typified by Isaac, risen again from the dead in figure, who blesses all the Gentiles, as now in the gospel, contra-distinguished from the numerous Jewish seed, who are to subject the nations and rule over them, in the age to come. The Seed risen from the dead has evidently broken the link with life or relationship on earth, and is in a wholly new condition wherein He is able to bless the Gentile as freely as the Jew. - Kelly, William. Abram, the Friend of God.

The Death of Sarah (23:1-2)

Abraham Purchases a Burying Place (23:3-18)

1. Deck, J.G. Called from above. Little Flock Hymnbook #212

The Commission of Abraham’s Servant (24:1-9)

The Servant’s Journey and Prayer at the Well (24:10-14)

Rebekah Appears, Draws Water, is Introduced (24:15-31)

The Servant’s Explanation and Proposal (24:32-49)

Agreement to the Proposal, Blessing and Sending Off of Rebekah (24:50- 60)

The Bride’s Journey and Union with Isaac (24:61-67)

1. Tersteegen, Gerhardt. Midst the darkness, storm, and sorrow. Echoes of Grace Hymnbook #239. vv.1-2
2. Tersteegen, Gerhardt. Midst the darkness, storm, and sorrow. Echoes of Grace Hymnbook #239. vv.3-4

Abraham’s Marriage to Keturah and Her Sons (25:1-4)

Abraham Bequeaths All to Isaac (25:5-6)

Death and Burial of Abraham (25:7-10)

Isaac Blessed by God (25:11)

The Generations of Ishmael (25:12-18)