Text -- Genesis 14:1-24 (NET)

The Blessing of Victory for God’s People

14:1 At that time Amraphel king of Shinar, Arioch king of Ellasar, Kedorlaomer king of Elam, and Tidal king of nations 14:2 went to war against Bera king of Sodom, Birsha king of Gomorrah, Shinab king of Admah, Shemeber king of Zeboiim, and the king of Bela (that is, Zoar). 14:3 These last five kings joined forces in the Valley of Siddim (that is, the Salt Sea). 14:4 For twelve years they had served Kedorlaomer, but in the thirteenth year they rebelled. 14:5 In the fourteenth year, Kedorlaomer and the kings who were his allies came and defeated the Rephaites in Ashteroth Karnaim, the Zuzites in Ham, the Emites in Shaveh Kiriathaim, 14:6 and the Horites in their hill country of Seir, as far as El Paran, which is near the desert. 14:7 Then they attacked En Mishpat (that is, Kadesh) again, and they conquered all the territory of the Amalekites, as well as the Amorites who were living in Hazazon Tamar. 14:8 Then the king of Sodom, the king of Gomorrah, the king of Admah, the king of Zeboiim, and the king of Bela (that is, Zoar) went out and prepared for battle. In the Valley of Siddim they met 14:9 Kedorlaomer king of Elam, Tidal king of nations, Amraphel king of Shinar, and Arioch king of Ellasar. Four kings fought against five. 14:10 Now the Valley of Siddim was full of tar pits. When the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah fled, they fell into them, but some survivors fled to the hills. 14:11 The four victorious kings took all the possessions and food of Sodom and Gomorrah and left. 14:12 They also took Abram’s nephew Lot and his possessions when they left, for Lot was living in Sodom. 14:13 A fugitive came and told Abram the Hebrew. Now Abram was living by the oaks of Mamre the Amorite, the brother of Eshcol and Aner. (All these were allied by treaty with Abram.) 14:14 When Abram heard that his nephew had been taken captive, he mobilized his 318 trained men who had been born in his household, and he pursued the invaders as far as Dan. 14:15 Then, during the night, Abram divided his forces against them and defeated them. He chased them as far as Hobah, which is north of Damascus. 14:16 He retrieved all the stolen property. He also brought back his nephew Lot and his possessions, as well as the women and the rest of the people. 14:17 After Abram returned from defeating Kedorlaomer and the kings who were with him, the king of Sodom went out to meet Abram in the Valley of Shaveh (known as the King’s Valley). 14:18 Melchizedek king of Salem brought out bread and wine. (Now he was the priest of the Most High God.) 14:19 He blessed Abram, saying, “Blessed be Abram by the Most High God, Creator of heaven and earth. 14:20 Worthy of praise is the Most High God, who delivered your enemies into your hand.” Abram gave Melchizedek a tenth of everything. 14:21 Then the king of Sodom said to Abram, “Give me the people and take the possessions for yourself.” 14:22 But Abram replied to the king of Sodom, “I raise my hand to the Lord, the Most High God, Creator of heaven and earth, and vow 14:23 that I will take nothing belonging to you, not even a thread or the strap of a sandal. That way you can never say, ‘It is I who made Abram rich.’ 14:24 I will take nothing except compensation for what the young men have eaten. As for the share of the men who went with me– Aner, Eshcol, and Mamre– let them take their share.”

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per phrase)

Wesley: Gen 14:1

We have here an account of the first war that ever we read of in scripture, in which we may observe. [1.] The parties engaged in it.

Wesley: Gen 14:1

That is, Chaldea and Persia; yet probably not the sovereign princes of those great kingdoms, but rather the heads of some colonies which came out thence, and settled themselves near Sodom, but retained the names of the countries from which they had their original. The invaded were the kings of five cities that lay near together in the plain of Jordan, Sodom and Gomorrah, Admah, Zeboiim, and Zoar. [2.] The occasion of this war was, the revolt of the five kings from under the government of Chedorlaomer.

Wesley: Gen 14:4

The Sodomites were the posterity of Canaan, whom Noah had pronounced a servant to Shem, from whom Elam descended. Thus soon did that prophecy begin to be fulfilled. In the thirteenth year, beginning to be weary of their subjection, they rebelled - Denied their tribute, and attempted to shake off the yoke.

Wesley: Gen 14:5

After some pause and preparation, Chedorlaomer, in conjunction with his allies, set himself to reduce the revolters.

[3.] The progress of the war. The four kings laid the neighbouring countries waste, and enriched themselves with the spoil of them, Gen 14:5-7. Upon the alarm of which, the king of Sodom and his allies went out and were routed.

Wesley: Gen 14:13

We have here an account of the only military action we ever find Abram engaged in; and this he was not prompted to by avarice or ambition, but purely by a principle of charity.

Wesley: Gen 14:14

To the number of three hundred and eighteen: a great family, but a small army; about as many as Gideon's that routed the Midianites, Jdg 7:7. He drew out his trained servants, or his catechized servants; not only instructed in the art of war, but instructed in the principles of religion; for Abram commanded his household to keep the way of the Lord.

Wesley: Gen 14:16

That is, his kinsman.

Wesley: Gen 14:18

The Rabbins say, that Melchizedek was Shem the son of Noah, who was king and priest to those that descended from him, according to the patriarchal model. Many Christian writers have thought that this was an appearance of the Son of God himself, our Lord Jesus, known to Abram at this time by this name. But as nothing is expressly revealed concerning it, we can determine nothing.

Wesley: Gen 14:18

For the refreshment of Abram and his soldiers, and in congratulation of their victory. This he did as a king. As priest of the most high God he blessed Abram, which we may suppose a greater refreshment to Abram than his bread and wine were.

Wesley: Gen 14:19

Observe the titles he here gives to God, which are very glorious. The most high God, which speaks his absolute perfections in himself, and his sovereign dominion over all the creatures.

Wesley: Gen 14:19

That is, rightful owner and sovereign Lord of all the creatures; because he made them.

Wesley: Gen 14:20

Note, In all our prayers we must praise God, and join hallelujahs with all our hosannas. These are the spiritual sacrifices we must offer up daily, and upon particular occasions. God as the most high God must have the glory of all our victories. In them he shews himself higher than our enemies, and higher than we, for without him we could do nothing.

Wesley: Gen 14:20

That is, of the spoils, Heb 7:4. This may be looked upon, As a gratuity presented to Melchizedek, by way of return for his respects. As an offering dedicated to the most high God, and therefore put into the hands of Melchizedek his priest. Jesus Christ, our great Melchizedek, is to be humbly acknowledged by every one of us as our king and priest, and not only the tithe of all, but all we have, must be given up to him.

Wesley: Gen 14:21

So the Hebrew reads it. Here he fairly begs the persons, but as freely bestows the goods on Abram. Gratitude teaches us to recompense to the utmost of our power those that have undergone fatigues, or been at expence for our service.

Wesley: Gen 14:22

Here Observe, The titles he gives to God, the most high God, the possessor of heaven and earth - The same that Melchizedek had just now used. It is good to learn of others how to order our speech concerning God, and to imitate those who speak well in divine things.

Wesley: Gen 14:22

In religious swearing we appeal to God's knowledge of our truth and sincerity, and imprecate his wrath if we swear falsely; and the lifting up of the hands is expressive of both. Lest thou shouldst say, I have made Abram rich - Probably, Abram knew the king of Sodom to be a proud and scornful man, and one that would be apt to turn such a thing as this to his reproach afterwards, and when we have to do with such men, we have need to act with particular caution.

Wesley: Gen 14:23

latchet - Not the least thing that had ever belonged to the king of Sodom.

JFB: Gen 14:1

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

JFB: Gen 14:12

How would the conscience of that young man now upbraid him for his selfish folly and ingratitude in withdrawing from his kind and pious relative! Whenever we go out of the path of duty, we put ourselves away from God's protection, and cannot expect that the choice we make will be for our lasting good.

JFB: Gen 14:13

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

JFB: Gen 14:14

Domestic slaves, such as are common in Eastern countries still and are considered and treated as members of the family. If Abram could spare three hundred and eighteen slaves and leave a sufficient number to take care of the flocks, what a large establishment he must have had.

JFB: Gen 14:15-16

This war between the petty princes of ancient Canaan is exactly the same as the frays and skirmishes between Arab chiefs in the present day. When a defeated party resolves to pursue the enemy, they wait till they are fast asleep; then, as they have no idea of posting sentinels, they rush upon them from different directions, strike down the tent poles--if there is any fight at all, it is the fray of a tumultuous mob--a panic commonly ensues, and the whole contest is ended with little or no loss on either side.

JFB: Gen 14:18

This victory conferred a public benefit on that part of the country; and Abram, on his return, was treated with high respect and consideration, particularly by the king of Sodom and Melchizedek, who seems to have been one of the few native princes, if not the only one, who knew and worshipped, "the most high God," whom Abram served. This king who was a type of the Saviour (Heb 7:1), came to bless God for the victory which had been won, and in the name of God to bless Abram, by whose arms it had been achieved--a pious acknowledgment which we should imitate on succeeding in any lawful enterprise.

JFB: Gen 14:20

Here is an evidence of Abram's piety, as well as of his valor; for it was to a priest or official mediator between God and him that Abram gave a tenth of the spoil--a token of his gratitude and in honor of a divine ordinance (Pro 3:9).

JFB: Gen 14:21

According to the war customs still existing among the Arab tribes, Abram might have retained the recovered goods, and his right was acknowledged by the king of Sodom. But with honest pride, and a generosity unknown in that part of the world, he replied with strong phraseology common to the East, "I have lifted up mine hand" [that is, I have sworn] unto the Lord that I will not take from a thread even to a sandal-thong, and that that I will not take any thing that [is] thine, lest thou shouldst say, I have made Abram rich" [Gen 14:22-23].

Clarke: Gen 14:1

In the days of Amraphel - Who this king was is not known; and yet, from the manner in which he is spoken of in the text, it would seem that he was a person well known, even when Moses wrote this account. But the Vulgate gives a different turn to the place, by rendering the passage thus: Factum est in illo tempore, ut Amraphel , etc. "It came to pass in that time that Amraphel, etc."The Chaldee Targum of Onkelos makes Amraphel king of Babylon, others make him king of Assyria; some make him the same as Nimrod, and others, one of his descendants

Clarke: Gen 14:1

Arioch king of Ellasar - Some think Syria is meant; but conjecture is endless where facts cannot be ascertained. Chedorlaomer king of Elam - Dr. Shuckford thinks that this was the same as Ninyas, the son of Ninus and Semiramis; and some think him to be the same with Keeumras, son of Doolaved, son of Arphaxad, son of Shem, son of Noah; and that Elam means Persia; see Gen 10:22. The Persian historians unanimously allow that Keeumras, whose name bears some affinity to Chedorlaomer, was the first king of the Peeshdadian dynasty

Clarke: Gen 14:1

Tidal king of nations - גוים goyim , different peoples or clans. Probably some adventurous person, whose subjects were composed of refugees from different countries.

Clarke: Gen 14:2

These made war with Bera, etc. - It appears, from Gen 14:4, that these five Canaanitish kings had been subdued by Chedorlaomer, and were obliged to pay him tribute; and that, having been enslaved by him twelve years, wishing to recover their liberty, they revolted in the thirteenth; in consequence of which Chedorlaomer, the following year, summoned to his assistance three of his vassals, invaded Canaan, fought with and discomfited the kings of the Pentapolis or five cities - Sodom, Gomorrah, Zeboiim, Zoar, and Admab, which were situated in the fruitful plain of Siddim, having previously overrun the whole land.

Clarke: Gen 14:5

Rephaims - A people of Canaan: Gen 15:20

Clarke: Gen 14:5

Ashteroth - A city of Basan, where Og afterwards reigned; Jos 13:31

Clarke: Gen 14:5

Zuzims - Nowhere else spoken of, unless they were the same with the Zamzummims, Deu 2:20, as some imagine

Clarke: Gen 14:5

Emims - A people great and many in the days of Moses, and tall as the Anakim. They dwelt among the Moabites, by whom they were reputed giants; Deu 2:10, Deu 2:11

Clarke: Gen 14:5

Shaveh Kiriathaim - Rather, as the margin, the plain of Kiriathaim, which was a city afterwards belonging to Sihon king of Heshbon; Jos 13:19.

Clarke: Gen 14:6

The Horites - A people that dwelt in Mount Seir, till Esau and his sons drove them thence; Deu 2:22

Clarke: Gen 14:6

El-paran - The plain or oak of Paran, which was a city in the wilderness of Paran; Gen 21:21.

Clarke: Gen 14:7

En-mishpat - The well of judgment; probably so called from the judgment pronounced by God on Moses and Aaron for their rebellion at that place; Num 20:1-10

Clarke: Gen 14:7

Amalekites - So called afterwards, from Amalek, son of Esau; Gen 36:12

Clarke: Gen 14:7

Hazezon-tamar - Called, in the Chaldee, Engaddi; a city in the land of Canaan, which fell to the lot of Judah; Jos 15:62. See also 2Ch 20:2. It appears, from Son 1:14, to have been a very fruitful place.

Clarke: Gen 14:8

Bela, the same is Zoar - That is, it was called Zoar after the destruction of Sodom, etc., mentioned in Genesis 19.

Clarke: Gen 14:10

Slime-pits - Places where asphaltus or bitumen sprang out of the ground; this substance abounded in that country

Clarke: Gen 14:10

Fell there - It either signifies they were defeated on this spot, and many of them slain, or that multitudes of them had perished in the bitumen-pits which abounded there; that the place was full of pits we learn from the Hebrew, which reads here בארת בארת beeroth beeroth , pits, pits, i.e., multitudes of pits. A bad place to maintain a fight on, or to be obliged to run through in order to escape.

Clarke: Gen 14:11

They took all the goods, etc. - This was a predatory war, such as the Arabs carry on to the present day; they pillage a city, town, or caravan; and then escape with the booty to the wilderness, where it would ever be unsafe, and often impossible, to pursue them.

Clarke: Gen 14:12

They took Lot, etc. - The people, being exceedingly wicked, had provoked God to afflict them by means of those marauding kings; and Lot also suffered, being found in company with the workers of iniquity. Every child remembers the fable of the Geese and Cranes; the former, being found feeding where the latter were destroying the grain, were all taken in the same net. Let him that readeth understand.

Clarke: Gen 14:13

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

Clarke: Gen 14:13

These were confederate with Abram - It seems that a kind of convention was made between Abram and the three brothers, Mamre, Eshcol, and Aner, who were probably all chieftains in the vicinity of Abram’ s dwelling: all petty princes, similar to the nine kings before mentioned.

Clarke: Gen 14:14

He armed his trained servants - These amounted to three hundred and eighteen in number: and how many were in the divisions of Mamre, Eshcol, and Aner, we know not; but they and their men certainly accompanied him in this expedition. See Gen 14:24.

Clarke: Gen 14:15

And he divided himself against them - It required both considerable courage and address in Abram to lead him to attack the victorious armies of these four kings with so small a number of troops, and on this occasion both his skill and his courage are exercised. His affection for Lot appears to have been his chief motive; he cheerfully risks his life for that nephew who had lately chosen the best part of the land, and left his uncle to live as he might, on what he did not think worthy his own acceptance. But it is the property of a great and generous mind, not only to forgive, but to forget offenses; and at all times to repay evil with good.

Clarke: Gen 14:16

And he brought back - the women also - This is brought in by the sacred historian with peculiar interest and tenderness. All who read the account must be in pain for the fate of wives and daughters fallen into the hands of a ferocious, licentious, and victorious soldiery. Other spoils the routed confederates might have left behind; and yet on their swift asses, camels, and dromedaries, have carried off the female captives. However, Abram had disposed his attack so judiciously, and so promptly executed his measures, that not only all the baggage, but all the females also, were recovered.

Clarke: Gen 14:17

The king of Sodom went out to meet him - This could not have been Bera, mentioned Gen 14:2, for it seems pretty evident, from Gen 14:10, that both he and Birsha, king of Gomorrah, were slain at the bitumen-pits in the vale of Siddim; but another person in the meantime might have succeeded to the government.

Clarke: Gen 14:18

And Melchizedek, king of Salem - A thousand idle stories have been told about this man, and a thousand idle conjectures spent on the subject of his short history given here and in Heb. vii. At present it is only necessary to state that he appears to have been as real a personage as Bera, Birsha, or Shinab, though we have no more of his genealogy than we have of theirs

Clarke: Gen 14:18

Brought forth bread and wine - Certainly to refresh Abram and his men, exhausted with the late battle and fatigues of the journey; not in the way of sacrifice, etc.; this is an idle conjecture

Clarke: Gen 14:18

He was the priest of the most high God - He had preserved in his family and among his subjects the worship of the true God, and the primitive patriarchal institutions; by these the father of every family was both king and priest, so Melchizedek, being a worshipper of the true God, was priest among the people, as well as king over them

Melchizedek is called here king of Salem, and the most judicious interpreters allow that by Salem, Jerusalem is meant. That it bore this name anciently is evident from Psa 76:1, Psa 76:2 : "In Judah is God known; his name is great in Israel. In Salem also is his tabernacle, and his dwelling place in Zion."From the use made of this part of the sacred history by David, Psa 110:4, and by St. Paul, Heb 7:1-10, we learn that there was something very mysterious, and at the same time typical, in the person, name, office, residence, and government of this Canaanitish prince. 1. In his person he was a representative and type of Christ; see the scriptures above referred to. 2. His name, מלכי צדק malki tsedek , signifies my righteous king, or king of righteousness. This name he probably had from the pure and righteous administration of his government; and this is one of the characters of our blessed Lord, a character which can be applied to him only, as he alone is essentially righteous, and the only Potentate; but a holy man, such as Melchizedek, might bear this name as his type or representative. 3. Office; he was a priest of the most high God. The word כהן cohen , which signifies both prince and priest, because the patriarchs sustained this double office, has both its root and proper signification in the Arabic; kahana signifies to approach, draw near, have intimate access to; and from hence to officiate as priest before God, and thus have intimate access to the Divine presence: and by means of the sacrifices which he offered he received counsel and information relative to what was yet to take place, and hence another acceptation of the word, to foretell, predict future events, unfold hidden things or mysteries; so the lips of the priests preserved knowledge, and they were often the interpreters of the will of God to the people. Thus we find that Melchizedek, being a priest of the most high God, represented Christ in his sacerdotal character, the word priest being understood as before explained. 4. His residence; he was king of Salem. שלם shalam signifies to make whole, complete, or perfect; and hence it means peace, which implies the making whole the breaches made in the political and domestic union of kingdoms, states, families, etc., making an end of discord, and establishing friendship. Christ is called the Prince of peace, because, by his incarnation, sacrifice, and mediation, he procures and establishes peace between God and man; heals the breaches and dissensions between heaven and earth, reconciling both; and produces glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace and good will among men. His residence is peace and quietness and assurance for ever, in every believing upright heart. He governs as the Prince and Priest of the most high God, ruling in righteousness, mighty to save; and he ever lives to make intercession for, and save to the uttermost all who come unto the Father by him. See the notes on Hebrews 7 (note).

Clarke: Gen 14:19

And he blessed him - This was a part of the priest’ s office, to bless in the name of the Lord, for ever. See the form of this blessing, Num 6:23-26; and for the meaning of the word to bless, see Gen 2:3 (note).

Clarke: Gen 14:20

And he gave him tithes - A tenth part of all the spoils he had taken from the confederate kings. These Abram gave as a tribute to the most high God, who, being the possessor of heaven and earth, dispenses all spiritual and temporal favors, and demands the gratitude, and submissive, loving obedience, of all his subjects. Almost all nations of the earth have agreed in giving a tenth part of their property to be employed in religious uses. The tithes were afterwards granted to the Levites for the use of the sanctuary, and the maintenance of themselves and their families, as they had no other inheritance in Israel.

Clarke: Gen 14:22

I have lift up mine hand - The primitive mode of appealing to God, and calling him to witness a particular transaction; this no doubt generally obtained among the faithful till circumcision, the sign of the covenant, was established. After this, in swearing, the hand was often placed on the circumcised part; see Gen 24:2, Gen 24:9.

Clarke: Gen 14:23

From a thread even to a shoelatchet - This was certainly a proverbial mode of expression, the full meaning of which is perhaps not known. Among the rabbinical writers חוט chut , or חוטי chuti , signifies a fillet worn by young women to tie up their hair; taken in this sense it will give a good meaning here. As Abram had rescued both the men and women carried off by the confederate kings, and the king of Sodom had offered him all the goods, claiming only the persons, he answers by protesting against the accepting any of their property: "I have vowed unto the Lord, the proprietor of heaven and earth, that I will not receive the smallest portion of the property either of the women or men, from a girl’ s fillet to a man’ s shoe-tie."

Clarke: Gen 14:24

Save only that which the young men have eaten - His own servants had partaken of the victuals which the confederate kings had carried away; see Gen 14:11. This was unavoidable, and this is all he claims; but as he had no right to prescribe the same liberal conduct to his assistants, Aner, Eshcol, and Mamre, he left them to claim the share that by right of conquest belonged to them of the recaptured booty. Whether they were as generous as Abram we are not told

The great variety of striking incidents in this chapter the attentive reader has already carefully noted. To read and not understand is the property of the foolish and the inconsiderate. 1. We have already seen the danger to which Lot exposed himself in preferring a fertile region, though peopled with the workers of iniquity. His sorrows commence in the captivity of himself and family, and the loss of all his property, though by the good providence of God he and they were rescued. 2. Long observation has proved that the company a man keeps is not an indifferent thing; it will either be the means of his salvation or destruction. 3. A generous man cannot be contented with mere personal safety while others are in danger, nor with his own prosperity while others are in distress. Abram, hearing of the captivity of his nephew, determines to attempt his rescue; he puts himself at the head of his own servants, three hundred and eighteen in number, and the few assistants with which his neighbors, Mamre, Aner, and Eshcol, could furnish him; and, trusting in God and the goodness of his cause, marches off to attack four confederate kings! 4. Though it is not very likely that the armies of those petty kings could have amounted to many thousands, yet they were numerous enough to subdue almost the whole land of Canaan; and consequently, humanly speaking, Abram must know that by numbers he could not prevail, and that in this case particularly the battle was the Lord’ s. 5. While depending on the Divine blessing and succor he knew he must use the means he had in his power; he therefore divided his troops skilfully that he might attack the enemy at different points at the same time, and he chooses the night season to commence his attack, that the smallness of his force might not be discovered. God requires a man to use all the faculties he has given him in every lawful enterprise, and only in the conscientious use of them can he expect the Divine blessing; when this is done the event may be safely trusted in the hands of God. 6. Here is a war undertaken by Abram on motives the most honorable and conscientious; it was to repel aggression, and to rescue the innocent from the heaviest of sufferings and the worst of slavery, not for the purpose of plunder nor the extension of his territories; therefore he takes no spoils, and returns peaceably to his own possessions. How happy would the world be were every sovereign actuated by the same spirit! 7. We have already noticed the appearance, person, office, etc., of Melchizedek; and, without indulging in the wild theories of either ancient or modern visionaries, have considered him as the Scriptures do, a type of Christ. All that has been already spoken on this head may be recapitulated in a few words. 1. The Redeemer of the world is the King of righteousness; he creates it, maintains it, and rules by it. 2. His empire is the empire of peace; this he proclaims to them who are afar off, and to them that are nigh; to the Jew and to the Gentile. 3. He is Priest of the most high God, and has laid down his life for the sin of the world; and through this sacrifice the blessing of God is derived on them that believe. Reader, take him for thy King as well as thy Priest; he saves those only who submit to his authority and take his Spirit for the regulator of their heart, and his word for the director of their conduct. How many do we find, among those who would be sorry to be rated so low as to rank only with nominal Christians, talking of Christ as their Prophet, Priest, and King, who are not taught by his word and Spirit, who apply not for redemption in his blood, and who submit not to his authority! Reader, learn this deep and important truth: "Where I am there also shall my servant be; and he that serveth me, him shall my Father honor."

Calvin: Gen 14:1

1.And it came to pass in the days of Amraphel. The history related in this chapter is chiefly worthy of remembrance, for three reasons: first, because Lot, with a gentle reproof, exhorted the men of Sodom to repentance; they had, however, become altogether unteachable, and desperately perverse in their wickedness. But Lot was beaten with these scourges, because, having been allured and deceived by the richness of the soil, he had mixed himself with unholy and wicked men. Secondly, because God, out of compassion to him, raised up Abram as his avenger and liberator, to rescue him, when a captive, from the hand of the enemy; in which act the incredible goodness and benevolence of God towards his own people, is rendered conspicuous; since, for the sake of one man, he preserves, for a time, many who were utterly unworthy. Thirdly, because Abram was divinely honored with a signal victory, and was blessed by the mouth of Melchizedek, in whose person, as appears from other passages of Scripture, the kingdom and priesthood of Christ was shadowed forth. As it respects the sum of the history, it is a horrible picture both of the avarice and pride of man.

The human race had yet their three progenitors, Shem, Ham, and Japheth, living among them; by the very sight of whom they were admonished, that they all sprung from one family, and one ark. Moreover, the memory of their common origin was a sacred pledge of fraternal connection, which should have bound them to assist each other, by mutual good offices. Nevertheless, ambition so prevailed, that they assailed one another on all sides, with sword and armor, and each attempted to subdue the rest. Wherefore, while we see, at the present day, princes raging furiously, and shaking the earth to the utmost of their power; let us remember that the evil is of ancient date; since the lust of dominion has, in all ages, been too prevalent among men. Let us, however, also remark, that no fault is worse than that loftiness of mind, which many deem a most heroical disposition. The ambition of Chedorlaomer was the torch of the whole war: for he, inflamed with the desire of triumphing, drew three others into a hostile confederacy. And pride compelled the men of Sodom and their allies to take arms, for the purpose of shaking off the yoke.

That Moses, however, records the names of so many kings, while Shem was yet living, (although derided by profane men as fabulous,) will not appear absurd, if we only reflect that this great propagation of the human race, was a remarkable miracle of God. For when the Lord said to Noah himself, and to his sons, Increase and multiply, he intended to raise them to the hope of a far more excellent restoration than would have taken place, in the ordinary course of nature. This benediction is indeed perpetual, and shall flourish even to the end of the world: but it was necessary that its extraordinary efficacy should then appear; in order that these earliest fathers might know, that a new world had been divinely inclosed within the ark. By the Poets, Deucalion with his wife, is feigned to have sown the race of men after the deluge, by throwing stones behind him. ³⁵⁶ But it followed of necessity, that the miserable minds of men should be deluded with such trifles, when they departed from the pure truth of God; and Satan has made use of this artifice, for the purpose at discrediting the veracity of the miracles of God. For since the memory of the deluge, and the unwonted propagation of a new world, could not be speedily obliterated, he scattered abroad clouds and smoke; introducing puerile conceits, in order that what had before been held for certain truth, might now be regarded as a fable. It is however to be observed, that all are called kings by Moses, who held the priority in any town, or in any considerable assembly of men. It is asked, whether those kings who followed Chedorlaomer dwelt at a great distance; because Tidal is called the king of nations? There are those who imagine that he reigned over different nations far and wide; as if he was a king of kings. The ancient interpreter fetches Arioch from Pontus; ³⁵⁷ which is most absurd. I rather think the true reason of the name was, that he had a band composed of deserters and vagrants, who, having left their own country, had resorted to him. Therefore, since they were not one body — natives of his own country — but gathered together from a promiscuous multitude, he was properly called king of nations. In saying that the battle was fought in the vale of Siddim, or in the open plain, which, when Moses wrote, had become the Salt Sea, it is not to be doubted that the Dead Sea, or the lake Asphaltites, is meant. For he knew whom he was appointed to instruct, and therefore he always accommodated his words to the rude capacity of the people; and this is his common custom in reference to the names of places, as I have previously intimated. Before, however, the battle was fought, Moses declares that the inhabitants of the region were partially beaten. It is probable that all had been scattered, because they had no leader, under whose auspices they might fight, until five kings advanced to meet them with a disciplined army. Now, though Chedorlaomer had rendered so many people tributary to him by tyranny rather than by lawful authority, and on that account his ambition is to be condemned; yet his subjects are justly punished for having rashly rebelled. For although liberty is by no means to be despised, yet the subjection which is once imposed upon us cannot, without implied rebellion against God, be shaken off; because ‘every power is ordained by God,’ notwithstanding, in its commencement, it may have flowed from the lust of dominion, (Rom 13:1.) Therefore some of the rebels are slaughtered like cattle; and others, though they have clothed themselves in armor, and are prepared to resist, are yet driven to flight; thus, unhappily to all concerned, terminates the contumacious refusal to pay tribute. And such narratives are to be noticed that we may learn from them, that all who strive to produce anarchy, fight against God.

Calvin: Gen 14:10

10.And the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah fled. Some expound that they had fallen into pits: but this is not probable, since they were by no means ignorant of the neighboring places: such an event would rather have happened to foreign enemies. Others say, that they went down into them for the sake of preserving their lives. I, however, understand them to have exchanged one kind of death for another, as is common in the moment of desperation; as if Moses had said, the swords of the enemy were so formidable to them, that, without hesitation, they threw themselves headlong into the pits. For he immediately afterwards subjoins, that they who escaped fled to the mountains. Whence we infer, that they who had rushed into the pits had perished. Only let us know, that they fell, not so much deceived through ignorance of the place, as disheartened by fear.

Calvin: Gen 14:12

12.And they took Lot. It is doubtful whether Lot remained at home while others went to the battle, and was there captured by the enemy; or whether he had been compelled to take arms with the rest of the people. As, however, Moses does not mention him till he speaks of the plundering of the city, the conjecture is probable, that at the conclusion of the battle, he was taken at home, unarmed. We here see, first, that sufferings are common to the good and the evil; then, that the more closely we are connected with the wicked and the ungodly, when God pours down his vengeance on them, the more quickly does the scourge come upon us.

Calvin: Gen 14:13

13.And there came one that had escaped. This is the second part of the chapter, in which Moses shows, that when God had respect to his servant Lot, he gave him Abram as his deliverer, to rescue him from the hands of the enemy. But here various questions arise; as, whether it was lawful for Abram, a private person, to arm his family against kings, and to undertake a public war. I do not, however, doubt, that as he went to the war endued with the power of the Spirit, so also he was guarded by a heavenly command, that he did not transgress the bounds of his vocation. And this ought not to be regarded as a new thing, but as his special calling; for he had already been created king of that land. And although the possession of it was deferred to a future time; yet God would give some remarkable proof of the power which he had granted him, and which was hitherto unknown to men. ³⁵⁸ A similar prelude of what was to follow, we read in the case of Moses, when he slew the Egyptian, before he openly presented himself as the avenger and deliverer of his nation. And for this reason the subject ought to be noticed, that they who wish to defend themselves by armed force, whenever any force is used against them, may note from this fact, frame a rule for themselves. We shall hereafter see this same Abram bearing patiently and with a submissive mind, injuries which had at least, an equal tendency to provoke his spirit. Moreover, that Abram attempted nothing rashly, but rather, that his design was approved by God, will appear presently, from the commendation of Melchizedek. We may therefore conclude, that this war was undertaken by him, under the special direction of the Spirit. If any one should take exception, that he proceeded further than was lawful, when he spoiled the victors of their prey and captives, and restored them wholly to the men of Sodom, who had, by no means been committed to his protection; I answer, since it appears that God was his Guide and Ruler in this affair, — as we infer from His approbation, — it is not for us to dispute respecting His secret judgment. God had destined the inhabitants of Sodom, when their neighbors were ruined and destroyed, to a still more severe judgment; because they were themselves the worst of all. He, therefore, raised up his servant Abram, after they had been admonished by a chastisement sufficiently severe, to deliver them, in order that they might be rendered the more inexcusable. Therefore, this peculiar suggestion of the Holy Spirit ought no more to be drawn into a precedent, than the whole war which Abram had carried on. With respect to the messenger who had related to Abram the slaughter at Sodom, I do not accept what some suppose, that he was a pious man. We may rather conjecture that, as a fugitive from home, who had been deprived of all his goods, he came to Abram to elicit something from his humanity. That Abram is called a Hebrew, I do not explain from the fact of his having passed over the river, as is the opinion of some; but from his being of the progeny of Eber. For it is a name of descent. And the Holy Spirit here again honorably announces that race as blessed by God.

And these were confederate with Abram. It appears, that in the course of time, Abram was freely permitted to enter into covenant and friendship with the princes of the land: for the heroical virtues of the man, caused them to regard him as one who was not, by any means, to be despised. Nay, as he had so great a family, he might also have been numbered among kings, if he had not been a stranger and a sojourner. But God purposed thus to provide for his peace, by a covenant relating to temporal things in order that he never might be mingled with those nations. Moreover, that this whole transaction was divinely ordered we may readily conjecture from the fact, that his associates did not hesitate, at great risk, to assail four kings, who (according to the state of the times) were sufficiently strong, and were flushed with the confidence of victory. Surely they would scarcely ever have been thus favorable to a stranger, except by a secret impulse of God.

Calvin: Gen 14:14

14.When Abram heard that his brother was taken captive. Moses briefly explains the cause of the war which was undertaken; namely, that Abram might rescue his relation from captivity. Meanwhile, what I have before said is to be remembered, that he did not rashly fly to arms; but took them as from the hand of God, who had constituted him lord of that land. With reference to the words themselves, I know not why the ancient interpreter has rendered them, ‘Abram numbered his trained servants.’ For the word ריק ( rik) signifies to unsheathe, or to draw out. ³⁵⁹ Now Moses calls these servants חניכים ( chanichim,) not as having been educated and trained for military service, as many suppose; but rather (in my opinion) as having been brought up under his own authority, and imbued from childhood with his discipline; so that they fought the more courageously, being stimulated by his faith, and going forth under his auspices; ³⁶⁰ and were ready to undergo every kind of danger for his sake. But in this great household troop, we must notice, not only the diligence of the holy patriarch, but the special blessing of God, by which it had been increased beyond the common and usual manner.

Calvin: Gen 14:15

15.And he divided himself against them. Some explain the words to mean that Abram alone, with his domestic troops, rushed upon the enemy. Others, that he and his three confederates divided their bands, in order to strike greater terror into the foe. A third class suppose the phrase to be a Hebraism, for making an irruption into the midst of the enemy. I rather embrace the second exposition; namely, that he invaded the enemy on different sides, and suddenly inspired them with terror. For the circumstance of time favors this view, because he attacked them by night. And although examples of similar bravery occur in profane history; yet it ought to be ascribed to the faith of Abram, that with a small band, he dared to assail a numerous army elated with victory. But that he came off conqueror with little trouble, and with intrepidity pursued those who far exceeded him in number, we must ascribe to the favor of God.

Calvin: Gen 14:17

17.And the king of Sodom went out. Although the king of Sodom knew that Abram had taken arms only on account of his nephew, yet he went to meet him with due honor, in order to show his gratitude. For it is a natural duty to acknowledge benefits conferred upon us, even when not intentionally rendered, but only from unexpected circumstances and occasions, or (as we say) by accident. Moreover, the whole affair yields greater glory to God, because the victory of Abram was celebrated in this manner. He also marks the place where the king of Sodom met Abram, namely, “the king’s dale,” which I think was so called, rather after some particular king, than because those kings met there for their pleasure. ³⁶¹

Calvin: Gen 14:18

18.And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth. This is the last of the three principal points of this history, that Melchizedek, the chief father of the Church, having entertained Abram at a feast, blessed him, in virtue of his priesthood, and received tithes from him. There is no doubt that by the coming of this king to meet him, God also designed to render the victory of Abram famous and memorable to posterity. But a more exalted and excellent mystery was, at the same time, adumbrated: for seeing that the holy patriarch, whom God had raised to the highest rank of honor, submitted himself to Melchizedek, it is not to be doubted that God had constituted him the only head of the whole Church; ³⁶² for, without controversy, the solemn act of benediction, which Melchizedek assumed to himself, was a symbol of preeminent dignity. If any one replies, that he did this as a priest; I ask, was not Abram also a priest? Therefore God here commends to us something peculiar in Melchizedek, in preferring him before the father of all the faithful. But it will be more satisfactory to examine the passage word by word, in regular order, that we may thence better gather the import of the whole. That he received Abram and his companions as guests belonged to his royalty; but the benediction pertained especially to his sacerdotal office. Therefore, the words of Moses ought to be thus connected: Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine; and seeing he was the priest of God, he blessed Abram; thus to each character is distinctly attributed what is its own. He refreshed a wearied and famishing army with royal liberality; but because he was a priest, he blessed, by the rite of solemn prayer, the firstborn son of God, and the father of the Church. Moreover, although I do not deny that it was the most ancient custom, for those who were kings to fulfill also the office of the priesthood; yet this appears to have been, even in that age, extraordinary in Melchizedek. And truly he is honored with no common eulogy, when the Spirit ratifies his priesthood. We know how, at that time, religion was everywhere corrupted since Abram himself, who was descended from the sacred race of Shem and Eber, had been plunged in the profound vortex of superstitions with his father and grandfather. Therefore many imagine Melchizedek to have been Shem; to whose opinion I am, for many reasons, hindered from subscribing. For the Lord would not have designated a man, worthy of eternal memory, by a name so new and obscure, that he must remain unknown. Secondly, it is not probable that Shem had migrated from the east into Judea; and nothing of the kind is to be gathered from Moses. Thirdly, if Shem had dwelt in the land of Canaan, Abram would not have wandered by such winding courses, as Moses has previously related, before he went to salute his ancestor. But the declaration of the Apostle is of the greatest weight; that this Melchizedek, whoever he was, is presented before us, without any origin, as if he had dropped from the clouds, and that his name is buried without any mention of his death. (Heb 7:3.) But the admirable grace of God shines more clearly in a person unknown; because, amid the corruptions of the world, he alone, in that land, was an upright and sincere cultivator and guardian of religion. I omit the absurdities which Jerome, in his Epistle to Evagrius, heaps together; lest, without any advantage, I should become troublesome, and even offensive to the reader. I readily believe that Salem is to be taken for Jerusalem; and this is the generally received interpretation. If, however, any one chooses rather to embrace a contrary opinion, seeing that the town was situated in a plain, I do not oppose it. On this point Jerome thinks differently: nevertheless, what he elsewhere relates, that in his own times some vestiges of the palace of Melchizedek were still extant in the ancient ruins, appears to me improbable.

It now remains to be seen how Melchizedek bore the image of Christ, and became, as it were, his representative, ἀντίτυπος ( avtitupos. ³⁶³) These are the words of David,

“The Lord sware, and will not repent, Thou art a priest forever, after the order of Melchizedek,” (Psa 110:4.)

First, he had placed him on a royal throne, and now he gives him the honor of the priesthood. But under the Law, these two offices were so distinct, that it was unlawful for kings to usurp the office of the priesthood. If, therefore, we concede as true, what Plato declares, and what occasionally occurs in the poets, that it was formerly received, by the common custom of nations, that the same person should be both king and priest; this was by no means the case with David and his posterity, whom the Law peremptorily forbade to intrude on the priestly office. It was therefore right, that what was divinely appointed under the old law, should be abrogated in the person of this priest. And the Apostle does not contend without reason, that a more excellent priesthood than that old and shadowy one, was here pointed out; which priesthood is confirmed by an oath. Moreover, we never find that king and priest, who is to be preeminent over all, till we come to Christ. And as no one has arisen except Christ, who equalled Melchizedek in dignity, still less who excelled him; we hence infer that the image of Christ was presented to the fathers, in his person. David, indeed, does not propose a similitude framed by himself; but declares the reason for which the kingdom of Christ was divinely ordained, and even confirmed with an oath; and it is not to be doubted that the same truth had previously been traditionally handed down by the fathers. The sum of the whole is, that Christ would thus be the king next to God, and also that he should be anointed priest, and that for ever; which it is very useful for us to know, in order that we may learn that the royal power of Christ is combined with the office of priest. The same Person, therefore who was constituted the only and eternal Priest, in order that he might reconcile us to God, and who, having made expiation, might intercede for us, is also a King of infinite power to secure our salvation, and to protect us by his guardian care. Hence it follows, that relying on his advocacy, we may stand boldly in the presence of God, who will, we are assured, be propitious to us; and that trusting in his invincible arm, we may securely triumph over enemies of every kind. But they who separate one office from the other, rend Christ asunder, and subvert their own faith, which is deprived of half its support. It is also to be observed, that Christ is called an eternal King, like Melchizedek. For since the Scripture, by assigning no end to his life, leaves him as if he were to survive through all ages; it certainly represents or shadows forth to us, in his person, a figure, not of a temporal, but of an eternal kingdom. But whereas Christ, by his death, has accomplished the office of Priest, it follows that God was, by that one sacrifice, once appeased in such a manner, that now reconciliation is to be sought in Christ alone. Therefore, they do him grievous wrong, and wrest from him by abominable sacrilege, the honor divinely conferred upon him by an oaths who either institute other sacrifices for the expiation of sins, or who make other priests. ³⁶⁴ And I wish this had been prudently weighed by the ancient writers of the Church. For then would they not so coolly, and even so ignorantly, have transferred to the bread and wine the similitude between Christ and Melchizedek, which consists in things very different. They have supposed that Melchizedek is the image of Christ, because he offered bread and wine. For they add, that Christ offered his body, which is life-giving bread, and his blood, which is spiritual drink. But the Apostle, while in his Epistle to the Hebrews, he most accurately collects, and specifically prosecutes, every point of similarity between Christ and Melchizedek, says not a word concerning the bread and wine. If the subtleties of Tertullian, and of others like him, were true, it would have been a culpable negligence, not to bestow a single syllable upon the principal point, while discussing the separate parts, which were of comparatively trivial importance. And seeing the Apostle disputes at so great length, and with such minuteness, concerning the priesthood; how gross an instance of forgetfulness would it have been, not to touch upon that memorable sacrifice, in which the whole force of the priesthood was comprehended? He proves the honor of Melchizedek from the benediction given, and tithes received: how much better would it have suited this argument to have said, that he offered not lambs or calves, but the life of the world, (that is, the body and blood of Christ,) in a figure? By these arguments the fictions of the ancients are abundantly refuted. Nevertheless, from the very words of Moses a sufficiently lucid refutation may be taken. For we do not there read that anything was offered to God; but in one continued discourse it is stated, ‘He offered bread and wine; and seeing he was priest of the Most High God, he blessed him.’ Who does not see that the same relative pronoun is common to both verbs; and therefore that Abram was both refreshed with the wine, and honored with the benediction? Utterly ridiculous truly are the Papists, who distort the offering ³⁶⁵ of bread and wine to the sacrifice of their mass. For in order to bring Melchizedek into agreement with themselves, it will be necessary for them to concede that bread and wine are offered in the mass. Where, then, is transubstantiation, which leaves nothing except the bare species of the elements? Then, with what audacity do they declare that the body of Christ is immolated in their sacrifices? Under what pretext, since the Son of God is called the only successor of Melchizedek, do they substitute innumerable successors for him? We see, then, how foolishly they not only deprave this passage, but babble without the color of reason.

Calvin: Gen 14:19

19.And he blessed him. Unless these two members of the sentence, ‘He was the priest of God,’ and ‘He blessed,’ cohere together, Moses here relates nothing uncommon. For men mutually bless each other; that is, they wish well to each other. But here the priest of God is described, who, according to the right of his office, sanctifies one inferior and subject to himself. For he would never have dared to bless Abram, unless he had known, that in this respect he excelled him. In this manner the Levitical priests are commanded to bless the people; and God promises that the blessing should be efficacious and ratified, (Num 6:23.) So Christ, when about to ascend up to heaven, having lifted up his hands, blessed the Apostles, as a minister of the grace of God, (Luk 24:51;) and then was exhibited the truth of this figure. For he testifies that the office of blessing the Church, which had been adumbrated in Melchizedek, was assigned him by his Father.

Blessed be Abram of the most high God. The design of Melchizedek is to confirm and ratify the grace of the Divine vocation to holy Abram; for he points out the honor with which God had peculiarly dignified him by separating him from all others, and adopting him as his own son. And he calls God, by whom Abram had been chosen, the Possessor of heaven and earth, to distinguish him from the fictitious idols of the Gentiles. Afterwards, indeed, God invests himself with other titles; that, by some peculiar mark, he may render himself more clearly known to men, who, because of the vanity of their mind, when they simply hear of God as the Framer of heaven and earth, never cease to wander, till at length they are lost in their own speculations. But because God was already known to Abram, and his faith was founded upon many miracles, Melchizedek deems it sufficient to declare that, by the title of Creator, ³⁶⁶ He whom Abram worshipped, is the true and only God. And although Melchizedek himself maintained the sincere worship of the true God, he yet calls Abram blessed of God, in respect of the eternal covenant: as if he would say, that, by a kind of hereditary right, the grace of God resided in one family and nation, because Abram alone had been chosen out of the whole world. Then is added a special congratulation on the victory obtained; not such as is wont to pass between profane men, who puff each other up with inflated encomiums; but Melchizedek gives thanks unto God, and regards the victory which the holy man had gained as a seal of his gratuitous calling.

Calvin: Gen 14:20

20.And he gave him tithes of all. There are those who understand that the tithes were given to Abram; but the Apostle speaks otherwise, in declaring that Levi had paid tithes in the loins of Abram, (Heb 7:9,) when Abram offered tithes to a more excellent Priest. And truly what the expositors above-mentioned mean, would be most absurd; because, if Melchizedek was the priest of God, it behaved him to receive tithes rather than to give them. Nor is it to be doubted but Abram offered the gift to God, in the person of Melchizedek, in order that, by such first-fruits, he might dedicate all his possessions to God. Abram therefore voluntarily gave tithes to Melchizedek, to do honor to his priesthood. Moreover, since it appears that this was not done wrongfully nor rashly, the Apostle properly infers, that, in this figure, the Levitical priesthood is subordinate to the priesthood of Christ. For other reasons, God afterwards commanded tithes to be given to Levi under the Law; but, in the age of Abram, they were only a holy offering, given as a pledge and proof of gratitude. It is however uncertain whether he offered the title of the spoils or of the goods which he possessed at home. But, since it is improbable that he should have been liberal with other persons’ goods, and should have given a very a tenth part of the prey, of which he had resolved not to touch even a thread, I rather conjecture, that these tithes were taken out of his own property. I do not, however, admit that they were paid annually, as some imagine, but rather, in my judgment, he dedicated this present to Melchizedek once, for the purpose of acknowledging him as the high priest of God: nor could he, at that time, (as we say,) hand it over; ³⁶⁷ but there was a solemn stipulation, of which the effect shortly after followed.

Calvin: Gen 14:21

21.And the king of Sodom said. Moses having, by the way, interrupted the course of his narrative concerning the king of Sodom, by the mention of the king of Salem, now returns to it again; and says that the king of Sodom came to meet Abram, not only for the sake of congratulating him, but of giving him a due reward. He therefore makes over to him the whole prey, except the men; as if he would says ‘It is a great thing that I recover the men; let all the rest be given to thee as a reward for this benefit.’ And thus to have shown himself grateful to man, would truly have been worthy of commendation; had he not been ungrateful to God, by whose severity and clemency he remained alike unprofited. It was even possible that this man, when poor and deprived of all his goods, might, with a servile affectation of modesty, try to gain the favor of Abram, by asking to have nothing but the captives and the empty city for himself. Certainly we shall afterwards see that the men of Sodom were unmindful of the benefit received, when they proudly and contemptuously vexed righteous Lot.

Calvin: Gen 14:22

22.And Abram said to the king of Sodom, I have lift up mine hand, etc ³⁶⁸ This ancient ceremony was very appropriate to give expression to the force and nature of an oath. For by raising the hand towards heaven, we show that we appeal to God as a witness, and also as an avenger, if we fail to keep our oath. Formerly, indeed, they raised their hands in giving votes; whence the Greeks derive the word (χειροτονεῖν,) ³⁶⁹ which signifies to decree: but in the rite of swearing, the reason for doing so was different. For men hereby declared, that they regarded themselves as in the presence of God, and called upon him to be both the Guardian of truth, and the Avenger of perjury. Yet it may seem strange that Abram should so easily have put himself forward to swear; for he knew that a degree of reverence was due to the name of God, which should constrain us to use it but sparingly, and only from necessity. I answer, there were two reasons for his swearing. First, since inconstant men are wont to measure others by their own standard, they seldom place confidence in bare assertions. The king of Sodom, therefore, would have thought that Abram did not seriously remit his right, unless the name of God had been interposed. And, secondly, it was of great consequence, to make it manifest to all, that he had not carried on a mercenary war. The histories of all times sufficiently declare, that even they who have had just causes of war have, nevertheless, been invited to it by the thirst of private gain. And as men are acute in devising pretexts, they are never at a loss to find plausible reasons for war, even though covetousness may be their only real stimulant. Therefore, unless Abram had resolutely refused the spoils of war, the rumor would immediately have spread, that, under the pretense of rescuing his nephew, he had been intent upon grasping the prey. Against which it was necessary for him carefully to guard, not so much for his own sakes as for the glory of God, which would otherwise have received some mark of disparagement. Besides, Abram wished to arm himself with the name of God, as with a shield, against all the allurements of avarice. For the king of Sodom would not have desisted from tempting his mind by various methods, if the occasion for using bland insinuations had not been promptly cut off.

Calvin: Gen 14:23

23.That I will not take from a thread even to a shoe - latchet. The Hebrews have an elliptical form of making oath, in which the imprecation of punishment is understood. In some places, the full expression of it occurs in the Scriptures, “The Lord do so to me and more also,” (1Sa 14:44.) Since however, it is a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the living God, in order that the obligation of oaths may be the more binding, this abrupt form of speech admonishes men to reflect on what they are doing; for it is just as if they should put a restraint upon themselves, and should stop suddenly in the midst of their discourse. This indeed is most certain, that men never rashly swear, but they provoke the vengeance of God against them, and make Him their adversary.

Lest thou shouldst say. Although these words seem to denote a mind elated, and too much addicted to fame, yet since Abram is on this point commended by the Spirit, we conclude that this was a truly holy magnanimity. But an exception is added namely that he will not allow his own liberality to be injurious to his allies, nor make them subject to his laws. For this also is not the least part of virtue, to act rightly, yet in such a manner, that we do not bind others to our example, as to a rule. Let every one therefore regard what his own vocation demands, and what pertains to his own duty, in order that men may not prejudge one another according to their own will. For it is a moroseness too imperious, to wish that what we ourselves follow as right, and consonant with our duty, should be prescribed as a law to others.

Defender: Gen 14:1

Shinar probably refers to Sumeria, and Elam to early Persia. Ellasar was the leading tribe in southern Babylonia and "nations" (Hebrew Goiim) was probably a tribe of northeastern Babylonia. Chedorlaomer seems to have been the chief leader of this confederacy (Gen 14:4)."

Defender: Gen 14:3

"Siddim" meant "cultivated fields," and the vale of Siddim at this time was extremely fertile, supporting the five cities of the plain. The reference to "the salt sea" was probably a later editorial insertion by Moses. At the time of Abram, what is now the Dead Sea was still a freshwater remnant of the great flood, and the whole region was "well watered everywhere" (Gen 13:10). The exact location of Sodom and her four sister cities is uncertain, although most authorities believe their remains are now submerged beneath the waters of the shallow southern arm of the Dead Sea. There is also the possibility that the actual cities were located on higher elevations overlooking five ephemeral streams emptying into the lake, with the inhabitants working the fields below during the daytime, then living in the cooler heights above at night."

Defender: Gen 14:5

Some of these Canaanite tribes actually seem to have been demon-possessed, in the same manner as the demon-energized population before the Flood (see notes on Gen 6:1-4). The Rephaim ("strong ones") and the Zamzummim ("powerful ones," probably the same as the Zuzim) along with the Emim, all seem to have been of the sons of Anak, or the Anakim, and all seem to have been giants (Deu 2:10, Deu 2:20; Jos 15:13). In Num 13:33, these Anakim are actually said to have been "giants" (Hebrew nephilim, the same word as used in Gen 6:4). Furthermore, the term rephaim is also used to refer to some of the spirits of the wicked dead in Hades (Job 26:5; Pro 2:18; Pro 9:18; Pro 21:16; Isa 14:9; Isa 26:14). All of this suggests another irruption of demonic spirits after the Flood, possibly at the rebellion at Babel, with giant progeny again being produced through demon-possessed parents. Their descendants inhabited Canaan."

Defender: Gen 14:6

The Horites are known to archaeologists as the Hurrians, a leading tribe of the ancient Middle East."

Defender: Gen 14:7

The Amalekites were descended from Amalek, a grandson of Esau, and later inhabited a region west of the Dead Sea. This note was evidently inserted by Moses in his editing of Genesis.

Defender: Gen 14:7

The Amorites were probably the dominant tribe in Canaan at this time."

Defender: Gen 14:10

These "slime pits" were so extensive that the Dead Sea was called the Asphalt Sea by early writers. They probably represented accumulations of organic debris from the Flood, collecting in the unique basins of the great Rift Valley which traverses the region."

Defender: Gen 14:18

The identity of Melchizedek is controversial, especially in view of the statements made concerning him in Psa 110:4, and in Heb 5:6, Heb 5:10; Heb 6:20; 7:1-21. "The Lord" is called by David "a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek." The writer of Hebrews said Melchizedek was "without father, without mother, without descent ("genealogy"), having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God; abideth a priest continually" (Heb 7:3). The usual interpretation of these words is that he was made into a type of Christ since as a "King of Righteousness" (meaning of Melchizedek ) and "King of Peace" (meaning of Salem ), he appears and leaves the record suddenly, with no mention of either ancestry or death. It seems better to take the words literally, in which case they could be applicable to Christ Himself, appearing here to Abram in a theophany. This would also solve the problem of how such a godly king and priest as Melchizedek could be ruling a city in such an ungodly land as Canaan and, why, if he did, Abram would have had no other contact with him. The fact that he was "like unto the Son of God" (Heb 7:3) accords with one of Christ's pre-incarnate appearances; at His human birth, he became the incarnate Son of God forever. Melchizedek was also said to be a man (Heb 7:4), but the same is true in the case of other theophanies, one of which was likewise manifested to Abram (Gen 18:2, Gen 18:22; 19:1-24)."

TSK: Gen 14:1

am 2091, bc 1913

Shinar : Gen 10:10, Gen 11:2; Isa 11:11; Dan 1:2; Zec 5:11

Ellasar : Isa 37:12

Elam : Gen 10:22; Isa 21:2, Isa 22:6; Jer 25:25, Jer 49:34-39; Eze 32:24

TSK: Gen 14:2

Sodom : Gen 10:19, Gen 13:10, Gen 19:24; Isa 1:9, Isa 1:10

Admah : Deu 29:23; Hos 11:8

Zeboiim : 1Sa 13:18; Neh 11:34

Zoar : Gen 19:20-30; Deu 34:3; Isa 15:5; Jer 48:34

TSK: Gen 14:3

salt sea : Gen 19:24; Num 34:12; Deu 3:17; Jos 3:16; Psa 107:34 *marg.

TSK: Gen 14:4

they served : Gen 9:25, Gen 9:26

they rebelled : Eze 17:15

TSK: Gen 14:5

Rephaims : Gen 15:20; Deu 3:11, Deu 3:20, Deu 3:22; 2Sa 5:18, 2Sa 5:22, 2Sa 23:13; 1Ch 11:15, 1Ch 14:9; Isa 17:5

Ashteroth : The same as Ashteroth, a city of Bashan, where Og afterwards reigned. Deu 1:4; Jos 12:4, Jos 13:12, Jos 13:31

Zuzims : Deu 2:20-23; 1Ch 4:40; Psa 78:51, Psa 105:23, Psa 105:27, Psa 106:22

Emims : Deu 2:10, Deu 2:11

Shaveh Kiriathaim : or, the plains of Kiriathaim, Kiriathaim was beyond Jordan, 10 miles west-ward from Medeba, and afterwards belonged to Sihon, king of Heshbon. Jos 13:19; Jer 48:1, Jer 48:23

TSK: Gen 14:6

Horites : Gen 36:8, Gen 36:20-30; Deu 2:12, Deu 2:22; 1Ch 1:38-42

Elparan : or, the plain of Paran, Gen 16:7, Gen 21:21; Num 12:16, Num 13:3; Hab 3:3

TSK: Gen 14:7

Kadesh : En-mishpat or Kadesh, was about 8 leagues south of Hebron. Gen 16:14, Gen 20:1; Num 20:1; Deu 1:19, Deu 1:46

Amalekites : Gen 36:12, Gen 36:16; Exo 17:8-16; Num 14:43, Num 14:45, Num 24:20; 1Sam. 15:1-35, 1Sa 27:1-12; 1Sam. 30:1-31

Hazezontamar : Called by the Chaldee, ""En-gaddi,""a town on the western shore of the Dead Sea. Jos 15:62; 2Ch 20:2

TSK: Gen 14:8

same : Gen 14:2, Gen 13:10, Gen 19:20, Gen 19:22

in : Gen 14:3, Gen 14:10

TSK: Gen 14:9

Gen 14:1

TSK: Gen 14:10

slime pits, Places where asphaltus or bitumen sprung out of the ground: this substance which is properly denoted by the word ""slime,""abounds in these parts. Gen 11:3

fell : Jos 8:24; Psa 83:10; Isa 24:18; Jer 48:44

the mountain : Gen 19:17, Gen 19:30

TSK: Gen 14:11

Gen 14:16, Gen 14:21, Gen 12:5; Deu 28:31, Deu 28:35, Deu 28:51

TSK: Gen 14:12

Lot : Gen 11:27, Gen 12:5

who : Gen 13:12, Gen 13:13; Num 16:26; Job 9:23; Jer 2:17-19; 1Ti 6:9-11; Rev 3:19, Rev 18:4

TSK: Gen 14:13

one : 1Sa 4:12; Job 1:15

the : Gen 39:14, Gen 40:15, Gen 41:12, Gen 43:32; Exo 2:6, Exo 2:11; Jon 1:9; 2Co 11:22; Phi 2:5

dwelt : Gen 13:18

Mamre : Gen 14:24, Gen 13:18

Amorite : Gen 10:16; Num 21:21

and these : Gen 14:24

TSK: Gen 14:14

his brother : Gen 11:27-31, Gen 13:8; Pro 17:17, Pro 24:11, Pro 24:12; Gal 6:1, Gal 6:2; 1Jo 2:18

armed : or, led forth, Psa 45:3-5, Psa 68:12; Isa 41:2, Isa 41:3

trained : or, instructed

born : Gen 12:5, Gen 12:16, Gen 15:3, Gen 17:12, Gen 17:27, Gen 18:19, Gen 23:6; Ecc 2:7

Dan : Deu 34:1; Jdg 18:29, Jdg 20:1

TSK: Gen 14:15

And he : Psa 112:5

smote : Isa 41:2, Isa 41:3

Damascus : Deu 15:2; 1Ki 15:18; Act 9:2

TSK: Gen 14:16

Gen 14:11, Gen 14:12, Gen 12:2; 1Sa 30:8, 1Sa 30:18, 1Sa 30:19; Isa 41:2

TSK: Gen 14:17

to : Jdg 11:34; 1Sa 18:6; Pro 14:20, Pro 19:4

after : Heb 7:1

king’ s : 2Sa 18:18

TSK: Gen 14:18

king : Psa 76:2; Heb 7:1, Heb 7:2

bread : Mat 26:26-29; Gal 6:10

the priest : Psa 110:4; Heb 5:6, Heb 5:10, Heb 6:20, Heb 7:1, Heb 7:3, Heb 7:10-22

the most : Rth 3:10; 2Sa 2:5; Psa 7:17, Psa 50:14, Psa 57:2; Mic 6:6; Act 7:48, Act 16:17

TSK: Gen 14:19

he blessed : Gen 27:4, Gen 27:25-29, Gen 47:7, Gen 47:10, Gen 48:9-16, Gen 49:28; Num 6:23-27; Mar 10:16; Heb 7:6, Heb 7:7

Blessed be : Rth 3:10; 2Sa 2:5; Eph 1:3, Eph 1:6

high : Mic 6:6; Act 16:17

possessor : Gen 14:22; Psa 24:1, Psa 50:10, Psa 115:16; Mat 11:25; Luk 10:21

TSK: Gen 14:20

blessed : Gen 9:26, Gen 24:27; Psa 68:19, Psa 72:17-19, Psa 144:1; Eph 1:3; 1Pe 1:3, 1Pe 1:4

which : Jos 10:42; Psa 44:3

tithes : Gen 28:22; Lev 27:30-32; Num 28:26; Deu 12:17, Deu 14:23, Deu 14:28; 2Ch 31:5, 2Ch 31:6, 2Ch 31:12; Neh 10:37, Neh 13:12; Amo 4:4; Mal 3:8, Mal 3:10; Luk 18:12; Rom 15:16; Heb 7:4-9

TSK: Gen 14:21

persons : Heb. souls, Gen 14:21

TSK: Gen 14:22

lift : Exo 6:8; Deu 32:40; Dan 12:7; Rev 10:5, Rev 10:6

unto : Gen 21:23-31; Jdg 11:35

the most : Gen 14:20, Gen 17:1; Psa 24:1, Psa 83:18; Isa 57:15; Dan 4:34; Hag 2:8

possessor : Gen 14:19, Gen 21:33

TSK: Gen 14:23

That I : 1Ki 13:8; 2Ki 5:16, 2Ki 5:20; Est 9:15, Est 9:16; 2Co 11:9-11, 2Co 12:14

lest : 2Co 11:12; Heb 13:5

TSK: Gen 14:24

Save : Pro 3:27; Mat 7:12; Rom 13:7, Rom 13:8

Aner : Gen 14:13

let : 1Co 9:14, 1Co 9:15; 1Ti 5:18

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per Verse)

Barnes: Gen 14:1-24

- Abram Rescues Lot

1. אמרפל 'amrāpel , Amraphel; related: unknown. אלריוך 'aryôk , Ariok, "leonine?"related: ארי 'arı̂y , "a lion:"a name re-appearing in the time of Daniel Dan 2:14. אלסר 'elāsār Ellasar (related: unknown) is identified with Larsa or Larancha, the Λάρισσα Larissa or Λαράχων Larachōn of the Greeks, now Senkereh, a town of lower Babylonia, between Mugheir (Ur) and Warka (Erek) on the left bank of the Frat. כדרלעמר kedārlā‛omer , Kedorla’ omer, was compared by Col. Rawlinson with Kudur - mapula or mabuk , whose name is found on the bricks of Chaldaea, and whose title is Apda martu , ravager of the west. He translates it "servant of Lagamer,"one of the national divinities of Susiana. It is also compared with Kedar el-Ahmar, "Kedar the Red,"a hero in Arabian story. תדעל tı̂d‛āl , Tid’ al, "terror." גוים gôyı̂m , Goim, "nations."

2. ברע bera‛ , Bera‘ , "gift?" ברשׁע bı̂rsha , Birsha‘ , "long and thick?"Arabic שׁנאב shı̂n'āb , Shinab, "coolness?" אדמה 'admâh , Admah, "red soil" שׁמאבר shem'ēber , Shemeber, "high-soaring?" צביים ; ts^e bôyı̂ym , Tseboim, "gazelles." בלע bela‛ , Bela‘ , "devouring."

3. שׂדים śı̂dı̂ym , Siddim, "plains, fields."

5. רפאים r^e pā'ı̂ym , Rephaim, "the still, the shades, the giants." קרנים עשׁתרת ( asht^e rot - qarnayı̂m , ‘ Ashteroth-Qurnaim, "ewes of the two horns"; according to Gesenius, "stars of the two horns."The first word may be singular, "ewe,"or "star."The latter meaning is gained by connecting the word with the Persian sitareh and the Greek ἀστήρ astēr , "star."Ashteroth is the moon or the planet Venus, whence Astarte. זוּזים zûzı̂ym , Zuzim; related: "glance, gush." הם hām , Ham, "rush, sound, crowd." אימים 'eymı̂ym , Emim, "terrible." שׁיח־קריתים shāvēh - qı̂ryātāyı̂m , Shaveh, "plain"; Qiriathaim, "two cities;"related: "meet."

6. חרי chorı̂y , Chori, troglodyte; verb: "bore;"noun: "cave." שׁעיר sē‛ı̂yr , Se‘ ir, "rough, shaggy." פארן איל 'eyl - pā'rān , El, "tree, oak, terebinth, palm"; Paran, "bushy, or cavernous."

7. משׁפט עין ‛eyn - mı̂shpāṭ , ‘ En-mishpat, "well of judgment." קדשׁ qādēsh , Qadesh, "consecrated." עמלקי ‛ǎmālēkı̂y , ‘ Amaleki, "a people that licks up." תמר חצצן chatstson - tāmār , Chatsatson-tamar, "cuttiny of the palm."

13. עברי ‛ı̂brı̂y ‘ Ibri, a descendant of Eber. אשׁכל 'eshkol , Eshkol, "cluster of grapes." ענר ‛ǎner , ‘ Aner; related: unknown.

14. דן dan , Dan, "ruler, judge."

15. חיבה chôbâh , Chobah, "hidden." דמושׂק dameśeq , Dammeseq. a quadraliteral; related: "hasty, active, alert."

18. מלכיצדק malkı̂y - tsedeq , Malkitsedeq, "king of righteousness." שׁלם shālēm , Shalem. "peace." אל 'êl , El, "lasting, strong; strength."

20. מגן mı̂gēn , "give, deliver;"related: "mag, may."

The community of feeling and of faith was not yet wholly broken up between Abram and Lot, or between them and the nations out of whom Abram had been called. An interesting glimpse is at the same time presented of the daring and doing of fierce ambition in those early times. A confederacy of potentates enter upon an extensive raid or foray, in which Lot is taken captive. This rouses the clannish or family affection of Abram, who pursues, overtakes, and defeats the retreating enemy, and recovers his friend, as well as all the prisoners, and property that had been taken. On his return he receives refreshment and blessing from a native prince who is priest to the most high God.

Gen 14:1-12

The raid is minutely described in Gen 14:1-12. The dominant confederacy consists of four kings. Many generations back the first world power, consisting of four cities, was established by Nimrod in the land of Shinar Gen 10:8-10. This has now given way to a world-confederacy, consisting of four kings. From the vicinity of the places in which they reigned it is evident that they were petty princes of domains varying from a town and its suburbs to a comparatively extensive territory. The first, Amraphel, is king of Shinar. He is therefore the successor of Nimrod, and the sovereign of the most ancient kingdoms, and on these grounds occupies the first place in the list. But this kingdom is no longer the sole or even the supreme power. Amraphel is probably the descendant of Nimrod, and a Kushite. The second, Ariok, is king of Ellasar. If this town be the same as Larsa, lying between the Frat and the Shat el-Hie, the land of Shinar has been divided between two sovereigns, and no longer belongs entirely to the successor of Nimrod. Lower Shinar includes also Ur of the Kasdim; and hence, Ariok probably represents that race.

The third, Kedorlaomer, is king of Elam, or Elymais, a country east of the lower Tigris, and separated by it from Shinar. He is probably a Shemite, as the country over which he ruled received its name from a son of Shem Gen 10:22. He is the lord paramount of the others, and commander-in-chief of the united forces. Hence, the Hamite seems to have already succumbed to the Shemite. The fourth, Tidel, is designated "king of Goim."Goim means nations; and it is doubtful whether it denotes here a special nation or a congeries of tribes. The Gentiles, especially so called, seem to have been Japhethites Gen 10:5. It is obvious that four nationalities are here leagued together, corresponding probably to the Kiprat arbat, four nations or tongues mentioned by Rawlinson (Anc. Mon. I. p. 69). But Kedorlaomer, king of Elam, is clearly not a Kushite. The only question seems to be whether he is a Shemite or a Japhethite, or Arian, in which race the Shemite was ultimately absorbed. If the former alternative be adopted, we may have two Shemite languages among the four. If the latter be accepted, Kedorlaomer is an Arian; Tidal, a Turanian; Amraphel, a Hamite; and Ariok, a Shemite. In either case the Kushite has become subordinate, and a Japhethite or a Shemite has attained the predominance.

Gen 14:2-3

They made war. - Shinar was the central region from which the different branches of the human family dispersed after the confusion of tongues. It is possible that the mother country claimed some supremacy over the colonies. Shinar was also a great center of commerce, and the cities of the dale of Siddim formed another, of secondary importance. Intercourse between the two countries was therefore frequent. Abram himself had come from Ur Kasdim. The spirit of despotism had descended from Nimrod to the present potentates of the East, and prompted them to aim at universal empire. The five kings are the petty sovereigns, each of a single town and its neighborhood. The area in which these towns lay was very circumscribed. With the exception of the territory of Bela it was afterward submerged and formed part of the basin of the Salt Sea. Hence, Siddim is said to be the Salt Sea. The dale is the deep valley or glen in which these kings dwelt on the banks of the Jordan, or the salt lake into which it flowed. Of the five cities, Sodom was the chief in power, luxury, and wickedness; whence it is mentioned first. Bela is also called Zoar, "the little,"and, hence, is placed last; even the name of its king is not given. "All these joined together."They formed a league in self-defense, and marched out to meet the enemy in the dale of Siddim.

Gen 14:4-7

The narrative here reverts to the previous circumstances which gave occasion to the present raid. "Twelve years had they served Kedorlaomer."These years date probably from the commencement of his reign. They may have been previously dependent on the dominant power in Shinar, and connected with it by national descent. If Kedorlaomer had wrested the supremacy from the king of Shinar, and so was regarded as an alien by the princes of Siddim, their coolness might gradually ripen into disaffection. In the thirteenth year they rebelled, and in the fourteenth Kedorlaomer came to quell the revolt. This military expedition embraced far loftier objects than the mere subjugation of the Pentapolis in the dale of Siddim. In passing from Shinar the invaders must have marched in a northwesterly direction along the Frat, touching upon Tadmor and Damascus. We are not informed whether they held any sway or made any conquest in these intervening regions. But they overran the country that stretches along the whole cast side of the Jordan, and the parts south and west of the Salt Sea.

The Rephaim lay in Peraea. Some of them also were once found on the west side of the Jordan Gen 15:20, where they gave name to the valley of Rephaim (Wady el-Werd), southwest of Jerusalem, on the way to Bethlehem Jos 15:8, occupied part of Mount Ephraim Jos 17:15, and lingered for a long time among the Philistines (2Sa 21:16, ff.). They were a tall or gigantic race. They were not Kenaanites, but seem to have entered the country before them. They were conquered in Peraea by the Amorites, a branch of the Kenaanite family; and by the descendants of Lot, the Ammonites and Moabites. A remnant of them only lingered in the country when the Israelites arrived Deu 2:20; Deu 3:11, Deu 3:13. They may have been Shemites or Japhethites. The site of Ashteroth Carnaim has not been ascertained. Ritter finds it in Tell Ash’ areh. Porter suggests ‘ Afineh, eight miles from Busrah, as the Samaritan version has ‘ Aphinit for ‘ Ashtaroth.

The Zuzim dwelt between the Jabbok and the Arnon. They are supposed to be the same as the Zamzummin, who were dispossessed by the Ammonites. If so, they were a branch of the Rephaim Deu 2:20. Their town, Ham, is of unknown site.

The Emim were also accounted Rephaim. They lay on the east of the Salt Sea, and were afterward conquered by the Moabites, who gave them this name Deu 2:10-11. Of Shaveh Kiriathaim, the plain of the two cities, the name probably remains in el-Kureiyat, a site near Jebel Attarus in Moab.

The Horites were perhaps a Shemite tribe, the aboriginal inhabitants of Mount Seir, where they dwelt in caves; such as are still to be seen in Petra and other places around. They were afterward absorbed into the Edomites. Mount Seir stretches between the Salt Sea and the Elanitic Gulf. El-Paran, terebinth of Paran, is perhaps the same as Elath, at the head of the gulf of Aelana or Akaba. Paran lay west of Mount Seir and south of Palestine, and stretched into the peninsula of Sinai, where the name may yet be preserved in Wady Feiran. El-Paran would thus be by the wilderness of that name, now et-Tih.

Gen 14:7

This was the extreme point of their march southward. They now turned back by another route. Enmishpat, which is Kadesh, lay between Mount Hor and the Salt Sea, at a site now called Ain el-Welbch. "The field of the Amalekite"was some part of the country lying between Palestine and Egypt, which was afterward occupied by the Amalekites. Instead of "field,"the Septuagint has ἄρχοντας archontas , "rulers"of Amalek; but this reading is not supported. The tribe is descended from Amalek, thc son of Eliphaz and grandson of Esau Gen 36:12. Traces of them are found as far north as Ephraim Jdg 5:14; Jdg 12:15. Balaam calls Amalek the beginning of the nations Num 24:20; but this cannot be understood absolutely, as the name does not even occur in the table of nations. It is therefore well explained to mean that Amalek was the first that attacked Israel on coming out of Egypt. The invading host advance still further, to Hazazon-tamar, cutting of the palm, which is En-gedi (well of the kid, 2Ch 20:2), situated on the western shore of the Salt Sea, and now called Ain Jidy. This was a settlement of the Amorites.

Gen 14:8-12

We have now arrived again at the point we had reached in Gen 14:3. The five kings came out and joined battle with the four in the dale of Siddim. This dale abounded in pits of mineral pitch, or asphalt. The kings of Sodom and Amorah fled toward these pits, and seem to have fallen into them and perished. The others betook themselves to the mountain - probably the heights on the cast of the dale.

Gen 14:11

The provisions and other movable property of the vanquished are carried away from Sodom and Amorah. For רפשׁ rekush , "goods,"the Septuagint has here and in the 21st verse τὴν ἵππσν tēn hippon , "the cavalry."This implies the reading רכב rekeb , which is not supported by other authorities, nor suitable to the context. Among the prisoners is Lot, the son of Abram’ s brother. This designation prepares us for what is to follow. It is added that he was "dwelling in Sodom,"to explain why he was among the captives. "They went away."The invaders were now laden with booty. Their first concern was to transfer this to their native country, and deposit it in a place of safety. It was not prudent to delay while they were encumbered with so much valuable property. The terms on which the conquered tribes were to "serve"them could be settled by negotiation. If these terms were not accepted, they would be quite ready for another predatory incursion.

This great foray is only incidentally introduced into our narrative, on account of the capture of Lot. It was not the first visit probably of these marauders to the same lands. It is interesting to the historian, as a sample of the mode in which conquest was made. It opens up to the view one of the ancient scenes of human activity. It teaches us that the wave of war often flowed over the lands of the ancient world, and left more or less lasting marks of its disturbing power. Tribes were not unfrequently moved from place to place, intermingled with one another, and enslaved by other tribes. The actual state of things in the land of Abram’ s pilgrimage is suddenly presented to us under a new light. The Rephaim, including the Zuzim and the Emim, occupy the east of the Jordan, and had once a place on the west. The Perizzites also dwell side by side with the Kenaanites in the western district. The Horites are found in Mount Seir. As none of these were Kenaan’ s descendants, we have the undeniable traces of a Shemitic population before and along with the Kenaanites. The language of Heber, therefore, was in the country before the latter arrived.

Gen 14:13-16

Abram rescues Lot. הפליט hapālı̂yṭ "the fugitive"party, as "the Kenaanite"for the whole nation. The escaped party inform Abram when one of their number does so. "The Hebrew."This designation is given to Abram plainly for the purpose of connecting him with Lot. The Septuagint translates the word by περα της peratees , one who passes. This has been explained by transfluvialis , one who has come across the river; namely, the Frat. This no doubt applies to Lot as well as Abram; but it also applies to every other tribe in the country, inasmuch as all had originally migrated across the Euphrates. Besides, the word is nowhere else used in this sense, but always as a patronymic. And, moreover, Abram is here distinguished as the Hebrew, just as his confederate Mamre is distinguished as the Amorite. The object of these designations is to mark, not only their relation to each other, but also their connection with those who were carried off as prisoners of war. The term "Hebrew"does not come into the narrative by hap-hazard. "The sons of Heber"are distinctly mentioned in the table of nations among the descendants of Shem. Its introduction here intimates that there were other descendants of Heber besides Abram already in the land. They could not but be a widespread race. One branch of them, the Joctanites, were the first stock of Arabia’ s inhabitants, and the Palgites may have been the earliest settlers in the adjacent Palestine. How many of the non-Kenaanites belong to them we cannot tell; but we learn from the statement now before us that the Hebrew was at this time a known patronymic. The way between Mesopotamia and Palestine has been often trodden.

Abram was dwelling by the oaks of Mamre, near Hebron, therefore not far from the scene of war. He was also in league with Mamre and his brothers Eshkol and Aner. This league was, it is evident from the result, for mutual defense.

Gen 14:14

His brother. - This is a customary extension of the term, whether we regard Lot as his brother’ s son, or at the same time his brother-in-law. "His trained men."Abram had now a company of three hundred and eighteen trained men, born in his own house; which implies a following of more than one thousand men, women, and children. His flocks and herds must have corresponded in extent to such an establishment. "Unto Dan."This name is found in the Hebrew, Samaritan, Septuagint, and Onkelos. It might naturally be supposed that the sacred reviser of the text had inserted it here, had we not grounds for a contrary supposition. The custom of the reviser was to add the other name without altering the original; of which we have several examples in this very chapter Gen 14:2-3, Gen 14:7-8, Gen 14:17. We are, therefore, led to regard Dan as in use at the time of Abram. Held at that remote period perhaps by some Hebrew, it fell at length into the hands of the Sidonians Judg. 18, who named it Laish (lion) and Leshem (ligure).

Names of places in that eastern land vary, from a slight resemblance in sound (paronomasia), a resemblance in sense (synonyms), a change of masters, or some other cause. Laish and Leshem are significant names, partly alike in sound, and applied to the same town. They took the place of Dan when the town changed masters. The recollection of its ancient name and story may have attracted the Danites to the place, who burned Laish and built a new city which they again called Dan. This town was situated at the source of the lesser Jordan, with which some have connected its name. Its site is now occupied by Tell el-Kady, the hill of "the judge."This is a case of resemblance in sense between varying names. Others, however, distinguish the present Dan from the Laish Dan, and identify it with Danjaan or jaar, "Dan in the wood"2Sa 24:6. The former is not on the road to Damascus, while the latter was north of Gilead, and may have been near the route either by the south of the sea of Kinnereth, or of the waters of Merom. This is possible, and deserves consideration. But there may have been a third way to Damascus, passing Tell el-Kady; this place itself is on the east side of the main stream of the Jordan, and the expression רען דנה dānâh ya'an is confessedly obscure.

Gen 14:15-16

Abram and his confederates found the enemy secure and at their ease, not expecting pursuit. They attack them on two quarters; Abram, probably, on the one, and his allies on the other; by night, defeat and pursue them unto Hobah. "On the left hand of Damascus."Hobah was on the north of Damascus. An Eastern, in fixing the points of the heavens, faces the rising sun, in which position the east is before him, the west behind, the south at the right hand, and the north at the left. Hobah is referred by the Jews to Jobar, a place northeast of Damascus. J. L. Porter suggests a place due north, called Burzeh, where there is a Muslim wely or saint’ s tomb, called Makam Ibrahim, the sanctuary of Abraham (Handbook, p. 492). This route, by the north of Damascus, illustrates the necessity of advancing far north to get round the desert intervening between Shinar and the cities of the plain.

Damascus, Dimishk, esh-Sham, is a very ancient city of Aram. The choice of the site was probably determined by the Abana (Barada) and Pharpar (Awaj), flowing, the one from Anti-Libanus, and the other from Mount Hermon, and fertilizing a circuit of thirty miles. Within this area arose a city which, amidst all the changes of dynasty that have come over it, has maintained its prosperity to the present day, when it has one hundred and fifty thousand inhabitants. It was originally occupied by the descendants of Aram, and may have been built, as Josephus informs us, by Uz his son.

Abram, with his allies, succeeded in defeating the enemy and recovering the property, with the prisoners, male and female, that had been carried away, and, among the rest, Lot, the object of his generous and gallant adventure.

Verse 7-24

Abram’ s reception on his return. "The king of Sodom."This is either Bera, if he survived the defeat, or, if not, his successor. "The dale of Shaveh, which is the King’ s dale."The word עמק ‛ēmeq is rendered here uniformly by the familiar term "dale."The dale of Shaveh is here explained by the "King’ s dale."This phrase occurs at a period long subsequent as the name of the valley in which Absalom reared his pillar 2Sa 18:18. There is nothing to hinder the identity of the place, which must, according to the latter passage, have been not far from Jerusalem. Josephus makes the distance two stadia, which accords with the situation of Absalom’ s tomb, though the building now so-called, in the valley of Jehoshaphat, seems to be of later origin. The identity of the King’ s dale with the valley cast of Jerusalem, through which the Kedron flows, corresponds very well with the present passage.

Gen 14:18-20

An incident of the deepest interest here takes us by surprise. The connecting link in the narrative is obviously the place where the king of Sodom meets with Abram. The King’ s dale is plainly adjacent to the royal residence of Melkizedec, who therefore comes forth to greet and entertain the returning victor. This prince is the king of Shalem. This is apparently an ancient name of Jerusalem, which is so designated in Psa 76:8. The other Shalem, which lay in the vicinity of Shekem (Gen 33:18, if this be a proper name) is far away from the King’ s dale and the town of Sodom. Jerusalem is convenient to these localities, and contains the element Shalem in its composition, as the name signifies the foundation of peace (Shalom).

The king of Shalem, by name king of righteousness, and by office king of peace, "brought forth bread and wine."These are the standing elements of a simple repast for the refreshment of the body. In after times they were by divine appointment placed on the table of the presence in the tabernacle Exo 25:29-30. They were the accompaniments of the Paschal lamb Mat 26:26-27, and they were adopted by the Messiah as the sacred symbols of that heavenly fare, of which, if a man partake, he shall live forever Joh 6:48-58. The Author of revelation has made all nature intrinsically good and pure. He has realized therein a harmony of the laws of intelligence and design; everything meets and matches all that comes into contact with it; and all together form a cosmos, a system of things, a unity of types and antitypes. His word cannot but correspond to His work. Bread and wine are common things, familiar to the eye, the touch, and the taste of men. The Great Teacher takes them up out of the hands of man as emblems of grace, mercy, and peace, through an accepted ransom, of the lowliest as well as the loftiest boon of an everlasting salvation, and they have never lost their significance or appropriateness.

And he was priest to the most high God. - From this we are assured that the bread and wine refreshed not only the body, but the soul of Abram. In close connection with the preceding sentence, it seems to intimate that the bringing forth of bread and wine was a priestly act, and, accordingly, the crowning part of a sacred feast. The כהן kohen , or priest, who is here mentioned for the first time in Scripture, was one who acted in sacred things on the part of others. He was a mediator between God and man, representing God holding out the hand of mercy, and man reaching forth the hand of faith. The necessity of such an orifice grew out of the distance between God and man produced by sin. The business of the priest was to offer sacrifice and to intercede; in the former making amends to the law, in the latter appealing to the mercy of God. We do not learn by express statement what was the mode of intervention on the part of Melkizedec. But we know that sacrifice was as early as Habel, and that calling on the name of the Lord was commenced in the time of Enosh. These were early forms of approach to God. The offices of king and priest were combined in Melkizedec - a condition of things often exemplified in after times.

The most high God. - Here we meet with a new name of God, El, the Lasting, the Mighty, cognate with Elohim, and previously occurring in the compound proper names Mebujael, Mahalalel, and Bethel. We have also an epithet of God, "Elion the most high,"now appearing for the first time. Hence, we perceive that the unity, the omnipotence, and the absolute pre-eminence of God were still living in the memory and conscience of a section at least of the inhabitants of this land. Still more, the worship of God was not a mere domestic custom, in which the father or head of the family officiated, but a public ordinance conducted by a stated functionary. And, lastly, the mode of worship was of such a nature as to represent the doctrine and acknowledge the necessity of an atonement, since it was performed by means of a priest.

Gen 14:18

And he blessed him. - Here it comes out clearly that Melkizedec acts not only in a civil but in a sacred capacity. He blesses Abram. In the form of benediction employed we have two parts: the former of which is strictly a blessing or asking of good things for the person in question. "Blessed be Abram."It is the part of the father to bless the child, of the patriarch or superior to bless the subject or inferior, and of the priest to bless the people Heb 7:7. Here, accordingly, Melkizedec assumes and Abram concedes to him the superiority. The Most High God is here further designated as the Founder of heaven and earth, the great Architect or Builder, and, therefore, Possessor of all things. There is here no indistinct allusion to the creation of "heaven and earth,"mentioned in the opening of the Book of God. This is a manifest identification of the God of Melkizedec with the one Creator and Upholder of all things. We have here no mere local or national deity, with limited power and province, but the sole and supreme God of the universe and of man.

Gen 14:20

The second part of this benedictory prayer is a thanksgiving to the common God of Melkizedec and Abram for the victory which had been vouchsafed to the latter. "Thy foes."Here Abram is personally addressed. Melkizedec as a priest first appeals to God on behalf of Abram, and then addresses Abram on behalf of God. Thus, he performs the part of a mediator.

And he gave him a tithe of all. - This is a very significant act. In presenting the tenth of all the spoils of victory, Abram makes a practical acknowledgment of the absolute and exclusive supremacy of the God whom Melkizedec worshipped, and of the authority and validity of the priesthood which he exercised. We have here all the indications of a stated order of sacred rites, in which a costly service, with a fixed official, is maintained at the public expense, according to a definite rate of contribution. The gift in the present case is the tenth of the spoils of war. This act of Abram, though recorded last, may have taken place at the commencement of the interview. At all events, it renders it extremely probable that a sacrifice had been offered to God, through the intervention of Melkizedec, before he brought forth the bread and wine of the accepted feast.

It is obvious that here we stand on broader ground than the special promise made to Abram. Melkizedec was not a partner in the call of Abram, and yet the latter acknowledges him as a priest of the Most High God. Hence, we must fall back on the covenant made with Noah - the representative of the whole race after the deluge - as the broad basis of authority on which Melkizedec acted. That covenant, then, was not a dead letter. It still lived in the heart and will of a part of the nations. Its hallowing and exalting truths had produced at least one center of pure and spiritual worship on the earth. Even Abram, the called of God, acknowledges its constituted head. And the Most High God, Founder and Upholder of heaven and earth, thereby guarantees its validity for all who in every place call on his name in sincerity and truth. And his special call to Abram is given with a view to the final removal of all obstacles to the acceptance and application of this his everlasting covenant. We are thankful for this glimpse into the comprehensive grandeur of the divine purpose concerning man, which is for some time forward cast into the shade, until it begins to break forth again in the anticipations of the prophets, and at length shines forth with imperishable splendor in the revelations of the New Testament.

The genealogy of Melkizedec seems designedly veiled in impenetrable obscurity. To lift this veil entirely is therefore hopeless. Yet we may venture to hint the possibility that here we have another Shemite chieftain in the land of Kenaan. The indefinite statement of Josephus, that he was a potentate of the Kenaanites, is no proof to the contrary, even if it were of much value. The address of Ezekiel to Jerusalem: "Thy origin and thy birth are of the land of Kenaan; thy father was an Amorite, and thy mother a Hittite"Eze 16:3, may refer to the period immediately before the entrance of Israel into the land. At and after that time the Amorite and the Jebusite seem to have been in possession of the city Jos 10:5; Jdg 1:21. But in the time of Abram, more than four hundred years before, it may have been different. We have discovered other tribes in this land that were not of the race of Kenaan. It is not likely that Kenaan would furnish a priest of the most high God. It is evident that Melkizedec was not in the confederacy of the Pentapolis with the king of Sodom. He comes out separately and suddenly to meet Abram, who was one of "the children of Heber,"of whom Shem was the father.

And he is the acknowledged head of the worshippers of the most high God, who is "the Lord, the God of Shem."But be this as it may, it is only a secondary question here. The matter of primary importance, as has been already noted, is the existence of a community of pure worshippers of the true God in the land of Kenaan, antecedent to Abram. If this community be descendants of Kenaan, it only renders the discovery the more striking and impressive. The knowledge of the true God, the confession of the one everlasting supreme Creator of heaven and earth, the existence of a stated form of worship by means of a priest and a ritual attested by Abram the elect of God, in a community belonging to the Gentiles, form at once a remarkable vindication of the justice and mercy of God in having made known to all mankind the mode of acceptable approach to himself, and a singular evidence that such a revelation had been made to Noah, from whom alone it could have descended to the whole race, and consequently to this particular branch of it.

We have reason to believe that this was not the sole line in which this precious tradition was still preserved in comparative purity and power. Job and his companions belong to one other known line in which the knowledge of the one God was still vital. The fundamental principles of divine truth planted in the human breast by this and antecedent revelations were never afterward wholly eradicated; and from the hereditary germs of a primitive theology, cherished by contact with the Sidonians and other Phoenicians, were Homer, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, and other sages of the East and West, enabled to rise to the exalted conceptions which they occasionally formed of the unity, purity, spirituality, and supremacy of the Divine Being. The idea of God, conveyed into a soul of any power and freedom, is wonderfully prolific. It bursts the bonds of the animal nature, and expands and elevates the rational to some shadowy semblance of its primeval glory. Where it has become altogether extinct, the human has sunk down under the debasing bondage of the brutal. During the four centuries that elapsed from the arrival of Abram to the conquest of the country by his descendants, this interesting relic of a pure Gentile worship seems to have disappeared. But the traces of such a purifying and elevating knowledge of God were not even then effaced from the memories, the customs, and the phrases of the people.

Gen 14:21-24

The king of Sodom concedes to Abram, according to custom, the spoils of conquest as his right, and claims for himself only his subjects who had been rescued from the foe. Abram however declines any personal advantage from the enterprise, or material recompense for his services. To this he was led partly by the present disposition of his mind, in which the spiritual prevailed over the carnal, and partly by the character of the one with whom he had to deal; since the Sodomites were notorious for their wickedness. On other occasions he accepted unmerited gifts Gen 12:16; Gen 20:14, Gen 20:16. On the present occasion, he, no doubt, felt himself amply rewarded by the recovery of his own kinsman, and the blessing of Melkizedec. Disinterestedness has had another victory in Abram. And, accordingly, the minister of God meets him on the field of a common humanity, and pronounces on him a blessing. The unselfish, unsectarian heart of the heir of special promise, bows in acknowledgment of the representative of the universal and anterior covenant of God with Noah.

Gen 14:22

I have lifted up my hand. - This is a serious matter with Abram. Either before, or then and there, he made an oath or solemn asseveration before God, with uplifted hand, that he would not touch the property of Sodom. He must have felt that there was danger of moral contamination in coming into any political relationship with the cities of the vale. "The Lord, the Most High God, the Founder of heaven and earth."In this conjunction of names Abram solemnly and expressly identifies the God of himself and of Melkizedec in the presence of the king of Sodom. The Most High God of Melkizedec is the God of the first chapter of Genesis, and the Yahweh of Adam, Noah, and Abram.

Gen 14:24

While Abram refrains from accepting any part of the spoils beyond what had been consumed in supplying the necessities of his followers in the expedition, he expressly excepts the portion to which his confederates, Aner, Eshcol, and Mamre, became entitled by their share in the recovery of the property. This is sufficient to prove that the transaction regarding the spoil was not an offer of generosity on the part of the king of Sodom, but an act of disinterestedness on the part of Abram.

Poole: Gen 14:2

Once for all, observe that the name of kings is here and elsewhere given by Moses to the chief governors of cities or little provinces. Compare Jos 12:9 , &c.

Poole: Gen 14:3

Which now is, though when this battle was fought it was not so.

Poole: Gen 14:4

He was their lord, either,

1. By inheritance, as the issue of Elam, Shem’ s son, Gen 10:22 . Or,

2. By conquest, having subdued those people in a former war, which Josephus speaks of.

Poole: Gen 14:5

The kings that were with him i.e. confederate with him for the recovery of his right, expecting the same assistance from him upon the like occasion. 1913

The Rephaims a fierce and warlike people of Canaan. See Gen 15:20 . Or the giants, as this word is taken Deu 2:11 .

Ashteroth Karnaim a place in Basan called Ashteroth, Deu 1:4 Jos 9:10 13:31 . It is surnamed Carnaim, q.d.

Two-horned, like a half moon, either from the situation and form of the place, or from the goddess Diana, or the moon, which usually was painted with two horns, whom they worshipped.

The Emims a people in Canaan of giant-like stature, Deu 2:10,11 .

Shaveh Kiriathaim Kiriathaim is a noted city in Gilead, and Shaveh may be either the ancient name of that city, or the present name of the country adjoining and belonging to it.

Poole: Gen 14:6

The Horites the ancient inhabitants of Seir, of whom see Gen 36:20 Deu 2:12 . El signifies a plain, and Paran is the name of a known city and mountain. See Num 13:3 Deu 33:2 1Sa 25:1 , &c.

Poole: Gen 14:7

Which is Kadesh i.e. which after that time was called Kadesh, of which see Num 20:1,14 , &c.

The country of the Amalekites i.e. which afterwards was possessed by the Amalekites, Gen 36:12 . A known figure called prolepsis.

Poole: Gen 14:10

The vale of Siddim was chosen by those five kings for the place of battle, that their adversaries being ignorant of the place might unawares fall into those pits, which they by their knowledge of it thought to escape.

Kings of Sodom and Gomorrah i.e. their armies; a figurative speech, frequent in Scripture and other authors; for their persons escaped: see Gen 14:17 . They either,

1. Fell into the pits which they designed for others; or rather,

2. Were slain, as this word is oft used, as Jos 8:24,25 Jud 8:10 12:6 ; and here too; for those that fell are here opposed to those that remained.

Poole: Gen 14:12

Lot now suffered for his cohabitation with bad neighbours.

Poole: Gen 14:13

Abram the Hebrew so called, either,

1. From his great and good predecessor Eber, Gen 10:24 11:14 , in and by whom the primitive language and true religion were preserved; and therefore though Abram had five other progenitors between Eber and him, which were persons of less note, he is rightly denominated from Eber, the Hebrew, because he was the first that revived the memory and the work of Eber, that kept up the same language, and eminently propagated the same true religion. Or,

2. As others think, from his passing over the river Euphrates, from beyond which he came into Canaan.

These were confederate with Abram i.e. had entered into a league for their mutual defence against common enemies. Whence we learn that it is not simply and universally unlawful to make a league with persons of a false religion.

Poole: Gen 14:14

He armed his trained servants whom he had disciplined and instructed both in religion and in the military art too, both which were necessary to make them good soldiers, that they might both fight with skill and courage, and also rely upon God, and engage his assistance; which was now especially necessary, when so small a party were to engage against so numerous an army.

Dan is commonly thought to be a town then called Leshem, Jos 19:47 , or Laish, Jud 18:7 , and afterwards Dan; see Jud 18:7,29 ; so it is an anticipation. But it may be doubted whether this was a city; or if it were, whether it were not another town called by the same name, which was frequent in those parts. And some think this is not a town, but the very fountain of Dan, whence Jordan had its name.

Poole: Gen 14:15

He divided himself i.e. his forces into several parties, that coming upon them from several quarters he might strike them with greater terror, whilst they thought his army far more numerous than it was.

Poole: Gen 14:16

He brought back all the goods which the victorious kings had taken from the princes and people mentioned before in this chapter.

Poole: Gen 14:17

So called either upon this occasion of the meeting of divers kings here; or because king Melchizedek either had his habitation, or was much delighted with it, and conversant in it. See 2Sa 18:18 .

Poole: Gen 14:18

Quest Who was this?

Answ

1. Shem, as the Jews and many others think, who probably was alive at this time, and, no doubt, a great prince. But neither is it probable that Shem should be a king among the cursed race of Ham; nor will this agree with the apostle’ s description of Melchizedek, Heb 7:3 , without father and mother, & c. Whereas Shem’ s parents, and the beginning and end of his days, are as expressly mentioned by Moses as any other.

2. A Canaanitish king, by the Divine Providence made both a king over men, and priest unto the true God, brought in here in this unusual manner, without any mention of his parents, birth, or death, for this end, that he might be an illustrious type of Christ. Of this matter see more upon Heb 7:3 .

King of Salem i.e. of Jerusalem, called elsewhere Jebus, and Salem, Psa 76:2 .

Bread and wine; not for sacrifice to God; for then he had brought forth beasts to be slain, which were the usual and best sacrifices: but partly to show the respect which he bore to Abram, and principally to refresh his weary and hungry army, according to the manner of those times. See Deu 23:3,4 25:18 Jud 8:5,6,15 1Sa 17:17 .

He was the priest of the most high God: thus in succeeding ages the same persons were often both kings and priests, as the learned note out of Virgil and other authors. And this clause is here added, as the cause and reason, not for his bringing forth or offering bread and wine, as some would have it, (for that is ascribed to him as a king, as an act of royal munificence), but of the following benediction and decimation. In those times God had his remnant scattered here and there even in the worst places and nations.

Poole: Gen 14:19

And or therefore, ( as the particle is oft taken, i.e. because he was a priest of God),

he (i.e. Melchizedek )

blessed him ( Abram,) which was one act of the priestly office. See Poole on "Heb 7:6" . See Poole on "Heb 7:7" . So it is a prayer for him, that God would confirm and increase the blessing which he had given him. Or, blessed is; so it is an acknowledgment of God’ s blessing conferred upon Abram both formerly, and in this late and great victory. Or, blessed shall be; so it is a prediction concerning his future and further blessedness, whereof this was only an earnest.

Poole: Gen 14:20

Not Melchizedek gave to Abram, as some Jews foolishly understand it; for Abram swears that he would not keep nor take any of the recovered goods of the kings of Sodom, or his brethren, Gen 14:23 . But Abram gave to Melchizedek, as appears both from Heb 4:7 , and from the nature of the thing, for the tithes confessedly belong to the priest, such as Melchizedek, and not Abram, is here described to be.

All not of all the recovered goods, but of all the spoils taken from the enemies.

Poole: Gen 14:22

This was the ancient manner of swearing. See Exo 6:8 Num 14:30 Deu 32:40 Eze 20:5,6 .

Poole: Gen 14:23

That I will not take Heb. If I shall take. Understand, God do so and so to me, which is expressed 1Sa 14:44 . A defective manner of swearing used amongst the Hebrews, either to maintain the reverence of oaths, and the dread of perjury, seeing they were afraid so much as to mention the curse which they meant; or to show that they were willing to submit to any punishment which God should inflict upon them, without exception, if they violated their oaths.

Even to a shoe-latchet i.e. any thing, though never so small or mean, lest thou shouldst claim a share with God in the honour due to him, to whose blessing alone I do and I will owe my riches. Or, lest thou shouldst say, Abram is enriched with my spoils; and however he pretended kindness and charity, yet indeed it was his covetousness that put him upon this work.

Poole: Gen 14:24

For as Abram had a right to spoils, so had they, whether they joined with him in the battle, as it is conceived they did, or only abode by the stuff, 1Sa 30:24 ; and therefore though he might and did give away his own right, he could not give away other men’ s.

Haydock: Gen 14:1

Sennaar, or Babylon. ---

Pontus, Hebrew: Ellasar, perhaps Thalassar, as Jonathan writes, not far from Eden. ---

Elamites, or Persians. ---

Nations in Galilee, east of the Jordan, whither the conquered kings directed their course. Josue xii. 23, mentions the king of the nations (foreigners) at Galgal. (Calmet)

Haydock: Gen 14:3

Now, in the days of Moses. ---

Salt sea; called also the vale of salts, and the dead sea.

Haydock: Gen 14:4

Served. Thus Noe's prediction began to be fulfilled, as Elam was the eldest son of Sem, to whose posterity Chanaan should be slaves, chap. ix. 26.

Haydock: Gen 14:5

Raphaim, Zuzim, and Emim, were all of the gigantic race, robbers, like the Arabs. (Du Hamel) ---

These dwelt in the land of Basan, or of giants, Deuteronomy iii. 13.

Haydock: Gen 14:6

Chorreans, or Horreans, who dwelt in one part of that extensive range of mountains, which took their name from Seir; perhaps about mount Hor, where Aaron died. (Calmet) ---

These also were auxiliaries of the five kings, and hence experienced the fury of the four confederates; who cut off all their opponents, before they made their grand attack upon Sodom. (Haydock)

Haydock: Gen 14:7

Misphat, or of judgment and contradiction, because there the Hebrews contended with Moses and Aaron: it was afterwards called Cadez, Numbers xx. 11. ---

Amalecites, that is which they afterwards possessed; for as yet Amelec was unborn, chap. xxxvi. 16. (Menochius) ---

Amorrheans, to the west of Sodom. (Calmet)

Haydock: Gen 14:10

Of slime. Bituminis. This was a kind of pitch, which served for mortar in the building of Babel, Genesis xi. 3, and was used by Noe in pitching the ark. (Challoner) ---

Moses does not make this remark without reason. This bitumen would easily take fire, and contribute to the conflagration of Sodom. (Calmet) ---

Overthrown, not all slain, for the king of Sodom escaped, ver. 17.

Haydock: Gen 14:13

The Hebrew, or traveller who came from beyond the Euphrates, (Calmet) or who dwelt beyond the Jordan, with reference to the five kings. (Diodorus)

Haydock: Gen 14:14

Servants, fit for war. Hence we may form some judgment of the power and dignity of Abram, who was considered as a great prince in that country, chap. xxiii. 6. He was assisted by Mambre, Escol, and Aner, with all the forces they could raise on such a short warning; and coming upon the four kings unawares, in four divisions, easily discomfits them, while they were busy plundering the cities, and pursues them to Dan; which is either the city that went by that name afterwards, or more probably one of the sources of the Jordan, (Haydock) which the people of the country call Medan. Neither did he suffer them to repose, before he had retaken all the plunder at Hoba, or Abila, north of the road leading to Damascus. (Calmet)

Haydock: Gen 14:18

Melchisedech was not Sem: for his genealogy is given in Scripture. (Hebrew xii. 6.); nor God the Son, for they are compared together; nor the Holy Ghost, as some have asserted; but a virtuous Gentile who adored the true God, and was king of Salem, or Jerusalem, and Priest of an order different from that of Aaron, offering in sacrifice bread and wine, a figure of Christ's sacrifice in the Mass; as the fathers constantly affirm. (Haydock) ---

See Pererius. St. Jerome, ep. ad Evagrium, says, "Melchisedech offered not bloody victims, but dedicated the sacrament of Christ in bread and wine...a pure sacrifice." See St. Cyprian ep. 63, ad Cæcil.; St. Augustine, City of God xvi. 22, &c. Many Protestants confess, that this renowned prince of Chanaan, was also a priest; but they will not allow that his sacrifice consisted of bread and wine. In what then? for a true priest must offer some real sacrifice. If Christ, therefore, be a priest for ever according to the order of Melchisedech, whose sacrifice was not bloody, as those of Aaron were, what other sacrifice does he now offer, but that of his own body and blood in the holy Mass, by the ministry of his priests? for he was the priest: this is plainly referred to bringing forth, &c., which shews that word to be sacrificial, as in Judges vi. 18. The Hebrew may be ambiguous. But all know that vau means for as well as and . Thus the English Bible had it, 1552, "for he was the priest." (Worthington) ---

If Josephus take notice only of Melchisedech, offering Abram and his men corporal refreshment, we need not wonder; he was a Jewish priest, to whom the order of Melchisedech might not be agreeable. It is not indeed improbable, but Abram might partake of the meat, which had been offered in thanksgiving by Melchisedech; and in this sense his words are true. But there would be no need of observing, that he was a priest on this account; as this was a piece of civility expected from princes on similar occasions. (Deuteronomy xxiii. 4; 2 Kings xvii. 27.) (Haydock)

Haydock: Gen 14:19

Blessed him, as his inferior, and received tithes of him, Hebrews iv. 7. This shews the antiquity of the practice of supporting God's priests by tithes.

Haydock: Gen 14:21

The persons ( animas ), the souls subject to my dominion. (Haydock)

Haydock: Gen 14:22

I lift up. This is the posture of one swearing solemnly, by which we testify our belief, that God dwells in the heavens, and governs the world. (Calmet)

Haydock: Gen 14:23

Woof-thread. The first word is added by way of explanation. Abram declares he will not receive the smallest present for himself.

Haydock: Gen 14:24

Their shares, due to them on account of the danger to which they had exposed themselves. The king of Sodom could not but accept these conditions with gratitude. In a just war, whatever is taken by the enemy, cannot be reclaimed by the original proprietor, if it be retaken. (Grotius, iii. 6, de Jure.)

Gill: Gen 14:1

And it came to pass, in the days of Amraphel king of Shinar,.... Or Babylon, as Onkelos, where Nimrod began his kingdom, Gen 10:8. This was Nimrod himself, as the Jewish writers generally says; though more likely Ninyas the son of Ninus and Semiramis, and grandson of Nimrod; or rather some petty prince or deputy governor of Shinar, under the king of Babylon; since, though named first, he was not the principal in this war, but fought under the king of Elam, and as an ally and auxiliary of his; and it may be the kingdom of Babylon was not as yet of any great extent and power, and that all those stories told of Ninus, Semiramis, and Ninyas, are mere fables; and indeed we hear nothing in Scripture of this kingdom, and the kings of it, from this time, until the times of Merodach Baladan, the son of Baladan king of Babylon, in the reign of Hezekiah king of Judah; nor of the Assyrian kingdom, and the kings of it, until Pul king of Assyria, in the times of Menahem king of Israel; wherefore it is greatly to be questioned, whether those kingdoms rose to any considerable height until these times: though some think that Shinar here does not intend Shinar in Chaldea or Babylon, which was too far distant from Abram, but Shinar in Mesopotamia, a large city at the foot of a mountain, three days distant from Mansil, which is now, in Arabic, called Singjar, and by Ptolemy, Singara ⁿ.

Arioch king of Ellasar; or Telassar, according to the Targum of Jonathan, a place in Mesopotamia, inhabited by the children of Eden, Isa 37:12; and Stephanus ^o makes mention of a city in Coelesyria, upon the borders of Arabia, called Ellas, of which this prince may be thought to be the governor; or rather he was king of a people called Elesari, whose country is placed by Ptolemy ^p in Arabia; and could Ninyas be thought to be Amraphel, this king would bid fair to be Ariaeus a king of Arabia, or a son of his of the same name, that was a confederate of Ninus, as Diodorus Siculus ^q relates out of Ctesias. Next follows:

Chedorlaomer king of Elam; or the Elamites, as the Vulgate Latin version, the Persians, see Act 1:9. This led Diodorus ^r to say, that the war Moses speaks of is what the Persians waged against the Sodomites. This seems to have been the most powerful prince at this time, to whom the five kings of Sodom, &c. had been subject for twelve years, but now had rebelled, and to subdue them again he came forth, with three other kings his allies, see Gen 14:4; but if Elam is the same with Persia, as it often signifies, or with Elymais, a part of Persia, that kingdom could not be at this time so large and potent as it has been since; or Chedorlaomer would not have stood in need of the assistance of other princes against such petty kings as those of Sodom, &c. Nor does it seem credible that he should come out of Persia, and pass through so great a part of the world as the countries of Assyria, Chaldea, Mesopotamia, Syria, and part of Arabia and of Canaan, to bring five such small towns or cities into subjection to him, as he must, as Sir Walter Raleigh ^s observes; nor could the trifle of goods, as they may be comparatively called, he carried off, be an equivalent to the expense he must be at in so long a march. It is more probable, therefore, that this was the name of some place near to the land of Canaan, built by some of the posterity of Elam, the son of Shem, and called after the name of their ancestor; or it may be a colony of the Elamites in those parts, of which this prince was their head and chief:

and Tidal king of nations; that is, either of other nations distinct from those before mentioned, so Aben Ezra; or else, as he also observes, the name of a province; or as Jarchi and Ben Melech, the name of a place called Goim, because there were gathered together many out of various nations and places, and they set a man to reign over them, whose name was Tidal; just as one of the Galilees in later times was called Galilee of the nations, for a like reason. Sir Walter Raleigh ^t conjectures, that as there were many petty kingdoms joining to Phoenicia and Palestine, as Palmyrene, Batanea, Laodicene, Apamene, Chalcidice, Cassiotis and Celibonitis, these might be gathered together under this man. According to Eupolemus ^u, an Heathen writer, these several princes were Armenians that fought with the Phoenicians, and overcame them, by whom Lot was carried captive. Josephus ^w indeed, accommodating himself to the Greek historians, and in favour of them, says that the Assyrians at this time were masters of Asia, and led out an army under four generals, and made the kings of Sodom, &c. tributary to them; and they rebelling against them, made another expedition upon them under these four kings as their generals, and conquered them: but it seems not likely that the Assyrian monarchy was so large at this time; or if it was, these live petty kings of the plain of Jordan, who had not so much ground as our Middlesex, as Sir Walter Raleigh ^x observes, and perhaps not a quarter of the people in it, would never have dared to have engaged with so powerful an adversary.

Gill: Gen 14:2

That these made war with Bera king of Sodom,.... A city in the plain of Jordan, which with the four following made the Pentapolis, or five cities of the plain. Strabo ^y says, in this place formerly were thirteen cities, the metropolis of which was Sodom, and which yet had remaining a compass of sixty furlongs; according to Dr. Lightfoot ^z, it should be placed in the southern extremity of the lake Asphaltites, whereas it is usually set in the maps in the northern bounds of it:

and with Birsha king of Gomorrah; another city in the plain of Jordan, called by Solinus ^a Gomorrum:

Shinab king of Admah; a third city situated in the same plain:

and Shemeber king of Zeboiim; a fourth city of the plain, which seems to have its name from the pleasantness of its situation:

and the king of Bela, which is Zoar; so it was afterwards called by Lot, being a little city, Gen 19:20; but before, Bela; the name of its king is not mentioned, being a person of no great note and importance, and his city small.

Gill: Gen 14:3

All these were joined together in the vale of Siddim,.... Or "of fields", or "ploughed lands" ^b, a fruitful vale abounding with corn; or of gardens or paradises, as the Targums of Jonathan and Jerusalem, being full of gardens and orchards, and was as the garden of the Lord, even as Eden, see Gen 13:10; though Aben Ezra thinks it had its name from the slime or bitumen, of which there was great plenty in it, see Gen 14:10. Now the above five kings, as they all dwelt in the plain, they entered into a confederacy, met together, and joined their forces in this vale, to oppose the four kings that were come to make war with them, as being an advantageous place, as they judged, perhaps on more accounts than one; and here they stayed to receive the enemy, and give him battle, see Gen 14:8,

which is the salt sea; afterwards so called, not at this time, for then it would not have been fit for armies to be drawn up in battle array in it; but it was so called in the times of Moses, and after this fine vale was turned into a bituminous lake, and had its name from the saltness of the waters of the lake, or from the city Melach, or city of salt, which was near it, Jos 15:62.

Gill: Gen 14:4

Twelve years they served Chedorlaomer,.... King of Elam, who was of the race of Shem, and so the prophecy of Noah began to be fulfilled, that Canaan should be servant to Shem, Gen 9:26; for the kings of Sodom, &c. and their subjects, were of the race of Ham in the line of Canaan, who had by violence seized on that part of the earth which was allotted to the sons of Shem, and therefore Chedorlaomer being a descendant of his claimed his right, and made them tributary to him, which they were for the space of twelve years:

and in the thirteenth year they rebelled; refused homage to Chedorlaomer and to pay tribute to him.

Gill: Gen 14:5

And in the fourteenth year came Chedorlaomer,.... Not in the fourteenth year of their rebellion against him, as Jarchi, but from their becoming vassals to him:

and the kings that were with him; those kings before mentioned:

and smote the Rephaims in Ashteroth Karnaim; which were in their way to Sodom, &c. and very probably were confederates with the five kings; the Targum, and so the Septuagint, render the word "giants", as it is in Deu 2:11; but they were one of the nations or tribes of the Canaanites, Gen 15:20; and had their name either from the Hebrew word רפא, which signifies to be healthful and robust, as those people might be, or from Rephas, the Remphan of Stephen, Act 7:43; called Chiun, Amo 5:26; and with Cronus or Ham the father of Canaan, as Bishop Cumberland ^c observes; and these dwelt in Ashteroth Karnaim, which was a place in Bashan, Deu 1:4; it is about six miles, as Eusebius ^d says, from Adraa or Edrei, and in the Apocrypha:"Then Maccabeus marched forth to Carnion, and to the temple of Atargatis, and there he slew five and twenty thousand persons.'' (2 Maccabees 12:26)mention is made of a place called Carnion, where was a temple of Atergates, a Phoenician deity, as Ashteroth or Astarte, was; and this city here had its first name from Astarte the wife of Cronus or Ham, and whose name may be preserved in Carnaim, as Bishop Cumberland thinks; though as Astarte is said by Sanchoniatho ^e to put on her head the mark of her sovereignty, a bull's head, that is, with its horns, this might be another of her names retained in this city; and it is certain that she was a Phoenician goddess, called the goddess of the Zidonians, 1Ki 11:5; and Sanchoniatho relates ^f, that the Phoenicians say, that Astarte is she, who among the Greeks is called Aphrodite or Venus; and Astarte is called by Lucian ^g the Phoenician Venus, and by Cicero ^h the Syrian Venus; and if she was the same with Diana or the moon, as some think, she might have the name of Carnaim from its two horns, as the word signifies: our English poet ⁱ seems to have this in his thoughts, when he speaks of Astoreth as the goddess of the Phoenicians: however the in habitants of this place who belonged to the Canaanites were first attacked by the four kings and routed, though not utterly destroyed, because we hear of them afterwards, as well as they that follow:

and the Zuzims in Ham; or Hemtha, as Onkelos and Jonathan render it, a place so called from Ham the father of Canaan, and was somewhere in the land of Canaan or near it, and near the former place; for it can hardly be thought the land of Egypt, sometimes called the land of Ham, is meant; these Zuzim are supposed by Jarchi to the same with the Zamzummim in Deu 2:20; the word is by Onkelos and Jonathan rendered strong and mighty ones, as also by the Septuagint, mighty nations:

and the Enims in Shaveh Kiriathaim: a people great, and many, and tall, as the Anakim, and were accounted giants as they, and who in later times were by the Moabites called Emim, Deu 2:10; and therefore Moses gives them the same name here, which they had from the dread and terror they injected into men, and so the word in all the three Targums is rendered terrible ones; and these dwelt in Kiriathaim, a city in the tribe of Reuben, taken from Sihon, king of the Amorites, and which seems to be situated in a plain, see Jos 13:19.

Gill: Gen 14:6

And the Horites in their Mount Seir,.... Or the Horim who dwelt in Mount Seir, so called from Seir the Horite, who continued here till they were drove out by the sons of Esau or Edom, from whom their country was afterwards called Edom or Idumea, see Gen 36:20 Deu 2:12,

unto Elparan, which is by the wilderness; so far these Horites inhabited, and the four kings smote all they met with unto this place, which was either the plain or oak of Paran, near a wilderness of the same name; the wilderness of Arabia, through which the Israelites travelled forty years, in their way to Canaan.

Gill: Gen 14:7

And they returned, and came to Enmishpat, which is Kadesh,.... Pursuing their victories as far as Elparan by the wilderness, they had passed by the country of the Amalekites; wherefore they "returned", or came back to fall upon them, and they came to a place called Enmishpat, or the "fountain of judgment"; which was not its future name, as Jarchi thinks, because there Moses and Aaron were to be judged concerning the business of that fountain, even the waters of Meribah, with which agrees the Targum of Jonathan;"and they returned and came to the place where the judgment of Moses the prophet was determined by the fountain of the waters of contention:''but it seems to have been the ancient name of the place, and by which it was called at this time, as Kadesh was the name of it at the time of Moses writing this; and therefore he adds:

which is Kadesh; that is, which is now called Kadesh, because there the Lord was sanctified, when the rock at that place was smitten, and waters gushed out: it was a city on the uttermost border of the land of Edom, Num 20:1, and seems formerly to have been a place where causes were heard and judgment passed; and so Onkelos paraphrases it,"to the plain of the division or decision of judgment;''which, as Jarchi himself interprets it,"is a place where the men of the province gathered together for all judgment;''or for hearing all causes and determining them:

and smote all the country of the Amalekites; which, according to Josephus ^k, reached from Pelusium in Egypt to the Red sea; they inhabited Arabia Petraea, for he ^l says, the inhabitants of Gobolitis and Petra are called Amalekites; which name is generally supposed to have been given them here by way of anticipation, since the commonly received opinion is, that they were the descendants of Amalek, a grandson of Esau, who was not born when this war was waged, see Gen 36:12; but the Mahometan writers derive the pedigree of Amalek, from whom these people had their name, from Noah in the line of Ham, and make him to be some generations older than Abram, which with them stands thus, Noah, Ham, Aram, Uz, Ad, Amalek ^m; and they speak of the Amalekites as dwelling in the country about Mecca, from whence they were driven by the Jorhamites ⁿ: and indeed it seems more probable that the Amalekites were of the posterity of Ham, since Chedorlaomer, a descendant of Shem, falls upon them, and smites them; and they being confederates with the Canaanites, and are with the Amorites, Philistines, and other Canaanitish nations, always mentioned, seem to be a more ancient nation than what could proceed from Amalek the son of Eliphaz, since Amalek is said to be the first of the nations, Num 24:20; nor does there ever appear to be any harmony and friendship between them and the Edomites, as it might be thought there would, if they were a branch of Esau's family; nor did they give them any assistance, when destroyed by Saul, so that they seem rather to be a tribe of the Canaanitish nations; and they are, by Philo ^o the Jew, expressly called Phoenicians:

and also the Amorites, that dwelt in Hazezontamar; the same with the Emorites, see Gen 10:16; another tribe or nation of the Canaanites descended from Amor or Emor, a son of Canaan: the place of their habitation has its name of Hazezontamar from the multitude of palm trees which grew there: for Tamar signifies a palm tree, and Hazezon is from חצץ "to cut"; and this part of the name seems to be taken from the cutting of the top, crown, or head of the palm tree, for the sake of a liquor which has a more luscious sweetness than honey; and is of the consistence of a thin syrup, as Dr. Shaw ^p relates; the head of the palm tree being cut off, the top of the trunk is scooped into the shape of a basin, as he says, where the sap in ascending lodges itself at the rate of three or four quarts a day during the first week or fortnight, after which the quantity daily diminishes; and at the end of six weeks or two months the juices are entirely consumed, and the tree becomes dry, and serves only for timber or, firewood. This place is the same with Engedi, 2Ch 20:2; and so the Targums of Onkelos and Jonathan here translate it, "in Engedi"; and which place Pliny ^q says was famous for groves of palm trees; it was a city near the Dead sea, see Eze 47:8; and Josephus says ^r it was situated by the lake Asphaltites, that is, the place where Sodom and Gomorrah stood; and he adds, that it was three hundred furlongs distant from Jerusalem, where were the best palm trees and balsam: so that now the four kings had got pretty near Sodom; wherefore it follows,

Gill: Gen 14:8

And there went out the king of Sodom,.... With his armed men to meet the four kings, and give them battle, being so near him, and in so much danger from them, that if they could not stand their ground, they might flee to the mountains, and not perish in the city:

and the king of Gomorrah, and the king of Admah, and the King of Zeboiim; whose names are before given, Gen 14:2,

and the king of Bela, the same is Zoar: as in Gen 14:2,

and they joined battle with them in the vale of Siddim; where the five Canaanitish kings met, of which see Gen 14:3; and fought the four kings that were come forth against them, and whose names are repeated, and are as follow:

Gill: Gen 14:9

With Chedorlaomer king of Elam,.... Who is here mentioned first, being the principal in the war, and against whom the kings of Sodom, &c. had rebelled:

and with Tidal king of nations, and Amraphel king of Shinar, and Arioch king of Ellasar; who were his allies, confederates, and auxiliaries:

four kings with five; those four last mentioned, with the other five before spoken of, that is, they fought with them; or rather four kings against five, as the Vulgate Latin and Tigurine versions, and some others.

Gill: Gen 14:10

And the vale of Siddim was full of slimepits,.... Or "wells" or "fountains of slime" or bitumen ^s; a liquid of a pitchy nature, cast out of fountains, and which was used for a cement in buildings; such fountains were near Babylon; see Gill on Gen 11:3; so that this place was naturally prepared for what it was designed to be, a bituminous lake; and hence, when turned into one, it was called the lake Asphaltites, from this slime or bitumen, called by the Greeks "asphaltos". Brocardus ^t says, these pits or wells of bitumen are at this day on the shore of the lake, each of them having pyramids erect, which he saw with his own eyes; and such pits casting out bitumen, as fountains do water, have been found in other countries, as in Greece ^u. Now this vale being full of such pits, the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah chose it to fight in, and here drew up in a line of battle, hoping that the enemy, being ignorant of them, would fall into them and perish, and their ranks be broke and fall into confusion; but as it often is, that the pit men dig and contrive for others they fall into themselves, so it was in this case:

and the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah fled: the battle going hard against them, and they not able to stand before their enemies:

and fell there, or "into them" ^w; the slimepits, or fountains of bitumen, into which they precipitately fell, and many perished; or of their own accord they threw themselves into them for their own safety, as some think; though the sense may be this, that there was a great slaughter of them made there, as the word is frequently used, see 1Sa 4:10; this is to be understood not of the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah; for it is certain that they were preserved alive, at least the king of Sodom, for we hear of him afterwards, Gen 14:17; but of their soldiers:

and they that remained fled to the mountain: or mountains hard by, where Lot after went when Sodom was destroyed, Gen 19:30; hither such fled that escaped the sword of the enemy, or perished not in the slimepits, judging it more safe to be there, than to be in their cities, which would fall into the hands of their enemies, and be plundered by them, and where they would be in danger of losing their lives.

Gill: Gen 14:11

And they took all the goods of Sodom and Gomorrah,.... They entered these cities and pillaged them, and carried off everything valuable in them, that was portable or could be driven, as their cattle, &c. they did not burn these cities, nor take possession of them, and leave garrisons in them, which shows them to be petty princes that came for plunder, and to get an equivalent for nonpayment of tribute to one of them:

and all their victuals, and went away; all the meat and drink they could light of, with which they refreshed their troops, and then departed.

Gill: Gen 14:12

And they took Lot, Abram's brother's son,.... The son of Haran, his elder brother, who was now, as the Jews say ^x, fifty years of age:

who dwelt in Sodom, or near it, in the country adjacent to it, see Gen 13:12; and so being a neighbour of the men of Sodom, and a sojourner among them, he partakes of their punishment; and this was a just correction of him for choosing to dwell among such a people: and they took

his goods, and departed; as him and his family, so all his substance, his cattle, wealth, and riches of every sort, and went off with it: Eupolemus ^y, an Heathen writer, makes mention of this circumstance in his relation of this war, and says, that the Armenians, as he calls the four kings, baring conquered the Phoenicians, carried away captive the brother's son of Abram.

Gill: Gen 14:13

And there came one that escaped,.... Both the sword of the enemy and the slimepits; either one of the inhabitants of Sodom, who had an acquaintance with Lot and a friendship for him, and knew his relation to Abram; or one of Lot's family, that might escape being taken and carried captive: for not Michael the prince, so called, because when the angels fell they would have drawn him with them, but God delivered him, and therefore his name was called פליט, or "one that escaped", as the Jews ^z say; nor Og, that escaped the waters of the flood, as they also say ^a, and now from this war, and was the only one left of the Rephaim, or giants, whom Amraphel slew, which they gather from Deu 3:11; who they suppose came with the following message to Abram with an ill design, that he might go out to war with the kings, and be slain, and then he thought to marry his wife; but these are idle fancies, what is first suggested is right.

And told Abram the Hebrew; that there had been a battle of four kings with five, that the latter were beaten, among whom were the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah; and that Lot, his kinsman, who dwelt in or near Sodom, was carried captive, with all his goods. Abram is called the Hebrew, either from his passing over or coming beyond the river Euphrates, from Chaldea into Canaan; with which the Septuagint version agrees, rendering it the "passer over"; and so Jarchi says he is called, because he came beyond the river: or rather from his having lived beyond it, as such as dwelt there were called; for it can hardly be thought that he should peculiarly have this name from that single action of his passing the river, which multitudes did besides him: but rather, why should he not be called Ibri, the word here used, from the place of his birth? For, according to the Talmudists ^b, Ur of the Chaldees was called עיברא זעירא, "little Ibra"; though it is more generally thought he had this name from his being a descendant of Eber, and who was not only of his sons' sons, and spoke the same language, but professed the same religion, and which was continued in his posterity, who to the latest ages were called Hebrews, and sometimes Eber, Num 24:24; and which is the opinion of many Jewish writers ^c, and seems most probable:

for he dwelt in the plain of Mamre the Amorite; see Gen 13:18; it was about forty miles from Sodom, but from it to Dan, whither he pursued the four kings, and where he overtook, fought, and smote them, is by some computed one hundred and twenty four miles ^d: this Mamre, from whom the plain or grove of oaks were called, was the

brother of Eshcol, and brother of Aner; who are particularly mentioned, because of their concern in the following expedition:

and these were confederate with Abram; or " were masters" or "authors of a covenant" ^e with him; they had entered into a league to defend one another, their persons and properties, from the insults of invaders and tyrants, or thieves and robbers: and it may be lawful to form such leagues with irreligious persons on such accounts, where there is no prohibition from God, as there was none as yet, though there afterwards was one; and the Israelites, were forbid to make covenants with the Canaanites, but that was after they were drove out of the land for their sins, Deu 7:1; besides, it is not improbable that these men were religious men, and worshipped the same God with Abram, for such there were among the Canaanitish princes, of which Melchizedek, after spoken of, is an instance; and as yet the sin of the Amorites was not full, of which tribe or nation these men were.

Gill: Gen 14:14

And when Abram heard that his brother was taken captive,.... That is, his brother's son Lot, as in Gen 14:12; which was contrary to the law of nations; since Lot was only a sojourner, and not an inhabitant n Sodom, and therefore had no concern in the quarrel between the kings, and this justified Abram's taking up arms on his behalf:

he armed his trained servants; such as were trained up by him in religious exercises, see Gen 18:19; in the affairs and business of civil life, in the care of flocks and herds, and particularly in the art of war; which was both lawful and necessary, for the preservation of his family and substance from oppressors:

born in his own house; of his servants, and so were his property, and at his disposal and command; their number was

three hundred and eighteen, a large number for servants, and which showed how great a man Abram was, what possessions he must have to employ so many, and yet but a small number for an army, to go forth with against four kings who had conquered five; though how many his confederates brought with them is not certain:

and pursued them unto Dan; the Jerusalem Targum is, to Dan of Caesarea, meaning Caesarea of Philippi, as in the times of Christ and his apostles it was called; which at first had the name of Leshem, or Lais, and was not called Dan until the times of the judges, Jdg 18:29; wherefore, if the same place is intended here, it is so called not only by anticipation, but by a spirit of prophecy; since it had not the name of Dan even in the times of Moses, the writer of this history, unless it may be thought to be inserted by Samuel or some other inspired writer, after Moses; though there is no need to suppose either of these, seeing there might be a town or city of this name in those parts at this time, or however one of the springs of Jordan might be so called, from whence the river had its name as early, Gen 13:11; and so Josephus ^f expressly says, speaking of this expedition, that Abram fell upon them at Dan, for so, adds he, the other fountain of Jordan is called.

Gill: Gen 14:15

And he divided himself against them, he and his servants by night,.... Together with his confederates; and very probably their whole three was divided into four parts, under their four leaders; and this might be done in order to attack the four kings and their soldiers, who might be in four separate bodies; or to fall upon their camp in the four quarters of it, and to make a show of a greater army, thereby to intimidate the enemy: Abram seems to have understood the art of war, and the use of stratagems in it; and, as it might be night before he could come up to them, he took the advantage of that, and fell upon them unawares, when some were asleep in their beds, and others drunk, as Josephus ^g relates; and who also says, it was on the fifth night after Abram had knowledge of what had happened at Sodom:

and smote them, and pursued them unto Hoba, which is on the left hand of Damascus; a famous city in Syria; it was in later times the metropolis of that country, Isa 7:8; and was most delightfully situated in a vale; see Gill on Jer 49:25; according to Josephus ^h it was built by Uz, the son of Aram and grandson of Shem, and some say ⁱ by Shem himself, and that it is to this day called Sem in the Saracene language, and lay between Palestine and Coelesyria; on the left hand of this city, or on the north of it, as all the Targums paraphrase it, lay a place called Hoba, and is completed to be eighty miles from Dan, from whence he pursued them hither, after he had discomfited them there.

Gill: Gen 14:16

And he brought back all the goods,.... Taken from Sodom and Gomorrah, Gen 14:11,

and also brought again his brother Lot; his brother's son, Gen 14:12, for whose sake chiefly he engaged in this enterprise: and his goods; money, cattle, &c.

and the women also, and the people; not only that belonged to Lot, but to Sodom and Gomorrah, who had been taken and carried captive; these were all rescued and brought back by Abram, see Gen 14:21;

Gill: Gen 14:17

And the king of Sodom went out to meet him,.... While Abram was in pursuit of the four kings, the king of Sodom came down from the mountain whither he and those that escaped with him fled, and came to Sodom: and from hence he went out, not alone, but accompanied with his retinue, to meet Abram:

after his return from the slaughter of Chedorlaomer, and of the kings that were with him; to congratulate him upon the victory he had obtained over them; and this meeting was

at the valley of Shaveh; a most plain and even valley, as the word signifies, clear of trees and everything that obstructs sight or passage, as Jarchi observes, and so a proper place to have an interview in:

which is the king's dale; some say King Melchizedek's, but one should rather think it was the king of Sodom's; the Targum of Jonathan calls it the place of the king's exercise, where he had his diversions in riding, walking, &c. it can hardly be that in 2Sa 18:18; though some are of this opinion, being near to Jerusalem, which they suppose to be the same with Salem in Gen 14:18.

Gill: Gen 14:18

And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine,.... Both the Targums of Jonathan and Jerusalem say, this is Shem the son of Noah, and which is the sense of the Jewish writers in general, and of many Christian ones; but, though it is highly probable he was living at this time, yet it is not easy to account for it why his name should be changed, or that he should reign in a country in the possession of his brother's son; or that he should meet Abram, and congratulate him on the slaughter of one of his own descendants, as Chedorlaomer was; and especially it cannot be said of him that he was without father or mother, or that those were not known, since Shem's parentage and pedigree are famous enough; some have thought him to be more than a mere man, even the Son of God himself, but he is manifestly distinguished from him in Heb 7:3; he seems to be what Josephus ^k says he was, a Canaanitish prince, a pious and religious man, eminently raised up by God, and whose genealogy was kept a secret, that he might be in this as in other things a type of Christ; but that he should be Canaan himself, as Dr. Clayton ^l thinks, a brother of Metsir, or Mizraim, the second son of Ham, being by Sanchoniatho called Sedec, is not likely, since he was cursed by Noah. Salem, of which he was king, is by the above Targums said to be Jerusalem, and which is the opinion of many writers, Jewish and Christian, and of which opinion I myself was formerly; see Gill on Heb 7:1; Jerusalem being plainly called Salem, Psa 76:2, but it seems clear from hence that it must be near to Sodom, and lay in the way between Damascus and Sodom; whereas Jerusalem was in a contrary situation, and lay nearly forty miles from Sodom; for Josephus says ^m, the lake Asphaltites, where Sodom once stood, was three hundred furlongs from Jerusalem, which is about thirty eight miles; and Jerom relates ⁿ, that Salem was a town near Scythopolis, which was so called in his times, and where was showed the palace of Melchizedek, which, by the largeness of the ruins, appeared to have been very magnificent, and takes it to be the same place with Shalem in Gen 33:18; and Salim, near to which John was baptizing, Joh 3:23, this great man "brought forth bread and wine"; not as a priest for an offering, but as a munificent king, to refresh Abram and his weary troops, and which the king of Sodom could not do, because the victuals of that place were carried off by the four kings, Gen 14:11; and as Abram had the land of Canaan by promise, and now had made conquest in it over the invaders of it, Melchizedek, sensible of his right unto it, brings forth the best fruits of it, and, as Dr. Lightfoot observes ^o, tenders them to him as "livery and seisin" of it: in this Melchizedek was a type of Christ, who comforts and refreshes his hungry and weary people with himself, the bread of life, and with the wine of his love, as well as his name and title agree with him, who is a righteous King and Prince of Peace, Jer 23:5,

and he was the priest of the most high God; a priest as well as a king, as in many countries princes were both ^p; and in this he was a type of Christ in his kingly and priestly offices, who is a priest upon the throne, both king and priest, Zec 6:13. Melchizedek was a priest not of any of the Phoenician deities, but of the true and living God, who is above all gods, dwells in the highest heaven, and is the most High over all the earth; by him was he called to this office and invested with it, and he ministered to him in it.

Gill: Gen 14:19

And he blessed him,.... Melchizedek blessed Abram, which was one part of his office as a priest, to wish and pray for a blessing on others, see Num 6:23, &c. and herein typified Christ, who really blesses or confers blessings on all his people, even spiritual blessings, such as redemption, remission of sins, and justifying righteousness, adoption, and eternal life:

and said, blessed be Abram of the most high God; that is, may he be blessed by him who is the most high God, with all kind of blessings, both temporal and spiritual; or he declares him to be blessed of him, as he undoubtedly was, or foretells that he would be, as was certainly his case: and another epithet of God is added, which abundantly shows he was able to bless him, since he is the

possessor of heaven and earth; is the Maker of both, and has a right to dispose of all things in them, both heavenly and earthly.

Gill: Gen 14:20

And blessed be the most high God,.... Let his name be praised, and thanks be given to him for all mercies temporal and spiritual, since all flow from him, and particularly for the mercies Abram and others through him were now made partakers of; for whoever were the instruments, God was the efficient cause, and to him all the glory was to be given:

which hath delivered thine enemies into thine hand; the four kings, who are called Abram's enemies, because the enemies of God and of true religion, and because they had been injurious to a relation of his; and especially they may be so called, if their intention was, as, say the Jewish writers ^q to slay him, beginning first with Lot: and those four kings, according to them, signify the four monarchies, the Babylonian, Persian, Grecian, and Roman ^r who in their turns distressed his posterity, but in the latter day shall fall into their hands, as those did into Abram's, and fall by them:

and he gave him tithes of all; not Melchizedek to Abram, but Abram to Melchizedek, as appears from Heb 7:4; and these tithes were given not out of the goods that were recovered, for they were restored to the proprietors of them, but out of the spoils that were taken from the enemy, as is evident from the same place referred to; and these were given both as a return for the respect shown him by Melchizedek, and by way of thankfulness to God for the victory, whose priest he was; otherwise, as a king, he stood in no need of such a present; nor was it for his maintenance as a priest, or what Abram was obliged unto, but was a voluntary action, and not out of his own substance, but out of the spoils of the enemy, and to testify his gratitude to God: this was imitated by the Heathens in later times; so the Tarentines, having got a victory over the Peucetians, sent the tenth (of the spoil) to Delphos ^s: the Jews ^t say Abraham was the first in the world that began to offer tithes; but they are mistaken, when they say in the same place, that he took all the tithes of Sodom and Gomorrah, and of Lot his brother's son, and gave them to Shem the son of Noah. Eupolemus ^u makes mention of this interview between Abram and Melchizedek by name; he says, Abram was hospitably entertained in the holy city Argarizin, which is by interpretation the mountain of the most High (but seems to be the Mount Gerizzim) and that he received gifts from Melchizedek, the priest of God, who reigned there.

Gill: Gen 14:21

And the king of Sodom said unto Abram,.... After the conversation between him and Melchizedek was over:

give me the persons, and take the goods to thyself; meaning by "persons" or "souls", as in the original, his own subjects that had been taken and carried away by the four kings, and were now brought back by Abram; and by "the goods", those of his own and his subjects, which their conquerors had spoiled them of, but were now recovered, and which he was very willing Abram should have as his right, according to the laws of war, and as a reward of his labours; and very modestly asks for the other, which he did not deny but he might claim as the fruits of his victory: and this also shows, that the king of Sodom, though a Heathen prince, and perhaps a wicked man, yet had more regard to the persons of his subjects than to his own or their goods: the word for "goods" includes all the substance and possession of a man, gold, silver, cattle, and all movables ^w.

Gill: Gen 14:22

And Abram said to the king of Sodom,.... In reply to his request:

I have lifted up mine hand unto the Lord; which was both a gesture of praying and of swearing, and both may be intended here; when he set out on his expedition, it is very probable he prayed to God for success, and swore that if he prospered him, that he would receive no profit or advantage from it to himself; or now in the presence of Melchizedek he lift up his hands and swore that he would take none of the goods he had recovered to his own line; and in this form of praying or swearing, he makes use of the same epithets of God Melchizedek had just used:

the most high God, the possessor of heaven and earth: having his heart struck with those just and glorious representations of God, and awed with a sense of such a glorious Being, and being forward to learn and retain everything that tended to make for the glory of God.

Gill: Gen 14:23

That I will not take from a thread even to a shoelatchet,.... That is, from a thread used in sewing garments to, a shoelatchet, or the string which fastens the shoes to the foot, the least belonging to that; or from the hair lace of the head, to the shoelatchet of the foot; that is, he would take nothing of his from head to foot: the meaning is, that he would not take that which was of the least value and importance that could be conceived of, and which is more clearly expressed by what follows:

and that I will not take anything that is thine; the least thing that belonged to him, or to any of his subjects, for this reason:

lest thou shouldest say, I have made Abram rich; lest he should upbraid him with it afterwards, and say, that all his riches were owing to him; whereas God had promised to bless him, and make him rich and great, as he had begun to do, and still would more and more; and in whom his trusted, and to whom he was desirous all the glory of his greatness and riches should be ascribed.

Gill: Gen 14:24

Save only that which the young men have eaten,.... His three hundred and eighteen trained servants, and those of his confederates, who having recovered the victuals taken away from the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah, had eaten of it for their refreshment, as it was but just and right they should:

and the portion of the men which went with me; the part in the spoil which belonged unto them by the laws of war; wherefore, though he abridged himself of rights and privileges that belonged unto him, which he might do, and thereby showed his great generosity, and that it was not covetousness but kindness that moved him to do what he did; yet he did not take upon him to abridge the rights and privileges of others, which would have been injurious to them: the men he means were Aner, Eshcol, and Mamre; his confederates, who went with him in the pursuit of the enemy, and were assisting to him in recovering the men and goods they had carried away: and as it was but justice they should have their share in the spoils, therefore he says:

let them take their portion; in the goods recovered, and in the spoils taken. Eupolemus ^x, the Heathen writer above quoted, relates this affair thus, that"Abram being assisted by his servants became master of those who had captivated others, and carried captive the wives and children of the soldiers; and when ambassadors came to him to ransom them with money, he would not suffer the conquered to be insulted, but taking food for the young men, returned the captives freely.''

Commentary -- Verse Notes / Footnotes

NET Notes: Gen 14:1

¹ tn The sentence begins with the temporal indicator וַיְהִי (vayÿhi) followed by “in the days of.”

² sn Shinar (also in v. 9) is the region of Babylonia.

³ tn Or “king of Goyim.” The Hebrew term גּוֹיִם (goyim) means “nations,” but a number of modern translations merely transliterate the Hebrew (cf. NEB “Goyim”; NIV, NRSV “Goiim”).

NET Notes: Gen 14:2

¹ tn Heb “made war.”

sn Went to war. The conflict here reflects international warfare in the Early and Middle Bronze periods. The countries operated with overlords and vassals. Kings ruled over city states, or sometimes a number of city states (i.e., nations). Due to their treaties, when one went to war, those confederate with him joined him in battle. It appears here that it is Kedorlaomer’s war, because the western city states have rebelled against him (meaning they did not send products as tribute to keep him from invading them).

² sn On the geographical background of vv. 1-2 see J. P. Harland, “Sodom and Gomorrah,” The Biblical Archaeologist Reader, 1:41-75; and D. N. Freedman, “The Real Story of the Ebla Tablets, Ebla and the Cities of the Plain,” BA 41 (1978): 143-64.

NET Notes: Gen 14:3

¹ tn Heb “all these,” referring only to the last five kings named. The referent has been specified as “these last five kings” in the translation for clarity.

² tn The Hebrew verb used here means “to join together; to unite; to be allied.” It stresses close associations, especially of friendships, marriages, or treaties.

³ sn The Salt Sea is the older name for the Dead Sea.

NET Notes: Gen 14:4

¹ tn The sentence simply begins with “twelve years”; it serves as an adverbial accusative giving the duration of their bondage.

² tn This is another adverbial accusative of time.

³ sn The story serves as a foreshadowing of the plight of the kingdom of Israel later. Eastern powers came and forced the western kingdoms into submission. Each year, then, they would send tribute east – to keep them away. Here, in the thirteenth year, they refused to send the tribute (just as later Hezekiah rebelled against Assyria). And so in the fourteenth year the eastern powers came to put them down again. This account from Abram’s life taught future generations that God can give victory over such threats – that people did not have to live in servitude to tyrants from the east.

NET Notes: Gen 14:5

¹ tn The Hebrew verb נָכָה (nakhah) means “to attack, to strike, to smite.” In this context it appears that the strike was successful, and so a translation of “defeated” is preferable.

NET Notes: Gen 14:6

¹ sn The line of attack ran down the eastern side of the Jordan Valley into the desert, and then turned and came up the valley to the cities of the plain.

NET Notes: Gen 14:7

¹ tn Heb “they returned and came to En Mishpat (that is, Kadesh).” The two verbs together form a verbal hendiadys, the first serving as the adverb: “they returned and came” means “they came again.” Most English translations do not treat this as a hendiadys, but translate “they turned back” or something similar. Since in the context, however, “came again to” does not simply refer to travel but an assault against the place, the present translation expresses this as “attacked…again.”

NET Notes: Gen 14:8

¹ tn Heb “against.”

NET Notes: Gen 14:9

¹ tn Or “Goyim.” See the note on the word “nations” in 14:1.

² tn The Hebrew text has simply “against.” The word “fought” is supplied in the translation for stylistic reasons.

NET Notes: Gen 14:10

¹ tn Heb “Now the Valley of Siddim [was] pits, pits of tar.” This parenthetical disjunctive clause emphasizes the abundance of tar pits in the area through repetition of the noun “pits.”

sn The word for “tar” (or “bitumen”) occurs earlier in the story of the building of the tower in Babylon (see Gen 11:3).

² tn Or “they were defeated there.” After a verb of motion the Hebrew particle שָׁם (sham) with the directional heh (שָׁמָּה, shammah) can mean “into it, therein” (BDB 1027 s.v. שָׁם).

³ tn Heb “the rest.”

⁴ sn The reference to the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah must mean the kings along with their armies. Most of them were defeated in the valley, but some of them escaped to the hills.

NET Notes: Gen 14:11

¹ tn Heb “they”; the referent (the four victorious kings, see v. 9) has been supplied in the translation for clarity.

NET Notes: Gen 14:12

¹ tn Heb “Lot the son of his brother.”

² tn Heb “and.”

³ tn Heb “he”; the referent (Lot) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

⁴ tn This disjunctive clause is circumstantial/causal, explaining that Lot was captured because he was living in Sodom at the time.

NET Notes: Gen 14:13

¹ tn Heb “the fugitive.” The article carries a generic force or indicates that this fugitive is definite in the mind of the speaker.

² sn E. A. Speiser (Genesis [AB], 103) suggests that part of this chapter came from an outside source since it refers to Abram the Hebrew. That is not impossible, given that the narrator likely utilized traditions and genealogies that had been collected and transmitted over the years. The meaning of the word “Hebrew” has proved elusive. It may be related to the verb “to cross over,” perhaps meaning “immigrant.” Or it might be derived from the name of Abram’s ancestor Eber (see Gen 11:14-16).

³ tn Or “terebinths.”

⁴ tn Or “a brother”; or “a relative”; or perhaps “an ally.”

⁵ tn Heb “possessors of a treaty with.” Since it is likely that the qualifying statement refers to all three (Mamre, Eshcol, and Aner) the words “all these” have been supplied in the translation to make this clear.

⁶ tn This parenthetical disjunctive clause explains how Abram came to be living in their territory, but it also explains why they must go to war with Abram.

NET Notes: Gen 14:14

¹ tn Heb “his brother,” by extension, “relative.” Here and in v. 16 the more specific term “nephew” has been used in the translation for clarity. Lot was the son of Haran, Abram’s brother (Gen 11:27).

² tn The verb וַיָּרֶק (vayyareq) is a rare form, probably related to the word רֵיק (req, “to be empty”). If so, it would be a very figurative use: “he emptied out” (or perhaps “unsheathed”) his men. The LXX has “mustered” (cf. NEB). E. A. Speiser (Genesis [AB], 103-4) suggests reading with the Samaritan Pentateuch a verb diq, cognate with Akkadian deku, “to mobilize” troops. If this view is accepted, one must assume that a confusion of the Hebrew letters ד (dalet) and ר (resh) led to the error in the traditional Hebrew text. These two letters are easily confused in all phases of ancient Hebrew script development. The present translation is based on this view.

³ tn The words “the invaders” have been supplied in the translation for clarification.

⁴ sn The use of the name Dan reflects a later perspective. The Danites did not migrate to this northern territory until centuries later (see Judg 18:29). Furthermore Dan was not even born until much later. By inserting this name a scribe has clarified the location of the region.

NET Notes: Gen 14:15

¹ tn The Hebrew text simply has “night” as an adverbial accusative.

² tn Heb “he”; the referent (Abram) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

³ tn Heb “he divided himself…he and his servants.”

⁴ tn Heb “left.” Directions in ancient Israel were given in relation to the east rather than the north.

NET Notes: Gen 14:16

¹ tn The word “stolen” is supplied in the translation for clarification.

² tn The phrase “the rest of “ has been supplied in the translation for clarification.

NET Notes: Gen 14:17

¹ tn Heb “he”; the referent (Abram) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

² tn Heb “him”; the referent (Abram) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

³ sn The King’s Valley is possibly a reference to what came to be known later as the Kidron Valley.

NET Notes: Gen 14:18

¹ sn Salem is traditionally identified as the Jebusite stronghold of old Jerusalem. Accordingly, there has been much speculation about its king. Though some have identified him with the preincarnate Christ or with Noah’s son Shem, it is far more likely that Melchizedek was a Canaanite royal priest whom God used to renew the promise of the blessing to Abram, perhaps because Abram considered Melchizedek his spiritual superior. But Melchizedek remains an enigma. In a book filled with genealogical records he appears on the scene without a genealogy and then disappears from the narrative. In Psalm 110 the Lord declares that the Davidic king is a royal priest after the pattern of Melchizedek.

² tn The parenthetical disjunctive clause significantly identifies Melchizedek as a priest as well as a king.

sn It is his royal priestly status that makes Melchizedek a type of Christ: He was identified with Jerusalem, superior to the ancestor of Israel, and both a king and a priest. Unlike the normal Canaanites, this man served “God Most High” (אֵל עֶלְיוֹן, ’el ’elyon) – one sovereign God, who was the creator of all the universe. Abram had in him a spiritual brother.

NET Notes: Gen 14:19

¹ tn The preposition לְ (lamed) introduces the agent after the passive participle.

² tn Some translate “possessor of heaven and earth” (cf. NASB). But cognate evidence from Ugaritic indicates that there were two homonymic roots ָקנָה (qanah), one meaning “to create” (as in Gen 4:1) and the other “to obtain, to acquire, to possess.” While “possessor” would fit here, “creator” is the more likely due to the collocation with “heaven and earth.”

³ tn The terms translated “heaven” and “earth” are both objective genitives after the participle in construct.

NET Notes: Gen 14:20

¹ tn Heb “blessed be.” For God to be “blessed” means that is praised. His reputation is enriched in the world as his name is praised.

² sn Who delivered. The Hebrew verb מִגֵּן (miggen, “delivered”) foreshadows the statement by God to Abram in Gen 15:1, “I am your shield” (מָגֵן, magen). Melchizedek provided a theological interpretation of Abram’s military victory.

³ tn Heb “him”; the referent (Melchizedek) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

NET Notes: Gen 14:22

¹ tn Abram takes an oath, raising his hand as a solemn gesture. The translation understands the perfect tense as having an instantaneous nuance: “Here and now I raise my hand.”

² tn The words “and vow” are not in the Hebrew text, but are supplied in the translation for clarification.

NET Notes: Gen 14:23

¹ tn The oath formula is elliptical, reading simply: “…if I take.” It is as if Abram says, “[May the Lord deal with me] if I take,” meaning, “I will surely not take.” The positive oath would add the negative adverb and be the reverse: “[God will deal with me] if I do not take,” meaning, “I certainly will.”

² tn The Hebrew text adds the independent pronoun (“I”) to the verb form for emphasis.

NET Notes: Gen 14:24

¹ tn The words “I will take nothing” have been supplied in the translation for stylistic reasons.

² tn Heb “except only what the young men have eaten.”

Geneva Bible: Gen 14:1

And it came to pass in the days of Amraphel king of ^{( a )} Shinar, Arioch king of Ellasar, Chedorlaomer king of Elam, and Tidal king of ^{( b )} nations;

^{( a )} That is, of Babylon: by kings here, meaning, them that were governors of cities.

^{( b )} Of a people gathered from various countries.

Geneva Bible: Gen 14:3

All these were ^{( c )} joined together in the vale of Siddim, which is the ^{( d )} salt sea.

^{( c )} Ambition is the chief cause of wars among princes.

^{( d )} Called also the dead sea, or the lake Asphaltite, near Sodom and Gomorrah.

Geneva Bible: Gen 14:10

And the ^{( e )} vale of Siddim [was full of] slimepits; and the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah fled, and fell there; and they that remained fled to the mountain.

^{( e )} And afterward was overwhelmed with water, and so was called the salt sea.

Geneva Bible: Gen 14:12

And they ^{( f )} took Lot, Abram's brother's son, who dwelt in Sodom, and his goods, and departed.

^{( f )} The godly are plagued many times with the wicked: therefore their company is dangerous.

Geneva Bible: Gen 14:13

And there came one that had escaped, and told Abram the Hebrew; for he dwelt in the plain of Mamre the Amorite, brother of Eshcol, and brother of Aner: and these [were] ^{( g )} confederate with Abram.

^{( g )} God removed them to join Abram, and preserves him from their idolatry and superstitions.

Geneva Bible: Gen 14:18

And Melchizedek king of Salem ^{( h )} brought forth bread and wine: and he [was] the priest of the most high God.

^{( h )} For Abram and his soldiers refreshment, not to offer sacrifice.

Geneva Bible: Gen 14:19

And he ^{( i )} blessed him, and said, Blessed [be] Abram of the most high God, possessor of heaven and earth:

^{( i )} Melchizedek fed Abram, declared himself to represent a king, and he blessed him as the high priest.

Geneva Bible: Gen 14:24

^{( k )} Save only that which the young men have eaten, and the portion of the men which went with me, Aner, Eshcol, and Mamre; let them take their portion.

^{( k )} He did not want his liberality to be hurtful to others.

Commentary -- Verse Range Notes

TSK Synopsis: Gen 14:1-24

1 The battle of four kings against the king of Sodom and his allies.

12 Lot is taken prisoner.

14 Abram rescues him.

17 Melchizedek blesses Abram at his return, who gives him tithes.

21 The rest of the spoil, his partners having had their portions he restores to the king of Sodom.

Maclaren: Gen 14:13

Genesis 14:13

This is a singular designation of Abram as The Hebrew.' Probably we have in its use here a trace of the customary epithet which he bore among the inhabitants of Canaan, and perhaps the presence of the name in this narrative may indicate the influence of some older account, traditional or written, which owed its authorship to some of them. At all events, this is the first appearance of the name in Scripture. As we all know, it has become that of the nation, but a Jew did not call himself a Hebrew' except in intercourse with foreigners. As in many other cases, the national name used by other nations was not that by which the people called themselves. Here, obviously, it is not a national name, for the very good reason that there was no nation then. It is a personal epithet, or, in plain English, a nickname, and it means, probably, as the ancient Greek translation of Genesis gives it, neither more nor less than The man from the other side,' the man that had come across the water. Just as a mediaeval prince bore the sobriquet Outremere--the man from beyond the sea'--so Abram, to the aboriginal, or. at least, long-settled, inhabitants of the country, was known simply as the foreigner, the man from the other side' (of the Jordan, or more probably of the great river Euphrates), the man from across the water.

Now that name may suggest, with a permissible, and, I hope, not misleading play of fancy, just two things, which I seek now to press upon our hearts and consciences. The one is as to how men become Christians, and the other is as to how they look to other people when they are.

1. Men Become Christians By A Great Emigration.

Get thee out from thy father's house, and from thy country, and from thy kindred,' was the command to Abram. And he became the heir to God's promises and the father of the faithful, because he did not hesitate a moment to make the plunge and to leave behind him all his past, his associations, his loves, much of his possessions, and, in a very profound sense, his old self, and put a great impassable gulf between him and them all.

Now I am not going to say anything so narrow or foolish as that the Christian life must always begin with a conscious and sudden change; but this I am quite sure of, that in the vast majority of cases of thoroughly and out-and-out religious men, there must be a conscious change, whether it has been diffused through months or years, or concentrated in one burning moment. There has been a beginning; whether it has been like the dawn, or whether it has been like the kindling of a candle, the beginning of the flashing of the divine light into the heart; and the men that are most really under the influence of religious truth can, as a rule, looking back upon their past experience, see that it divides itself into two halves, separated from each other by a profound gulf--the time on the other side, and that on this side, of the great river. We must take heed lest by insisting on any one way of entrance into the kingdom we seem to narrow God's mercy, or sadden true hearts, or make the method of approach a test of the fact of entrance. God's city has more than twelve gates; they open to all the thirty-two points of the compass, yet there is, in the religious experience of the truest saints, always something analogous to this change. And what I desire to press upon you is, that unless you are only religious people after the popular Superficial fashion of the day, there will be something like it in your lives.

There will be a change in a man's deepest self, so that he will be a new creature,' with new tastes, new motives stirring to action, new desires pressing for satisfaction, new loves sweetly filling his heart, new insight into the meanings and true good of life and time guiding his conduct, new aversions withdrawing him from old delights which have become hateful now, new hopes pluming their growing wings, and new powers bearing him along a new road. There will be a change in his relations to God and to God's will. God in Christ will have become his center, instead of self, which was so before. He lives in a new world, being himself a now man.

Our Lord uses this very illustration when He says, He that heareth My Word, and believeth Him that sent Me, hath eternal life, and cometh not into judgment, but hath passed out of death into life.' That is a great migration, is it not, from the condition of a corpse to that of a living man? Paul, too, gives the same idea with a somewhat different turn of the illustration, when he gives thanks to the Father who delivered us out of the power of darkness, and translated us into the kingdom of,'--not, as we might expect to complete the antithesis, the light,' but--the kingdom of the Son of His love,' which is the same thing as the light. The illustration is probably drawn from the practice of the ancient conquering monarchs, who, when they subjugated a country, were wont to lead away captive long files of its inhabitants as compulsory colonists, and set them down in another land. Thus the conquering Christ comes, and those whom He conquers by His love, He shifts by a great emigration out of the dominion of that darkness which is at once tyranny and anarchy, and leads them into the happy kingdom of the light.

Thus, then, all Christian men become such, because they turn their backs upon their old selves, and' crucify their affections and lusts'; and paste down the leaf, as it were, on which their blotted past is writ, and turn over a now and a fairer one. And my question to you, dear brethren, is, Are you men from the other side,' who were not born where you live now, and who have passed out of the native Chaldea into the foreign--and yet to the new self home land of union with God?

2. This Designation May Be Taken As Teaching,

That a Christian should be known as a foreigner, a man from across the water.

Everybody in Canaan that knew Abram at all knew him as not one of themselves. The Hebrew was the name he went by, because his unlikeness to the others was the most conspicuous thing about him, even to the shallowest eye. Abram found himself, when he had migrated into Canaan, in no barbarous country, but plunged at once into the midst of an organized and compact civilization, that walled its cities, and had the comforts and conveniences and regularities of a settled order; and in the midst of it all, what did he do? He elected to live in a tent. He dwelt in tabernacles,' as the Epistle to the Hebrews comments upon his history, because he looked for a city.' The more his expectations were fixed upon a permanent abode, the more transitory did he make his abode here. If there had been no other city to fill his eyes, he would have gone and lived in some of those that were in the land. If there had been no other order to which he felt himself to belong, he would have had no objection to cast in his lot with the order and the people with whom he lived on friendly terms. But although he bought and sold with them, and fought for them and by their sides, and acquired from them land in which to bury his dead, he was not one of them, but said, No! I am not going into your city. I stay in my tent under this terebinth tree; for I am here as a stranger and a sojourner.' No doubt there were differences of language, dress, and a hundred other little things which helped the impression made on the men of the land by this strange visitor who lived in amity but in separation, and they are all crystallized in the name which the popular voice gave him,' The man from the other side.'

That is the impression which Christian people ought to make in the world. They should be recognized, by even unobservant eyes who know nothing of the inner secret of their lives, as plainly belonging to another order. If we seek to keep fresh in our own minds the consciousness that we do so, it will make itself manifest in all our bearing and actions. So that exhortation to cultivate the continual sense that our true city--the mother city of our hearts and hopes--is in heaven, is ever to be reiterated, and as constantly obeyed, as the necessary condition of a life worthy of our true affinities and of our glorious hopes.

Nor less needful is the other exhortation--live by the laws of your own land, not by those of the foreign country where you are for a time. If you do that thoroughly, you will not need to say, I am from another country.' Your conduct will say it for you. An English ship is a bit of England, in whatever latitude it may be, and however far beyond the three-mile limit of the King's authority upon the seas it may float. And so, wherever there is a Christian man, there is a bit of God's kingdom, and over that little speck in the midst of the ocean of the world the flag with the Cross on it should fly, and the laws of the Christ should be the only laws that have currency. If it could be said of us as Haman said to his king about the Jews, that we were a people with laws diverse from those of all people,' we should be doing more than, alas! most of us do, to honor Him whom we profess to serve. Follow Christ, and people will be quick enough to say of you The man from the other side,' He does not belong to our city.' There is no need for ostentation, nor for saying, Come and see my zeal for the Lord,' nor for blowing trumpets before us at street corners or elsewhere. The less of all that the better. The more we try to do the common things done by the folk round us, but from another motive, the more powerful will be our witness for our Master.

For instance, when John Knox was in the French galleys, he was fastened to the same oar with some criminal, perhaps a murderer. The two men sat on the same bench, did the same work, tugged at the same heavy sweep, were fed with the same food, suffered the same sorrows. Do you think there was any doubt as to the infinite gulf between them? We may be working side by side, at the very same tasks, and under similar circumstances, with men that have no share in our faith, and no sympathy with our hopes and aspirations, and yet, though doing the same thing, it will not be the same thing. And if we keep Christ before us, and follow His steps who has left us an example, depend upon it people will very soon find out that we are men from across the water.'

Notice, further, how this dissimilarity and obvious aloofness from the order of things in which we dwell is still perfectly compatible with all sorts of helpful associations. The context shows us that. There had come a flood of invasion, under kings with strange and barbarous names, from the far East. They had swept down upon the fertile valley of Siddim, and there had inflicted devastation. Amongst the captives had been Lot, Abram's relative, and all his goods had been taken. One fugitive, as it appears, had escaped, and the first thing he did was to go straight to' the man from the other side,' and tell him about it, as if sure of sympathy and help. No doubt the relationship between Abram and Lot was the main reason why the panting survivor made his way to the hills where Abram's tent was pitched, but there was also confidence in his willingness to help the Sodomites who had lost their goods. So it was not to the sons of Heth in Mature that the fugitive turned in his extremity, but he told Abram the Hebrew.'

I need not narrate over again the familiar story of how, for once in his peaceful life, the friend of God' girds on his sword and develops military instincts in his prompt and well-planned pursuit, which show that if he did not try to conquer some part of the land which he knew to be his by the will of God, it was not for want of ability, but because he' believed God,' and could wait. We all know how he armed his slaves, and made a swift march to the northern extremity of the land, and then, by a nocturnal surprise, came down upon the marauders and scattered them like chaff, before his onset, and recovered Lot and all the spoil.

Let us learn that, if Christian men will live well apart from the world, they will be able to sympathize with and help the world; and that our religion should fit us for the prompt and heroic undertaking, as it certainly does for the successful accomplishment, of all deeds of brotherly kindness and sympathy, bringing help and solace to the weak and the wearied, liberty to the captives, and hope to the despairing.

I do not believe that Christian men have any business to draw swords now. Abram is in that respect the Old Testament type of a God-fearing hero, with the actual sword in his hands. The New Testament type of a Christian warrior without a sword is not one jot less, but more, heroic. The form of sympathy, help, and public spirit' which the man from the other side' displayed is worse than an anachronism now in the light of Christ's law. It is a contradiction. But the spirit which breathed through Abram's conduct should be ours. We are bound to seek the peace of the city' where we dwell as strangers and pilgrims, avoiding no duty of sympathy and help, but by prompt, heroic, self-forgetting service to all the needy, sorrowful, and oppressed, building up such characters for ourselves that fugitives and desperate men shall instinctively turn to men from the other side for that help which, they know full well, the men of the country are too selfish or cowardly to give.

May I venture to suggest yet another and very different application of this name? To the aboriginal inhabitants of heaven, the angels that kept their first estate, redeemed men are possessors of a unique experience; and are the men from the other side.' They who entered on their pilgrimage through the Red Sea of conversion, pass out of it through the Jordan of death. They who become Christ's, by the great change of yielding their hearts to Him, and who live here as pilgrims and sojourners, pass dryshod through the stream into His presence. And there they who have always dwelt in the sunny highlands of the true Canaan, gather round them, and call them, not unenvying, perhaps, their experience, The men that have crossed.' The' Hebrews of the Hebrews' in the heavens are those who have known what it is to be pilgrims and sojourners, and to whom the promise has been fulfilled in the last hour of their journey, When thou passest through the river, I will be with thee.' They teach the angels a new song who sing, Thou hast led us through fire and through water, and brought us into a wealthy place.'

MHCC: Gen 14:1-12

The wars of nations make great figure in history, but we should not have had the record of this war if Abram and Lot had not been concerned. Out of covetousness, Lot had settled in fruitful, but wicked Sodom. Its inhabitants were the most ripe for vengeance of all the descendants of Canaan. The invaders were from Chaldea and Persia, then only small kingdoms. They took Lot among the rest, and his goods. Though he was righteous, and Abram's brother's son, yet he was with the rest in this trouble. Neither our own piety, nor our relation to the favourites of Heaven, will be our security when God's judgments are abroad. Many an honest man fares the worse for his wicked neighbours: it is our wisdom to separate, or at least to distinguish ourselves from them, 2Co 6:17. So near a relation of Abram should have been a companion and a disciple of Abram. If he chose to dwell in Sodom, he must thank himself if he share in Sodom's losses. When we go out of the way of our duty, we put ourselves from under God's protection, and cannot expect that the choice made by our lusts, should end to our comfort. They took Lot's goods; it is just with God to deprive us of enjoyments, by which we suffer ourselves to be deprived of the enjoyment of him.

MHCC: Gen 14:13-16

Abram takes this opportunity to give a real proof of his being truly friendly to Lot. We ought to be ready to succour those in distress, especially relations and friends. And though others may have been wanting in their duty to us, yet we must not neglect our duty to them. Abram rescued the captives. As we have opportunity, we must do good to all.

MHCC: Gen 14:17-20

Melchizedek is spoken of as a king of Salem, supposed to be the place afterwards called Jerusalem, and it is generally thought that he was only a man. The words of the apostle, Heb 7:3, state only, that the sacred history has said nothing of his ancestors. The silence of the Scriptures on this, is to raise our thoughts to Him, whose generation cannot be declared. Bread and wine were suitable refreshment for the weary followers of Abram; and it is remarkable that Christ appointed the same as the memorials of his body and blood, which are meat and drink indeed to the soul. Melchizedek blessed Abram from God. He blessed God from Abram. We ought to give thanks for other's mercies as for our own. Jesus Christ, our great High Priest, is the Mediator both of our prayers and praises, and not only offers up ours, but his own for us. Abram gave him the tenth of the spoils, Heb 7:4. When we have received some great mercy from God, it is very fit we should express our thankfulness by some special act of pious charity. Jesus Christ, our great Melchizedek, is to have homage done him, and to be humbly acknowledged as our King and Priest; not only the tithe of all, but all we have, must be given up to him.

MHCC: Gen 14:21-24

Observe the king of Sodom's grateful offer to Abram, Give me the souls, and take thou the substance. Gratitude teaches us to recompense to the utmost of our power, those that have undergone fatigues, run hazards, and been at expense for our service and benefit. Abram generously refused this offer. He accompanies his refusal with a good reason, Lest thou shouldest say, I have made Abram rich: which would reflect upon the promise and covenant of God, as if He would not have enriched Abraham without the spoils of Sodom. The people of God must, for their credit's sake, take heed of doing any thing that looks mean or mercenary, or that savors of covetousness and self-seeking. Abraham can trust the Possessor of Heaven and earth to provide for him.

Matthew Henry: Gen 14:1-12

We have here an account of the first war that ever we read of in scripture, which (though the wars of the nations make the greatest figure in history) we should not have had the history of if Abram and Lot had not been concerned in it. Now, concerning this war, we may observe,

I. The parties engaged in it. The invaders were four kings, two of them no less than kings of Shinar and Elam (that is, Chaldea and Persia), yet probably not the sovereign princes of those great kingdoms in their own persons, but either officers under them, or rather the heads and leaders of some colonies which came out of those great nations, and settled themselves near Sodom, but retained the names of the countries from which they had their origin. The invaded were the kings of five cities that lay near together in the plain of Jordan, namely, Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, Zeboiim, and Zoar. Four of them are named, but not the fifth, the king of Zoar or Bela, either because he was much more mean and inconsiderable or because he was much more wicked and inglorious than the rest, and worthy to be forgotten.

II. The occasion of this war was the revolt of the five kings from under the government of Chedorlaomer. Twelve years they served him. Small joy they had of their fruitful land, while thus they were tributaries to a foreign power, and could not call what they had their own. Rich countries are a desirable prey, and idle luxurious countries are an easy prey, to growing greatness. The Sodomites were the posterity of Canaan whom Noah had pronounced a servant to Shem, from whom Elam descended; thus soon did that prophecy begin to e fulfilled. In the thirteenth year, beginning to be weary of their subjection, they rebelled, denied their tribute, and attempted to shake off the yoke and retrieve their ancient liberties. In the fourteenth year, after some pause and preparation, Chedorlaomer, in conjunction with his allies, set himself to chastise and reduce the rebels, and, since he could not have it otherwise, to fetch his tribute from them on the point of his sword. Note, Pride, covetousness, and ambition, are the lusts from which wars and fightings come. To these insatiable idols the blood of thousands has been sacrificed.

III. The progress and success of the war. The four kings laid the neighbouring countries waste and enriched themselves with the spoil of them (Gen 14:5-7), upon the alarm of which it had been the wisdom of the king of Sodom to submit, and desire conditions of peace; for how could he grapple with an enemy thus flushed with victory? But he would rather venture the utmost extremity than yield, and it sped accordingly. Quos Deus destruet eos dementat - Those whom God means to destroy he delivers up to infatuation. 1. The forces of the king of Sodom and his allies were routed; and, it should seem, many of them perished in the slime-pits who had escaped the sword, Gen 14:10. In all places we are surrounded with deaths of various kinds, especially in the field of battle. 2. The cities were plundered, Gen 14:11. All the goods of Sodom, and particularly their stores and provisions of victuals, were carried off by the conquerors. Note, When men abuse the gifts of a bountiful providence to gluttony and excess, it is just with God, and his usual way, by some judgment or other to strip them of that which they have so abused, Hos 2:8, Hos 2:9. 3. Lot was carried captive, Gen 14:12. They took Lot among the rest, and his goods. Now Lot may here be considered, (1.) As sharing with his neighbours in this common calamity. Though he was himself a righteous man, and (which is here expressly noticed) Abram's brother's son, yet he was involved with the rest in all this trouble. Note, All things come alike to all, Ecc 9:2. The best of men cannot promise themselves an exemption from the greatest troubles in this life; neither from our own piety nor our relation to those that are the favourites of heaven will be our security, when God's judgments are abroad. Note, further, Many an honest man fares the worse for his wicked neighbours. It is therefore our wisdom to separate ourselves, or at least to distinguish ourselves, from them (2Co 6:17), and so deliver ourselves, Rev 18:4. (2.) As smarting for the foolish choice he made of a settlement here. This is plainly intimated when it is said, They took Abram's brother's son, who dwelt in Sodom. So near a relation of Abram should have been a companion and disciple of Abram, and should have abode by his tents; but, if he choose to dwell in Sodom, he must thank himself if he share in Sodom's calamities. Note, When we go out of the way of our duty we put ourselves from under God's protection, and cannot expect that the choices which are made by our lusts should issue to our comfort. Particular mention is made of their taking Lot's goods, those goods which had occasioned his contest with Abram and his separation from him. Note, It is just with God to deprive us of those enjoyments by which we have suffered ourselves to be deprived of our enjoyment of him.

Matthew Henry: Gen 14:13-16

We have here an account of the only military action we ever find Abram engaged in, and this he was prompted to, not by his avarice or ambition, but purely by a principle of charity; it was not to enrich himself, but to help his friend. Never was any military expedition undertaken, prosecuted, and finished, more honourably than this of Abram's. Here we have,

I. The tidings brought him of his kinsman's distress. Providence so ordered it that he now sojourned not far off, that he might be a very present help. 1. He is here called Abram the Hebrew, that is, the son and follower of Heber, in whose family the profession of the true religion was kept up in that degenerate age. Abram herein acted like a Hebrew - in a manner not unworthy of the name and character of a religious professor. 2. The tidings were brought by one that had escaped with his life for a prey. Probably he was a Sodomite, and as bad as the worst of them; yet knowing Abram's relation to Lot, and concern for him, he implores his help, and hopes to speed for Lot's sake. Note, The worst of men, in the day of their trouble, will be glad to claim acquaintance with those that are wise and good, and so get an interest in them. The rich man in hell called Abram Father; and the foolish virgins made court to the wise for a share of their oil.

II. The preparations he made for this expedition. The cause was plainly good, his call to engage in it was clear, and therefore, with all speed, he armed his trained servants, born in his house, to the number of three hundred and eighteen - a great family, but a small army, about as many as Gideon's that routed the Midianites, Jdg 7:7. He drew out his trained servants, or his catechised servants, not only instructed in the art of war, which was then far short of the perfection which later and worse ages have improved it to, but instructed in the principles of religion; for Abram commanded his household to keep the way of the Lord. This shows that Abram was, 1. A great man, who had so many servants depending upon him, and employed by him, which was not only his strength and honour, but gave him a great opportunity of doing good, which is all that is truly valuable and desirable in great places and great estates. 2. A good man, who not only served God himself, but instructed all about him in the service of God. Note, Those that have great families have not only many bodies, but many souls besides their own, to take care of and provide for. Those that would be found the followers of Abram must see that their servants be catechised servants. 3. A wise man for, though he was a man of peace, yet he disciplined his servants for war, not knowing what occasion he might have, some time or other, so to employ them. Note, Though our holy religion teaches us to be for peace, yet it does not forbid us to provide for war.

III. His allies and confederates in this expedition. He prevailed with his neighbours, Aner, Eshcol, and Mamre (with whom he kept up a fair correspondence) to go along with him. It was his prudence thus to strengthen his own troops with their auxiliary forces; and probably they saw themselves concerned, in interest, to act, as they could, against this formidable power, lest their own turn should be next. Note, 1. It is our wisdom and duty to behave ourselves so respectfully and obligingly towards all men as that, whenever there is occasion, they may be willing and ready to do us a kindness. 2. Those who depend on God's help, yet, in times of distress, ought to make use of men's help, as Providence offers it; else they tempt God.

IV. His courage and conduct were very remarkable. 1. There was a great deal of bravery in the enterprise itself, considering the disadvantages he lay under. What could one family of husbandmen and shepherds do against the armies of four princes, who now came fresh from blood and victory? It was not a vanquished, but a victorious army, that he was to pursue; nor was he constrained by necessity to this daring attempt, but moved to it by generosity; so that, all things considered, it was, for aught I know, as great an instance of true courage as ever Alexander or Caesar was celebrated for. Note, Religion tends to make men, not cowardly, but truly valiant. The righteous is bold as a lion. The true Christian is the true hero. 2. There was a great deal of policy in the management of it. Abram was no stranger to the stratagems of war: He divided himself, as Gideon did his little army (Jdg 7:16), that he might come upon the enemy from several quarters at once, and so make his few seem a great many; he made his attack by night, that he might surprise them. Note, Honest policy is a good friend both to our safety and to our usefulness. The serpent's head (provided it be nothing akin to the old serpent) may well become a good Christian's body, especially if it have a dove's eye in it, Mat 10:16.

V. His success was very considerable, Gen 14:15, Gen 14:16. He defeated his enemies, and rescued his friends; and we do not find that he sustained any loss. Note, Those that venture in a good cause, with a good heart, are under the special protection of a good God, and have reason to hope for a good issue. Again, It is all one with the Lord to save by many or by few, 1Sa 14:6. Observe,

1. He rescued his kinsman; twice here he is called his brother Lot. The remembrance of the relation that was between them, both by nature and grace, made him forget the little quarrel that had been between them, in which Lot had by no means acted well towards Abram. Justly might Abram have upbraided Lot with his folly in quarrelling with him and removing from him, and have told him that he was well enough served, he might have known when he was well off; but, in the charitable breast of pious Abram, it is all forgiven and forgotten, and he takes this opportunity to give a real proof of the sincerity of his reconciliation. Note, (1.) We ought to be ready, whenever it is in the power of our hands, to succour and relieve those that are in distress, especially our relations and friends. A brother is born for adversity, Pro 17:17. A friend in need is a friend indeed. (2.) Though others have been wanting in their duty to us, yet we must not therefore deny our duty to them. Some have said that they can more easily forgive their enemies than their friends; but we shall see ourselves obliged to forgive both if we consider, not only that our God, when we were enemies, reconciled us, but also that he passeth by the transgression of the remnant of his heritage, Mic 7:18.

2. He rescued the rest of the captives, for Lot's sake, though they were strangers to him and such as he was under no obligation to at all; nay, though they were Sodomites, sinners before the Lord exceedingly, and though, probably, he might have recovered Lot alone by ransom, yet he brought back all the women, and the people, and their goods, Gen 14:16. Note, As we have opportunity we must do good to all men. Our charity must be extensive, as opportunity offers itself. Wherever God gives life, we must not grudge the help we can give to support it. God does good to the just and unjust, and so must we, Mat 5:45. This victory which Abram obtained over the kings the prophet seems to refer to, Isa 41:2, Who raised up the righteous man from the east, and made him rule over kings? And some suggest that, as before he had a title to this land by grant, so now by conquest.

Matthew Henry: Gen 14:17-20

This paragraph begins with the mention of the respect which the king of Sodom paid to Abram at his return from the slaughter of the kings; but, before a particular account is given of this, the story of Melchizedek is briefly related, concerning whom observe,

I. Who he was. He was king of Salem and priest of the most high God; and other glorious things are said of him, Heb 7:1, etc. 1. The rabbin, and most of our rabbinical writers, conclude that Melchizedek was Shem the son of Noah, who was king and priest to those that descended from him, according to the patriarchal model. But this is not at all probable; for why should his name be changed? And how came he to settle in Canaan? 2. Many Christian writers have thought that this was an appearance of the Son of God himself, our Lord Jesus, known to Abram, at this time, by this name, as afterwards, Hagar called him by another name, Gen 16:13. He appeared to him as a righteous king, owning a righteous cause, and giving peace. It is difficult to imagine that any mere man should be said to be without father, without mother, and without descent, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, Heb 7:3. It is witnessed of Melchizedek that he liveth, and that he abideth a priest continually (Gen 14:3, Gen 14:8); nay (Gen 14:13, Gen 14:14), the apostle makes him of whom these things are spoken to be our Lord who sprang out of Judah. It is likewise difficult to think that any mere man should, at this time, be greater than Abram in the things of God, that Christ should be a priest after the order of any mere man, and that any human priesthood should so far excel that of Aaron as it is certain that Melchizedek's did. 3. The most commonly received opinion is that Melchizedek was a Canaanitish prince, that reigned in Salem, and kept up the true religion there; but, if so, why his name should occur here only in all the story of Abram, and why Abram should have altars of his own and not attend the altars of his neighbour Melchizedek who was greater than he, seem unaccountable. Mr. Gregory of Oxford tells us that the Arabic Catena, which he builds much upon the authority of, gives this account of Melchizedek, That he was the son of Heraclim, the son of Peleg, the son of Eber, and that his mother's name was Salathiel, the daughter of Gomer, the son of Japheth, the son of Noah.

II. What he did. 1. He brought forth bread and wine, for the refreshment of Abram and his soldiers, and in congratulation of their victory. This he did as a king, teaching us to do good and to communicate, and to be given to hospitality, according to our ability; and representing the spiritual provisions of strength and comfort which Christ has laid up for us in the covenant of grace for our refreshment, when we are wearied with our spiritual conflicts. 2. As priest of the most high God, he blessed Abram, which we may suppose a greater refreshment to Abram than his bread and wine were. Thus God, having raised up his Son Jesus, has sent him to bless us, as one having authority; and those whom he blesses are blessed indeed. Christ went to heaven when he was blessing his disciples (Luk 24:51); for this is what he ever lives to do.

III. What he said, Gen 14:19, Gen 14:20. Two things were said by him: - 1. He blessed Abram from God: Blessed be Abram, blessed of the most high God, Gen 14:19. Observe the titles he here gives to God, which are very glorious. (1.) The most high God, which bespeaks his absolute perfections in himself and his sovereign dominion over all the creatures; he is King of kings. Note, It will greatly help both our faith and our reverence in prayer to eye God as the most high God, and to call him so. (2.) Possessor of heaven and earth, that is, rightful owner, and sovereign Lord, of all the creatures, because he made them. This bespeaks him a great God, and greatly to be praised (Psa 24:1), and those a happy people who have an interest in his favour and love. 2. He blessed God for Abram (Gen 14:20): and blessed be the most high God. Note, (1.) In all our prayers, we must praise God, and join hallelujahs with all our hosannahs. These are the spiritual sacrifices we must offer up daily, and upon particular occasions. (2.) God, as the most high God, must have the glory of all our victories, Exo 17:15; 1Sa 7:10, 1Sa 7:12; Jdg 5:1, Jdg 5:2; 2Ch 20:21. In them he shows himself higher than our enemies (Exo 18:11), and higher than we; for without him we could do nothing. (3.) We ought to give thanks for others' mercies as for our own, triumphing with those that triumph. (4.) Jesus Christ, our great high priest, is the Mediator both of our prayers and praises, and not only offers up ours, but his own for us. See Luk 10:21.

IV. What was done to him: Abram gave him tithes of all, that is, of the spoils, Heb 7:4. This may be looked upon, 1. As a gratuity presented to Melchizedek, by way of return for his tokens of respect. Note, Those that receive kindness should show kindness. Gratitude is one of nature's laws. 2. As an offering vowed and dedicated to the most high God, and therefore put into the hands of Melchizedek his priest. Note, (1.) When we have received some signal mercy from God, it is very fit that we should express our thankfulness by some special act of pious charity. God must always have his dues out of our substance, especially when, by any particular providence, he has either preserved or increased it to us. (2.) That the tenth of our increase is a very fit proportion to be set apart for the honour of God and the service of his sanctuary. (3.) That Jesus Christ, our great Melchizedek, is to have homage done him, and to be humbly acknowledged by every one of us as our king and priest; and not only the tithe of all, but all we have, must be surrendered and given up to him.

Matthew Henry: Gen 14:21-24

We have here an account of what passed between Abram and the king of Sodom, who succeeded him that fell in the battle (Gen 14:10), and thought himself obliged to do this honour to Abram, in return for the good services he had done him. Here is,

I. The king of Sodom's grateful offer to Abram (Gen 14:21): Give me the soul, and take thou the substance; so the Hebrew reads it. Here he fairly begs the persons, but as freely bestows the goods on Abram. Note, 1. Where a right is dubious and divided, it is wisdom to compound the matter by mutual concessions rather than to contend. The king of Sodom had an original right both to the persons and to the goods, and it would bear a debate whether Abram's acquired right by rescue would supersede his title and extinguish it; but, to prevent all quarrels, the king of Sodom makes this fair proposal. 2. Gratitude teaches us to recompense to the utmost of our power those that have undergone fatigues, run hazards, and been at expense for our service and benefit. Who goes a warfare at his own charges? 1Co 9:7. Soldiers purchase their pay dearer than any labourers, and are well worthy of it, because they expose their lives.

II. Abram's generous refusal of this offer. He not only resigned the persons to him, who, being delivered out of the hand of their enemies, ought to have served Abram, but he restored all the goods too. He would not take from a thread to a shoe-latchet, not the least thing that had ever belonged to the king of Sodom or any of his. Note, A lively faith enables a man to look upon the wealth of this world with a holy contempt, 1Jo 5:4. What are all the ornaments and delights of sense to one that has God and heaven ever in his eye? He resolves even to a thread and a shoe-latchet; for a tender conscience fears offending in a small matter. Now,

1. Abram ratifies this resolution with a solemn oath: I have lifted up my hand to the Lord that I will not take any thing, Gen 14:22. Here observe, (1.) The titles he gives to God, The most high God, the possessor of heaven and earth, the same that Melchizedek had just now used, Gen 14:19. Note, It is good to learn of others how to order our speech concerning God, and to imitate those who speak well in divine things. This improvement we are to make of the conversation of devout good men, we must learn to speak after them. (2.) The ceremony used in this oath: I have lifted up my hand. In religious swearing we appeal to God's knowledge of our truth and sincerity and imprecate his wrath if we swear falsely, and the lifting up of the hand is very significant and expressive of both. (3.) The matter of the oath, namely, that he would not take any reward from the king of Sodom, was lawful, but what he was not antecedently obliged to. [1.] Probably Abram vowed, before he went to the battle, that, if God would give him success, he would, for the glory of God and the credit of his profession, so far deny himself and his own right as to take nothing of the spoils to himself. Note, the vows we have made when we are in pursuit of a mercy must be carefully and conscientiously kept when we have obtained the mercy, though they were made against our interest. A citizen of Zion, if he has sworn, whether it be to God or man, though it prove to his own hurt, yet he changeth not, Psa 15:4. Or, [2.] Perhaps Abram, now when he saw cause to refuse the offer made him, at the same time confirmed his refusal with this oath, to prevent further importunity. Note, First, There may be good reason sometimes why we should debar ourselves of that which is our undoubted right, as St. Paul, 1Co 8:13; 1Co 9:12. Secondly, That strong resolutions are of good use to put by the force of temptations.

2. He backs his refusal with a good reason: Lest thou shouldest say, I have made Abram rich, which would reflect reproach, (1.) Upon the promise and covenant of God, as if they would not have enriched Abram without the spoils of Sodom. And, (2.) Upon the piety and charity of Abram, as if all he had in his eye, when he undertook that hazardous expedition, was to enrich himself. Note, [1.] We must be very careful that we give no occasion to others to say things which they ought not. [2.] The people of God must, for their credit's sake, take heed of doing any thing that looks mean or mercenary, or that savours of covetousness and self-seeking. Probably Abram knew the king of Sodom to be a proud and scornful man, and one that would be apt to turn such a thing as this to his reproach afterwards, though most unreasonably. When we have to do with such men, we have need to act with particular caution.

3. He limits his refusal with a double proviso, Gen 14:24. In making vows, we ought carefully to insert the necessary exceptions, that we may not afterwards say before the angel, It was an error, Ecc 5:6. Abram here excepts, (1.) The food of his soldiers; they were worthy of their meat while they trod out the corn. This would give no colour to the king of Sodom to say that he had enriched Abram. (2.) The shares of his allies and confederates: Let them take their portion. Note, Those who are strict in restraining their own liberty yet ought not to impose those restraints upon the liberties of others, nor to judge of them accordingly. We must not make ourselves the standard to measure others by. A good man will deny himself that liberty which he will not deny another, contrary to the practice of the Pharisees, Mat 23:4. There was not the same reason why Aner, Eshcol, and Mamre, should quit their right, that there was why Abram should. They did not make the profession that he made, nor were they, as he was, under the obligation of a vow. They had not the hopes that Abram had of a portion in the other world, and therefore, by all means, let them take their portion of this.

Keil-Delitzsch: Gen 14:1-12

The war, which furnished Abram with an opportunity, while in the promised land of which as yet he could not really call a single rood his own, to prove himself a valiant warrior, and not only to smite the existing chiefs of the imperial power of Asia, but to bring back to the kings of Canaan the booty that had been carried off, is circumstantially described, not so much in the interests of secular history as on account of its significance in relation to the kingdom of God. It is of importance, however, as a simple historical fact, to see that in the statement in Gen 14:1, the king of Shinar occupies the first place, although the king of Edom, Chedorlaomer, not only took the lead in the expedition, and had allied himself for that purpose with the other kings, but had previously subjugated the cities of the valley of Siddim, and therefore had extended his dominion very widely over hither Asia. If, notwithstanding this, the time of the war related here is connected with " the days of Amraphel, king of Shinar, "this is done, no doubt, with reference to the fact that the first worldly kingdom was founded in Shinar by Nimrod (Gen 10:10), a kingdom which still existed under Amraphel, though it was now confined to Shinar itself, whilst Elam possessed the supremacy in inner Asia. There is no ground whatever for regarding the four kings mentioned in Gen 14:1 as four Assyrian generally or viceroys, as Josephus has done in direct contradiction to the biblical text; for, according to the more careful historical researches, the commencement of the Assyrian kingdom belongs to a later period; and Berosus speaks of an earlier Median rule in Babylon, which reaches as far back as the age of the patriarchs (cf. M. v. Niebuhr, Gesch. Assurs, p. 271). It appears significant also, that the imperial power of Asia had already extended as far as Canaan, and had subdued the valley of the Jordan, no doubt with the intention of holding the Jordan valley as the high-road to Egypt. We have here a prelude of the future assault of the worldly power upon the kingdom of God established in Canaan; and the importance of this event to sacred history consists in the fact, that the kings of the valley of the Jordan and the surrounding country submitted to the worldly power, whilst Abram, on the contrary, with his home-born servants, smote the conquerors and rescued their booty, - a prophetic sign that in the conflict with the power of the world the seed of Abram would not only not be subdued, but would be able to rescue from destruction those who appealed to it for aid.

Gen 14:1-2

In Gen 14:1-3 the account is introduced by a list of the parties engaged in war. The kings named here are not mentioned again. On Shinar , see Gen 10:10; and on Elam , Gen 10:22. It cannot be determined with certainty where Ellasar was. Knobel supposes it to be Artemita , which was also called Χαλάσαρ , in southern Assyria, to the north of Babylon. Goyim is not used here for nations generally, but is the name of one particular nation or country. In Delitzsch 's opinion it is an older name for Galilee, though probably with different boundaries (cf. Jos 12:23; Jdg 4:2; and Isa 9:1). - The verb עשׂוּ ( made ), in Gen 14:2, is governed by the kings mentioned in Gen 14:1. To Bela , whose king is not mentioned by name, the later name Zoar (vid., Gen 19:22) is added as being better known.

Gen 14:3

" All these (five kings) allied themselves together, (and came with their forces) into the vale of Siddim ( השׂדּים , prob. fields of plains), which is the Salt Sea; "that is to say, which was changed into the Salt Sea on the destruction of its cities (Gen 19:24-25). That there should be five kings in the five cities ( πεντάπολις , Wis. 10:6) of this valley, was quite in harmony with the condition of Canaan, where even at a later period every city had its king.

Gen 14:4-6

The occasion of the war was the revolt of the kings of the vale of Siddim from Chedorlaomer. They had been subject to him for twelve years, "and the thirteenth year they rebelled." In the fourteenth year Chedorlaomer came with his allies to punish them for their rebellion, and attacked on his way several other cities to the east of the Arabah, as far as the Elanitic Gulf, no doubt because they also had withdrawn from his dominion. The army moved along the great military road from inner Asia, past Damascus, through Peraea, where they smote the Rephaims, Zuzims, Emims, and Horites. " The Rephaim in Ashteroth Karnaim: "all that is known with certainty of the Rephaim is, that they were a tribe of gigantic stature, and in the time of Abram had spread over the whole of Peraea, and held not only Bashan, but the country afterwards possessed by the Moabites; from which possessions they were subsequently expelled by the descendants of Lot and the Amorites, and so nearly exterminated, that Og, king of Bashan, is described as the remnant of the Rephaim (Deu 2:20; Deu 3:11, Deu 3:13; Jos 12:4; Jos 13:12). Beside this, there were Rephaim on this side of the Jordan among the Canaanitish tribes (Gen 15:20), some to the west of Jerusalem, in the valley which was called after them the valley of the Rephaim (Jos 15:8; Jos 18:16; 2Sa 5:18, etc.), others on the mountains of Ephraim (Jos 17:15); while the last remains of them were also to be found among the Philistines (2Sa 21:16.; 1Ch 20:4.). The current explanation of the name, viz., "the long-stretched,"or giants ( Ewald ), does not prevent our regarding רפא as the personal name of their forefather, though no intimation is given of their origin. That they were not Canaanites may be inferred from the fact, that on the eastern side of the Jordan they were subjugated and exterminated by the Canaanitish branch of the Amorites. Notwithstanding this, they may have been descendants of Ham, though the fact that the Canaanites spoke a Semitic tongue rather favours the conclusion that the oldest population of Canaan, and therefore the Rephaim, were of Semitic descent. At any rate, the opinion of J. G. Müller , that they belonged to the aborigines, who were not related to Shem, Ham, and Japhet, is perfectly arbitrary. - Ashteroth Karnaim , or briefly Ashtaroth , the capital afterwards of Og of Bashan, was situated in Hauran; and ruins of it are said to be still seen in Tell Ashtereh , two hours and a half from Nowah , and one and three-quarters from the ancient Edrei , somewhere between Nowah and Mezareib (see Ritter, Erdkunde ).

(Note: J. G. Wetztein , however, has lately denied the identity of Ashteroth Karnaim, which he interprets as meaning Ashtaroth near Karnaim, with Ashtaroth the capital of Og (see Reiseber . üb. Hauran , etc. 1860, p. 107). But he does so without sufficient reason. He disputes most strongly the fact that Ashtaroth was situated on the hill Ashtere, because the Arabs now in Hauran assured him, that the ruins of this Tell (or hill) suggested rather a monastery or watch-tower than a large city, and associates it with the Bostra of the Greeks and Romans, the modern Bozra , partly on account of the central situation of this town, and its consequent importance to Hauran and Peraea generally, and partly also on account of the similarity in the name, as Bostra is the latinized form of Beeshterah , which we find in Jos 21:27 in the place of the Ashtaroth of 1Ch 6:56; and that form is composed of Beth Ashtaroth , to which there are as many analogies as there are instances of the omission of Beth before the names of towns, which is a sufficient explanation of Ashtaroth (cf. Ges. thes. , p. 175 and 193).)

" The Zuzims in Ham "were probably the people whom the Ammonites called Zam zummim , and who were also reckoned among the Rephaim (Deu 2:20). Ham was possibly the ancient name of Rabba of the Ammonites (Deu 3:11), the remains being still preserved in the ruins of Ammân . - "The Emim in the plain of Kiryathaim:" the אימים or אמים (i.e., fearful, terrible), were the earlier inhabitants of the country of the Moabites, who gave them the name; and, like the Anakim, they were also reckoned among the Rephaim (Deu 2:11). Kiryathaim is certainly not to be found where Eusebius and Jerome supposed, viz., in Καριάδα , Coraiatha , the modern Koerriath or Kereyat , ten miles to the west of Medabah; for this is not situated in the plain, and corresponds to Kerioth (Jer 48:24), with which Eusebius and Jerome have confounded Kiryathaim . It is probably still to be seen in the ruins of el Teym or et Tueme , about a mile to the west of Medabah. " The Horites (from חרי , dwellers in caves), in the mountains of Seir, "were the earlier inhabitants of the land between the Dead Sea and the Elanitic Gulf, who were conquered and exterminated by the Edomites (Gen 36:20.). - " To El-paran, which is by the wilderness: "i.e., on the eastern side of the desert of Paran (see Gen 21:21), probably the same as Elath (Deu 2:8) or Eloth (1Ki 9:26), the important harbour of Aila on the northern extremity of the so-called Elanitic Gulf, near the modern fortress of Akaba , where extensive heaps of rubbish show the site of the former town, which received its name El or Elath ( terebinth , or rather wood ) probably from the palm-groves in the vicinity.

Gen 14:7

From Aila the conquerors turned round, and marched (not through the Arabah, but on the desert plateau which they ascended from Aila) to En-mishpat ( well of judgment ), the older name of Kadesh , the situation of which, indeed, cannot be proved with certainty, but which is most probably to be sought for in the neighbourhood of the spring Ain Kades , discovered by Rowland , to the south of Bir Seba and Khalasa ( Elusa ), twelve miles E.S.E. of Moyle , the halting-place for caravans, near Hagar's well (Gen 16:14), on the heights of Jebel Halal (see Ritter, Erdkunde, and Num 13). " And they smote all the country of the Amalekites, "i.e., the country afterwards possessed by the Amalekites (vid., Gen 26:12),

(Note: The circumstance that in the midst of a list of tribes who were defeated, we find not the tribe but only the fields ( שׂדה) of the Amalekites mentioned, can only be explained on the supposition that the nation of the Amalekites was not then in existence, and the country was designated proleptically by the name of its future and well-known inhabitants (Hengstenberg, Diss. ii. p. 249, translation).)

to the west of Edomitis on the southern border of the mountains of Judah (Num 13:29), " and also the Amorites, who dwelt in Hazazon-Thamar, "i.e., Engedi , on the western side of the Dead Sea (2Ch 20:2).

Gen 14:8-12

After conquering all these tribes to the east and west of the Arabah, they gave battle to the kings of the Pentapolis in the vale of Siddim, and put them to flight. The kings of Sodom and Gomorrah fell there, the valley being full of asphalt-pits, and the ground therefore unfavourable for flight; but the others escaped to the mountains ( הרה for ההרה ), that is, to the Moabitish highlands with their numerous defiles. The conquerors thereupon plundered the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah, and carried off Lot, who dwelt in Sodom, and all his possessions, along with the rest of the captives, probably taking the route through the valley of the Jordan up to Damascus.

Keil-Delitzsch: Gen 14:13-16

A fugitive (lit., the fugitive; the article denotes the genus, Ewald , §277) brought intelligence of this to Abram the Hebrew ( העברי , an immigrant from beyond the Euphrates). Abram is so called in distinction from Mamre and his two brothers, who were Amorites, and had made a defensive treaty with him. To rescue Lot, Abram ordered his trained slaves ( חניכיו , i.e., practised in arms) born in the house (cf. Gen 17:12), 318 men, to turn out (lit., to pour themselves out); and with these, and (as the supplementary remark in Gen 14:24 shows) with his allies, he pursued the enemy as far as Dan , where " he divided himself against them, he and his servants, by night, "- i.e., he divided his men into companies, who fell upon the enemy by night from different sides - " smote them, and pursued them to Hobah, to the left (or north) of Damascus ."Hobah has probably been preserved in the village of Noba, mentioned by Troilo , a quarter of a mile to the north of Damascus. So far as the situation of Dan is concerned, this passage proves that it cannot have been identical with Leshem or Laish in the valley of Beth Rehob, which the Danites conquered and named Dan (Jdg 18:28-29; Jos 19:47); for this Laish-Dan was on the central source of the Jordan, el Leddan in Tell el Kady , which does not lie in either of the two roads, leading from the vale of Siddim or of the Jordan to Damascus.

(Note: One runs below the Sea of Galilee past Fik and Nowa, almost in a straight line to Damascus; the other from Jacob's Bridge, below Lake Merom. But if the enemy, instead of returning with their booty to Thapsacus, on the Euphrates, by one of the direct roads leading from the Jordan past Damascus and Palmyra, had gone through the land of Canaan to the sources of the Jordan, they would undoubtedly, when defeated at Laish-Dan, have fled through the Wady et Teim and the Bekaa to Hamath, and not by Damascus at all (vid., Robinson, Bibl. Researches).)

This Dan belonged to Gilead (Deu 34:1), and is no doubt the same as the Dan-Jaan mentioned in 2Sa 24:6 in connection with Gilead, and to be sought for in northern Peraea to the south-west of Damascus.

Keil-Delitzsch: Gen 14:17-24

As Abram returned with the booty which he had taken from the enemy, the king of Sodom (of course, the successor to the one who fell in the battle) and Melchizedek, king of Salem, came to meet him to congratulate him on his victory; the former probably also with the intention of asking for the prisoners who had been rescued. They met him in " the valley of Shaveh, which is (what was afterwards called) the King's dale ."This valley, in which Absalom erected a monument for himself (2Sa 18:18), was, according to Josephus, two stadia from Jerusalem, probably by the brook Kidron therefore, although Absalom's pillar, which tradition places there, was of the Grecian style rather than the early Hebrew. The name King's dale was given to it undoubtedly with reference to the event referred to here, which points to the neighbourhood of Jerusalem. For the Salem of Melchizedek cannot have been the Salem near to which John baptized (Joh 3:23), or Aenon, which was eight Roman miles south of Scythopolis, as a march of about forty hours for the purpose of meeting Abraham, if not romantic, would, at least be at variance with the text of Scripture, where the kings are said to have gone out to Abram after his return. It must be Jerusalem, therefore, which is called by the old name Salem in Psa 76:2, out of which the name Jerusalem (founding of peace, or possession of peace) was formed by the addition of the prefix ירוּ = ירוּי "founding,"or ירוּשׁ "possession."Melchizedek brings bread and wine from Salem "to supply the exhausted warriors with food and drink, but more especially as a mark of gratitude to Abram, who had conquered for them peace, freedom, and prosperity"( Delitzsch ). This gratitude he expresses, as a priest of the supreme God, in the words, "Blessed be Abram of the Most High God, the founder of heaven and earth; and blessed be God, the Most High, who hath delivered thine enemies into thy hand." The form of the blessing is poetical, two parallel members with words peculiar to poetry, צריך for איביך , and מגּן . - עליון אל without the article is a proper name for the supreme God, the God over all (cf. Exo 18:11), who is pointed out as the only true God by the additional clause, "founder of the heaven and the earth."On the construction of בּרוּך with ל , vid., Gen 31:15; Exo 12:16, and Ges. §143, 2. קנה , founder and possessor: קנה combines the meanings of κτίζειν and κτᾶσθαι . This priestly reception Abram reciprocated by giving him the tenth of all, i.e., of the whole of the booty taken from the enemy. Giving the tenth was a practical acknowledgment of the divine priesthood of Melchizedek; for the tenth was, according to the general custom, the offering presented to the Deity. Abram also acknowledged the God of Melchizedek as the true God; for when the king of Sodom asked for his people only, and would have left the rest of the booty to Abram, he lifted up his hand as a solemn oath " to Jehovah, the Most High God, the founder of heaven and earth, "- acknowledging himself as the servant of this God by calling Him by the name Jehovah , - and swore that he would not take " from a thread to a shoe-string, "i.e., the smallest or most worthless thing belonging to the king of Sodom, that he might not be able to say, he had made Abram rich. אם , as the sign of an oath, is negative, and in an earnest address is repeated before the verb. " Except ( בּלעדי , lit., not to me, nothing for me) only what the young men (Abram's men) have eaten, and the portion of my allies...let them take their portion: "i.e., his followers should receive what had been consumed as their share, and the allies should have the remainder of the booty.

Of the property belonging to the king of Sodom, which he had taken from the enemy, Abram would not keep the smallest part, because he would not have anything in common with Sodom. On the other hand, he accepted from Salem's priest and king, Melchizedek, not only bread and wine for the invigoration of the exhausted warriors, but a priestly blessing also, and gave him in return the tenth of all his booty, as a sign that he acknowledged this king as a priest of the living God, and submitted to his royal priesthood. In this self-subordination of Abram to Melchizedek there was the practical prediction of a royal priesthood which is higher than the priesthood entrusted to Abram's descendants, the sons of Levi, and foreshadowed in the noble form of Melchizedek, who blessed as king and priest the patriarch whom God had called to be a blessing to all the families of the earth. The name of this royal priest is full of meaning: Melchizedek , i.e., King of Righteousness. Even though, judging from Jos 10:1, Jos 10:3, where a much later king is called Adonizedek , i.e., Lord of Righteousness, this name may have been a standing title of the ancient kings of Salem, it no doubt originated with a king who ruled his people in righteousness, and was perfectly appropriate in the case of the Melchizedek mentioned here. There is no less significance in the name of the seat of his government, Salem , the peaceful or peace, since it shows that the capital of its kings was a citadel of peace, not only as a natural stronghold, but through the righteousness of its sovereign; for which reason David chose it as the seat of royalty in Israel; and Moriah, which formed part of it, was pointed out to Abraham by Jehovah as the place of sacrifice for the kingdom of God which was afterwards to be established. And, lastly, there was something very significant in the appearance in the midst of the degenerate tribes of Canaan of this king of righteousness, and priest of the true God of heaven and earth, without any account of his descent, or of the beginning and end of his life; so that he stands forth in the Scriptures, "without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days nor end of life."Although it by no means follows from this, however, that Melchizedek was a celestial being (the Logos, or an angel), or one of the primeval patriarchs (Enoch or Shem), as Church fathers, Rabbins, and others have conjectured, and we can see in him nothing more than one, perhaps the last, of the witnesses and confessors of the early revelation of God, coming out into the light of history from the dark night of heathenism; yet this appearance does point to a priesthood of universal significance, and to a higher order of things, which existed at the commencement of the world, and is one day to be restored again. In all these respects, the noble form of this king of Salem and priest of the Most High God was a type of the God-King and eternal High Priest Jesus Christ; a thought which is expanded in Heb 7 on the basis of this account, and of the divine utterance revealed to David in the Spirit, that the King of Zion sitting at the right hand of Jehovah should be a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek (Psa 110:4).

Constable: Gen 11:27--Exo 1:1

II. PATRIARCHAL NARRATIVES 11:27--50:26

One of the significant changes in the emphasis that occurs at this point in Genesis is from cursing in the primeval record to blessing in the patriarchal narratives. The Abrahamic Covenant is most important in this respect. How Abram's family gained these blessings unfolds. Israel could, and we can, identify with their experiences.

"Chapters 1-11 are set in Babylonia; chs. 12-36 are set in Palestine; chs. 37-50 are set in Egypt. (The same kind of tripartite geographical focus emerges from Exodus: [1] 1:1-12:36, in Egypt; [2] 12:37-18:27, to Sinai; [3] 19:1-40:38, at Sinai.) In other words, each part of the Mediterranean world is highlighted in some part of Genesis. The crucial center section of Genesis (chs. 12-36) is bracketed geographically by two sections of the Near Eastern world with whose history that of Israel would be constantly interlocked. . . .

"In chs. 1-11 we read of individuals who had land, but are either losing it or being expelled from it. In chs. 12-50 the emphasis is on individuals who do not have land, but are on the way toward it. One group is losing; another group is expecting.

"Genesis is moving us progressively from generation (chs. 1-2), to degeneration (chs. 3-11), to regeneration (chs. 12-50)."³⁹³

Chapters 1-11 present a structural pattern that carries over into the rest of the Pentateuch.

"The importance of Genesis 1-11 for the rest of the Pentateuch can be seen in the fact that its narrative structure provides a pattern by which the author often shapes subsequent pentateuchal narratives. Thus the order and arrangement of the Creation accounts in Genesis 1-2 exhibit the same pattern as the description of the building of the tabernacle (Ex 25-31); the tabernacle is portrayed as a return to the Garden of Eden. The instructions given to Noah for building the ark foreshadow those given to Moses for building the tabernacle. Furthermore, one can demonstrate that whole sections of laws in the Pentateuch have been grouped and arranged in patterns that parallel the narrative structure of Genesis 1-11."³⁹⁴

"The ancient oriental background to Gen 1-11 shows it to be concerned with rather different issues from those that tend to preoccupy modern readers. It is affirming the unity of God in the face of polytheism, his justice rather than his caprice, his power as opposed to his impotence, his concern for mankind rather than his exploitation. And whereas Mesopotamia clung to the wisdom of primeval man, Genesis records his sinful disobedience. Because as Christians we tend to assume these points in our theology, we often fail to recognize the striking originality of the message of Gen 1-11 and concentrate on subsidiary points that may well be of less moment."³⁹⁵

Some notable changes take place in the second part of Genesis. Instead of the genealogies being prominent and the stories secondary, as in chapters 1-11, the reverse becomes true now. God retreats farther into the background of the events recorded than was the case earlier, and there is corresponding emphasis on the personalities of the patriarchs. The promises to the patriarchs form the central theme of this section, especially those concerning descendants, land, and divine blessing. There also seems to be increasing depth in the moral awareness of the patriarchs as generation follows generation from Abram to Joseph.³⁹⁶

Constable: Gen 11:27--25:12

A. What became of Terah 11:27-25:11

A major theme of the Pentateuch is the partial fulfillment of the promises to the patriarchs. The promises in Genesis 12:1-3 and 7 are the fountainhead from which the rest of the Pentateuch flows.³⁹⁷ Walter Kaiser labeled the three things promised Abram as an heir, a heritage, and an inheritance.³⁹⁸ David Clines called them posterity, relationship with God, and land.³⁹⁹ J. Dwight Pentecost and Robert L. Saucy referred to them as seed, blessing, and land.⁴⁰⁰

God progressively revealed more information about each of these promises. He gave more information about the land promise in 13:15, 17; 15:7-8, 18; 17:8; 24:7; 26:3-4 (plural "lands"); 28:4, 13; 35:12; 48:4; and 50:24. Repetition of the seed promise occurs in 13:15-16; 15:5; 17:2, 5-10, 13, 16, 19-20; 18:18; 21:12; 22:17-18; 26:3-4, 24; 28:13-14; 32:12; 35:11-12; 46:3; and 48:4 and 16.

"A line of successive representative sons of the patriarchs who were regarded as one with the whole group they represented matched the seminal idea already advocated in Genesis 3:15. Furthermore, in the concept of seed' were the two aspects of the seed as a future benefit and the seed as the present beneficiaries of God's temporal and spiritual gifts. Consequently, seed' was always a collective singular noun; never did it appear as a plural noun (e.g., as in sons'). Thereby the seed' was marked as a unit, yet with a flexibility of reference: now to the one person, now to the many descendants of that family. This interchange of reference with its implied corporate solidarity was more than a cultural phenomena or an accident of careless editing; it was part and parcel of its doctrinal intention."⁴⁰¹

The promise of universal blessing recurs in 18:18; 22:18 9 (to Abraham); 26:4 (to Isaac); and 28:14 (to Jacob).⁴⁰²

"While this promissory triad of blessing, seed, and land is the thematic cord binding the Book of Genesis, we find that the counterthemes of fratricide, violence, uncreation, and expulsion are the literary-theological foil for the promissory blessing."⁴⁰³

Genesis 12-50 focuses on the promise of posterity (an heir, seed), though the other promises receive much attention. Exodus and Leviticus center on the promise of worldwide influence (relationship with God, heritage, blessing), and Numbers and Deuteronomy emphasize the promise of real estate (land, inheritance, rest).

In Genesis 12-25 the problems of possessing the land and obtaining an heir dominate the story of Abram's life. How will Abram obtain the land, and who will be Abram's heir? These are the great questions that the thoughtful reader continually asks himself as he reads the story of Abram. At least one of them is central in every incident in his life that God has chosen to record in Genesis. These questions form the unifying theme of the Abram narrative.⁴⁰⁴

One writer called the form in which Moses revealed the Abram cycle of stories an "obstacle story."

"Few literary techniques have enjoyed so universal and perennial a vogue as the obstacle story. It is found in ancient and modern literature from the Gilgamesh epic and the Odyssey to the Perils of Pauline and the latest novel. Its character is episodal in that it is not self-contained but finds its raison d'etre in its relation to the larger story or narrative of which it is a part. Its purpose is to arouse suspense and sustain interest by recounting episodes which threaten or retard the fulfillment of what the reader either suspects or hopes or knows to be the ending of the story."⁴⁰⁵

Twelve crises arise as the story of Abram's life unfolds. Each of these must be overcome and is overcome by God who eventually does provide Abram's descendants. Each of these problems constituted a challenge to Abram's faith. Is God faithful and powerful enough to provide what He has promised? In the end we can see that He is.

Each problem Abram encountered is typical of problems that every believer has to deal with in seeking to live by faith. Consequently each episode in Abram's life teaches us something about God's power and faithfulness and should enable us to live by faith more consistently. Moses originally recorded these lessons for Israel's benefit.

The problems Abram's faith encountered were these.

1. Sarai was barren (11:30).

2. Abram had to leave the Promised Land (12:10).

3. Abram's life was in danger in Egypt (12:11-20).

4. Abram's nephew, Lot, strove with him over the land (ch. 13).

5. Abram entered a war (14:1-16).

6. Abram's life was in danger in the Promised Land (15:1).

7. God ruled Eliezer out as Abram's heir (15:2-3).

8. Hagar, pregnant with Abram's son (heir?), departed (16:6).

9. Abimelech threatened Sarai's reputation and child (heir?) in Gerar (ch. 20).

10. Abram had two heirs (21:8-11).

11. God commanded Abram to slay his heir (ch. 22).

12. Abram could not find a proper wife for his heir (24:5).

". . . the narrator has skillfully woven this material together in such a way as to involve the reader/listener in a drama of increasing tension between, on the one hand, the promise of Yahweh that Abram would have an heir and, indeed, would become the father of many nations, and, on the other, the threat to the fulfillment of this promise by a series of crises."⁴⁰⁶

Constable: Gen 14:1-24

4. Abram's military victory ch. 14

A powerful coalition of kings from Mesopotamia invaded Canaan and in the process took Lot captive. Abram retaliated with a surprise attack at night and recovered Lot and the possessions those kings had taken. Upon his return to his home Abram received a blessing from Melchizedek, king of Salem, and received an offer of reward by the king of Sodom, Bera (v. 2). Abram declined to accept the reward because he did not want to tarnish God's promised blessing of him. Abram's realization that victory and possessions come from God alone enabled him to avoid the danger of accepting gifts from the wicked and to wait for God to provide what He had promised.

Constable: Gen 14:1-16

Abram's war with four kings 14:1-16

A major significance of this literary unit is that it describes two more challenges to God's faithfulness and Abram's faith. So far Abram had had to contend with several barriers to God's fulfilling His promises to him. His wife was barren, he had to leave the land, his life was in danger, and his anticipated heir showed not interest in the Promised Land. Now he became involved in a war and consequently became the target of retaliation by four powerful kings.

14:1-12 The four kings (v. 1) were from the eastern part of the Fertile Crescent. They sought to dominate the land of Canaan by subjugating the five kings (v. 2) who lived there. They probably wanted to keep the trade routes between Mesopotamia and Egypt open and under their control. It is interesting that people living around Babylon initiated this first war mentioned in the Bible (v. 2).

Scholars have debated the identity of the Rephaim (vv. 5; cf. 15:20; literally "ghosts" or "spirits of the dead"). Some believe they were gods, others that they were the deified dead, and still others the promoters of fertility.⁴⁵⁰ Most likely they were one of the early tribal groups that inhabited Canaan when Abram entered the land. They appear to have been very powerful, and apparently some of their neighbors regarded them as superhuman before and or after their heyday.⁴⁵¹

The scene of the battle of the nine kings was the Valley of Siddim (vv. 3, 8). This valley probably lay in the southern "bay" of the modern Dead Sea south of the Lissan Peninsula.

14:13-16 Abram could have lost his possessions and his life by getting involved in war with the Mesopotamian kings. He also set himself up as the target for retaliation. Almost everyone in the ancient Near East practiced retaliation, and it is still a major factor in the continuing political turmoil that characterizes the Middle East to this day. People did not forgive and forget; they harbored resentment for acts committed against their ancestors or themselves for generations and took revenge when they thought they could succeed.

Why was Abram willing to take such risks? He probably thought he could win. His love for Lot may have been the primary factor. Perhaps Abram hoped that Lot had learned his lesson living in Sodom and would return to him. Unfortunately Lot had not learned his lesson but returned to Sodom soon after his release as a prisoner of war. Undoubtedly Abram also had confidence in God's promises to him (12:2-3, 7).

"We have here a prelude of the future assault of the worldly power upon the kingdom of God established in Canaan; and the importance of this event to sacred history consists in the fact, that the kings of the valley of Jordan and the surrounding country submitted to the worldly power, whilst Abram, on the contrary, with his home-born servants, smote the conquerors and rescued their booty,--a prophetic sign that in the conflict with the power of the world the seed of Abram would not only not be subdued, but would be able to rescue from destruction those who appealed to it for aid."⁴⁵²

Some scholars have suggested that Abram's designation as a Hebrew (v. 13) marked him as a resident alien rather than a semi-nomad. As such he took steps to take possession of the land God had promised him.⁴⁵³ He could have been both.⁴⁵⁴ Albright argued that he was a "donkeyman, donkey driver, caravaneer."⁴⁵⁵ However most conservative interpreters have concluded that he was a semi-nomadic shepherd.⁴⁵⁶ The term "Hebrew" is primarily an ethnic designation in the Old Testament.⁴⁵⁷ Usually people other than Hebrews used it to describe this ethnic group.

The situation that Abraham faced taking his 318 men and going into battle against an alliance of five armies was similar to the one Gideon faced in leading 300 men against 135,000 Midianites (Judg. 7:6; 8:10). The lesson of both passages is similar: God is able to give a trusting and obedient minority victory over ungodly forces that are overwhelmingly superior in numbers.

Constable: Gen 14:17-24

Abram's meeting with two kings 14:17-24

This section records an important decision Abram had to make after he returned victoriously from his battle with the Mesopotamian kings.

14:17 The "valley of Shaveh" was near Jerusalem (the Salem of verse 18). It may have been the Kidron Valley immediately east of the city or some other valley not far away.

14:18 "Melchizedek" was probably a title rather than a proper name. It means "King of Righteousness."⁴⁵⁸ However theophoric names were common in the ancient Near East, so his name may have meant "My king is Sedeq" or "Milku is righteous," Sedeq and Milku presumably being the names of gods.⁴⁵⁹ The names of both the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah (v. 2) are compounds of a Hebrew word translated "evil" (cf. 13:13).

Bread and wine were the royal food and drink of the day. Many writers have commented on their typical significance. Many ancient Near Easterners used them in making covenants.⁴⁶⁰ Melchizedek, the first priest mentioned in the Bible, evidently gave a royal banquet in Abram's honor. In view of their characters and geographical proximity, Abram and Melchizedek may have been friends before this meeting. Melchizedek may have been Abram's king to whom the patriarch was paying an expected obligation.⁴⁶¹

14:19 The God Melchizedek worshipped as a priest was the true God known to him as El Elyon, the possessor of heaven and earth. This title reveals the sovereign power of God. Melchizedek and Abram regarded Abram's recent victory in battle as due to the blessing of El Elyon.

14:20 People practiced tithing as an act of worship commonly in the ancient Near East at this time (cf. 28:22).⁴⁶² It was also a common tax.⁴⁶³ However since Melchizedek gave Abram a priestly blessing, it is likely that Abram reciprocated by giving Melchizedek a gift with priestly connotations.⁴⁶⁴ "All" probably refers to all that he took in the battle rather than all that was in Abram's possession (cf. vv. 23-24; Heb. 7:4).

14:21-24 Abram identified El Elyon with Yahweh (v. 22). His willingness to take no spoil from the battle for himself demonstrates Abram's desire that God would receive all the glory for his prosperity. He also appears not to have wanted to be indebted to the wicked king of Sodom. This man may have by his offer to Abram been setting him up for demands later (cf. 23:15).

"The gifts of the ungodly are often attached to deadly strings."⁴⁶⁵

Generally, the patriarchs believed that God would give them what He had promised without their having to take it from others.⁴⁶⁶ Abram was content with what God had given him.

". . . just as in the previous episode where Abram allowed Lot the pick of the land, so here he allows the surly king of Sodom more than his due."⁴⁶⁷

"Christians are really so rich in their own inheritance that it ill becomes them to crave the possessions of others."⁴⁶⁸

This event is significant because it demonstrates Abram's trust in God to provide what He had promised, which God soon rewarded with another revelation and promise (15:1).

"Even without the explicit warning that he who disdains you I shall curse,' the narrative suggests that it is dangerous to despise those through whom God works.

"It is the demonstration of divine support for Abram that is the clearest thrust of this story. . . .

"Within Genesis, however, Melchizedek is primarily an example of a non-Jew who recognizes God's hand at work in Israel . . . They are those who have discovered that in Abram all the families of the earth find blessing."⁴⁶⁹

The writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews expounded the typical significance of Melchizedek and the events of this incident in Hebrews 7 (cf. Ps. 110:4).

Confidence that God will preserve and provide for His own as He has promised should encourage believers to decline worldly benefits and wait for God's blessings.

Guzik: Gen 14:1-24

Genesis 14 - Abram Rescues Lot and Meets Melchizedek

A. Abram rescues Lot from the confederacy of kings.

1. (1-10) The four kings of the cities in the region of Sodom and Gomorrah rebel against the confederation of five kings of nations ruling over them.

And it came to pass in the days of Amraphel king of Shinar, Arioch king of Ellasar, Chedorlaomer king of Elam, and Tidal king of nations, that they made war with Bera king of Sodom, Birsha king of Gomorrah, Shinab king of Admah, Shemeber king of Zeboiim, and the king of Bela (that is, Zoar). All these joined together in the Valley of Siddim (that is, the Salt Sea). Twelve years they served Chedorlaomer, and in the thirteenth year they rebelled. In the fourteenth year Chedorlaomer and the kings that were with him came and attacked the Rephaim in Ashteroth Karnaim, the Zuzim in Ham, the Emim in Shaveh Kiriathaim, and the Horites in their mountain of Seir, as far as El Paran, which is by the wilderness. Then they turned back and came to En Mishpat (that is, Kadesh), and attacked all the country of the Amalekites, and also the Amorites who dwelt in Hazezon Tamar. And the king of Sodom, the king of Gomorrah, the king of Admah, the king of Zeboiim, and the king of Bela (that is, Zoar) went out and joined together in battle in the Valley of Siddim against Chedorlaomer king of Elam, Tidal king of nations, Amraphel king of Shinar, and Arioch king of Ellasar; four kings against five. Now the Valley of Siddim was full of asphalt pits; and the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah fled; some fell there, and the remainder fled to the mountains.

a. Chedorlaomer and the kings that were with him came and attacked: Archaeologist Nelson Glueck documents the destruction left by these kings: "I found that every village in their path had been plundered and left in ruins, and the countryside was laid waste. The population had been wiped out or led away into captivity. For hundreds of years thereafter, the entire area was like an abandoned cemetery, hideously unkempt, with all its monuments shattered and strewn in pieces on the ground."

b. Now the Valley of Siddim was full of asphalt pits: The Hebrew here is a good example of how the language uses repetition to show emphasis. "The Hebrew way of saying full of bitumen pits is: pits, pits of bitumen. Repetition expresses abundance, plenitude, etc." (Leupold)

2. (11-12) In the course of their attack, the five kings take Lot and all his possessions.

Then they took all the goods of Sodom and Gomorrah, and all their provisions, and went their way. They also took Lot, Abram's brother's son who dwelt in Sodom, and his goods, and departed.

a. They also took Lot: Now, the confederacy of five kings has involved Abram. Because Abram is a man of honor, he will fight for his nephew.

b. And his goods: Since Lot was living among the wicked people of Sodom, we are not surprised he is taken captive also. "Those believers who conform to the world must expect to suffer for it." (Spurgeon)

3. (13-14) Abram hears of Lot's captivity and marshals an army.

Then one who had escaped came and told Abram the Hebrew, for he dwelt by the terebinth trees of Mamre the Amorite, brother of Eshcol and brother of Aner; and they were allies with Abram. Now when Abram heard that his brother was taken captive, he armed his three hundred and eighteen trained servants who were born in his own house, and went in pursuit as far as Dan.

a. Abraham the Hebrew: This is the first use of Hebrew in the Bible. "The word Hebrew comes from a root that means passed over. The Septuagint translates it the passenger." (Barnhouse)

b. He armed his three hundred and eighteen trained servants: We see the great wealth of Abram; any man who can assemble 318 servants capable of fighting must be very rich.

c. Trained servants: Abram was a man who walked in faith, yet he was also a prudent man. Abram kept his own personal army, and he apparently kept them trained and ready to defend his interests.

d. Went in pursuit as far as Dan: Abram's army pursues the confederacy of five kings far a long distance to the north. The city of Dan is all the way up at the northern border of Israel.

4. (15-17) Abram leads his army to victory over the five kings.

He divided his forces against them by night, and he and his servants attacked them and pursued them as far as Hobah, which is north of Damascus. So he brought back all the goods, and also brought back his brother Lot and his goods, as well as the women and the people. And the king of Sodom went out to meet him at the Valley of Shaveh (that is, the King's Valley), after his return from the defeat of Chedorlaomer and the kings who were with him.

a. He divided his forces against them by night: Abram had military wisdom. Using the clever tactic of a night attack with his army split into two groups, he succeeds in rescuing Lot and recovering all the booty seized by the confederacy of the five kings.

b. Also brought back his brother Lot and his goods: Unfortunately, Lot will move right back to where he was in Sodom. He refuses this warning from God, and he will eventually lose everything when Sodom and Gomorrah are judged.

B. Abram and Melchizedek.

1. (18-20) Abram meets Melchizedek.

Then Melchizedek king of Salem brought out bread and wine; he was the priest of God Most High. And he blessed him and said: "Blessed be Abram of God Most High, possessor of heaven and earth; and blessed be God Most High, who has delivered your enemies into your hand." And he gave him a tithe of all.

a. Then Melchizedek: We have no idea of where Melchizedek came from, how he came to be in Canaan, how he came to be a worshipper and priest of the true God, and how Abram came to know about him. We only know he was there.

b. Melchizedek king of Salem: The name Melchizedek means "king of righteousness." He is the king of Salem, and Salem is the original Jerusalem, and Melchizedek is the priest of God Most High. He is a worshipper and priest of the true God, ruling over Jerusalem even in those ancient times.

i. One thing making Melchizedek unique is he is both a king and a priest. History shows how dangerous it is to combine religious and civic authority. God forbade the kings of Israel to be priests and the priests to be kings (In 2 Chronicles 26:16-26, King Uzziah tried to do the work of priest, and God struck him with leprosy), but here is an exception.

ii. And Melchizedek is the priest of God Most High. El Elyon means "Highest God," like saying "Supreme Being." We should never settle for a "higher power"; we should serve the Highest Power.

c. Brought out bread and wine: Melchizedek served Abram bread and wine. Perhaps he even served them in a manner looking forward to our redeeming sacrifice, as the bread and wine of Passover and the Lord's table look at our redeeming sacrifice, Jesus Christ.

d. He was the priest of God Most High: Melchizedek, as priest, did two things. He blessed Abram and he blessed God. Melchizedek shows a priest must connect with both God and man and has a ministry to both God and man.

i. Though Melchizedek seems like an obscure figure, he figures to be a very important Old Testament person. Psalm 110:4 says the priesthood of the Messiah is a priesthood according to the order of Melchizedek, as opposed to being of the order of Aaron. Hebrews chapters 5 through 7 makes a great deal of this idea.

ii. Hebrews 7:3 describes Melchizedek as without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but made like the Son of God, remains a priest continually. Because of this passage, some have thought Melchizedek is actually a pre-Bethlehem appearance of Jesus.

iii. Others have suggested he is Seth, Noah's son, or Job, or an angel; or even some have fancifully speculated Melchizedek is an outer-space visitor, an "unfallen Adam" from another planet, sent to observe the progress of God's work of redemption for this fallen race.

iv. "The question cannot be said to be settled completely . . . otherwise, the identity of Melchizedek would have been agreed on by Bible scholars long ago." (Morris) But we can, at the very least, say he was a remarkable type or picture of Jesus.

e. And he gave him a tithe of all: Abram gave unto the LORD, through Melchizedek, a tithe of all. This refers to one tenth of his assets, not his income.

i. It is almost as if Abram and Melchizedek worked to see who could bless the other more. Melchizedek blessed Abram out of his resources, and Abram blessed Melchizedek out of his resources. This is a great attitude for us to have in the body of Christ.

2. (21-24) Abram refuses the booty from the battle.

Now the king of Sodom said to Abram, "Give me the persons, and take the goods for yourself." But Abram said to the king of Sodom, "I have raised my hand to the LORD, God Most High, the Possessor of heaven and earth, that I will take nothing, from a thread to a sandal strap, and that I will not take anything that is yours, lest you should say, 'I have made Abram rich'; except only what the young men have eaten, and the portion of the men who went with me: Aner, Eshcol, and Mamre; let them take their portion."

a. Take the goods for yourself: As seemed proper, the king of Sodom wanted to reward Abram for all he did in recovering what was taken by the confederation of five kings, and he offered Abram a tremendous amount of booty.

b. I will take nothing: Yet, Abram will not take it - because of a vow he has made to God Most High - a phrase he uses after hearing Melchizedek use this particular title for God (Genesis 14:19).

c. Lest you should say, "I have made Abram rich": Abram refused the spoil because he would let no man say a man had made Abram rich. Abram demanded all the credit go to God and God alone.

i. When we are willing to pursue human measures of success in the flesh through worldly, fleshly methods, how can we really say God has given success, if it should come? How much better to let God raise you up, so He gets the glory, and so you know it was His work.

d. Let them take their portion: However, at the same time, Abram does not impose his scruples on his Amorite allies (Genesis 14:13). They are entitled to as much of the spoil as is appropriate.

© 2006 David Guzik - No distribution beyond personal use without permission

Commentary -- Other

Bible Query: Gen 14:1-17

Q: In Gen 14:1-17, is there any extra-Biblical evidence for Sodom, Gomorrah, and the other cities?

A: Yes. There used to be none until archaeologists found the Ebla tables. They mention si-dam-mu (Sodom) and sa-ba-i-im (Zeboiim). (Julius Africanus 200-245 A.D.) calls this Seboim.) For a discussion of the Ebla tablets see Ready with an Answer : For the Tough Questions About God p.282-286.

Bible Query: Gen 14:1-2

Q: In Gen 14:1-2, who are these kings?

A: This occurred around 2000 B.C., so it is not surprising we cannot find some of these rulers. However, Elam was a major power, having conquered Abram’s city of Ur around 2004 B.C. Shinar is the word the both the Old Testament and Egyptians used for Babylonia. Chederlaomer sounds like kudur (Elamite for servant) and Lagamar (Elamite goddess). Cheder (=Kudur) was the first part of the name of many Elamite kings. Tidal seems related to the Hittite name Tudhaliya, and there were at least five later Hittite kings named Tudhaliya. Towns of Si-da-mu (Sodom) and I-ma-ar (Gomorrah) are mentioned in the Ebla tablets, written 2400-2250 B.C. We do not have a record of Arioch of Ellasar, but there is independent historical evidence of a king Ariochu of Larsa, a major Sumerian city. Also, History of Israel p.61 says that Arriyuk(ki) or Arriwuk(ki) is know in both Mari and Nuzi as a Hurrian name. See When Critics Ask p.46-47 and Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties p.90-91 for more info.

According to John Warwick Montgomery in Evidence for Faith p.157, people formerly identified Amraphel with Hammurabi, but this is incorrect. He also says that Arioch is preferred over Ariochu, because Arioch was a common name of that time. It was a Hurrian name, also a name of a king of Mari (about 1750 B.C.), and in the tablets at the city of Nuzi (1500 B.C.) Since it was a common name, any number of kings from any number of minor provinces unknown to the modern world.

In summary, these names are very strange; the names were generally never used, - except during this narrow time period. It is highly unlikely anyone would have gotten these names, unless they had accurate knowledge of history at this time.

Bible Query: Gen 14:1-2

Q: In Gen 14:1-2, how could you have "confederacies" of kings fighting?

A: There would be very few confederacies of kings prior to the fall of the strong city-state of Ur in 2004 B.C. There would be very few confederacies after the rise of Hammurabi of Old Babylon around 1700 B.C. However, between the time the Elamites destroyed Ur in 2004 B.C., and the Elamites raided Babylon in 1725 B.C., Montgomery notes that confederacies were common.

Nobody in Moses time would try to make up a credible-sounding history of confederacies of kings, because monolithic Empires predominated. For someone to mention confederacies like this shows that he had an accurate knowledge of that time-period. According to Evidence for Faith p.157-164, a letter found at Mari mentions coalitions of ten, fifteen, and twenty kings. In addition, at least five other confederacies are known. See 735 Baffling Bible Questions Answered p.35-36 for more info.

Bible Query: Gen 14:1

Q: In Gen 14:1, how do you pronounce the name "Chederlaomer"?

A: Cruden’s Concordance says it is "ked-ur-la-o-mer", with the u and first e short, the last e with a tilde over it, and the a and o long. The accents are on the first and third syllables. The Wycliffe Bible Dictionary and Harper’s Bible Dictionary. It says the same, except that it places the accents on the first and fourth syllables.   In general, in the Old Testament "ch" is pronounced as "k", with cherubim being an exception. When in doubt on accents, the accent usually falls on the first syllable.

Bible Query: Gen 14:5

Q: In Gen 14:5, what does Ashteroth-Karnaim mean?

A: There are two possibilities according to both the Wycliffe Bible Dictionary p.160 and the New Bible Dictionary (Eerdmans’ 1962) p.97.

1. It could possibly mean Ashtarte of the two horns, since this goddess was shown wearing two horns at Gezer and Beth-Shan.

2. It more probably means the town Ashteroth which is near Karnaim, to distinguish it from other towns names after the goddess.      Q: In Gen 14:5-6, 36:20, and Dt 2:12,22, who are the Horites?

A: The Horites came from modern-day Armenia, according to the Archaeological Encyclopedia of the Holy Land p.176. They were first mentioned in the time of Sargon of Akkad in the 24th century B.C..

Bible Query: Gen 14:7

Q: In Gen 14:7, how do you pronounce the word "Amalekite"?

A: Cruden’s Concordance says it is pronounced as "AM-a-le-kit" with the "i" and second "a" long, and the accent on the first syllable. Harper’s Bible Dictionary has only with "i" with a long vowel, and the accent is also on the first syllable. The Wycliffe Bible Dictionary says the accent is on the second syllable.

Bible Query: Gen 14:14

Q: In Gen 14:14, how could Abram and his allies, only 318 men, defeat an invading army of an alliance of 4 great kings?

A: Genesis 14:15 suggests this was not a pitched battle. It was probably a surprise night attack by mounted troops on an unprepared army. Of course, God may have helped too.

Bible Query: Gen 14:14

Q: In Gen 14:14, how does Abram’s raid compare to other surprise attacks in history?

A: The army apparently retreated from Dan to Damascus, around 40 miles (64 km) away, so Abram’s army won "the field of battle". Let’s look at surprise attacks, attacks against larger armies, and finally let’s look at it from the enemies’ perspective. Some of these numbers are from the Encyclopedia Britannica.  

First we will look at surprise attacks.  

In the Battle of San Jacinto in 1836, Sam Houston and 743 raw troops made a raid in the daytime against 1,800 Mexican troops and won.   In the Battle of Trenton, Washington crossed the Delaware at night surprising the Hessian mercenaries and capturing 1,000 of them.  

At Teutoberg Wald, Arminius the German kills 14,000 seasoned Roman troops in a surprise battle.  

Now let’s look at victories against great odds.  

At the Battle of Marathon in 490 B.C., 10,000 Greeks defeated 20,000 Persians.   At Canae in 216 B.C., 56,000 Carthaginians (with effectively used cavalry) defeat 86,000 Romans.  

At al-Qadissiyat in 636/7 A.D., 30,000 Muslims defeat 120,000 Persians.

At Pharsalus in 48 B.C., Julius Caesar and 20,000 troops defeated Pompey and 45,000 troops.

At Dorylaeum in 1091, 70,000 Crusaders defeated 250,000 Muslims, killing about 30,000 of them. (The Crusaders had armor, but then again Abram’s soldiers might have had armor while the invading army had taken theirs off.)   Alexander the Great against the Persians, Julius Caesar against the Gauls and the Helvetians, Belisarius, Napoleon, and others also defeated vastly superior forces, though on a larger scale. We do not have the numbers for these armies, except that Julius only had 10,000 men when he invaded England.

The enemies’ perspective: Suppose you are an Elamite soldier, picked to be a part of an elite group to go on a mission far away to punish Sodom. You know there are a large number of the enemy just outside your tent, but they are captives; unarmed and well-guarded. In the middle of the night you are awakened by mounted troops from a new, unknown enemy swooping in and killing your comrades. Not only are they doing that, but if they run off your animals, or free and arm the captives, then you are doomed. You do the sensible thing and flee in the opposite direction of the attack, regrouping with your comrades later.   Of course, apart from all these factors, God likely aided Abram’s troops to cause panic and route the enemy. For an even greater example of God aiding a successful surprise attack, see the battle of Gideon and the Midianites in Judges 7:6-25.

Bible Query: Gen 14:18-19

Q: In Gen 14:18-19, how could Melchizedek, presumably a cursed Canaanite, be in a position to bless Abraham?

A: Melchizedek is a mysterious person in the Bible. Some think Melchizedek was pre-incarnate appearance of Christ. Others say Melchizedek was a godly man (perhaps Canaanite or perhaps not) who was simply a type of Christ. Even if Melchizedek were a Canaanite man, God is not restricted from teaching and sanctifying people of any nationality. See Hard Sayings of the Bible p.120-121 and 735 Baffling Bible Questions Answered p.35-36 for more info.

As a side note, the Jewish sect at Qumran placed great importance on Melchizedek as a heavenly deliver, who will proclaim God’s salvation. See the Wycliffe Bible Dictionary p.441 for more info.

Bible Query: Gen 14:18

Q: In Gen 14:18, how old is the city of Jerusalem?

A: We think it was founded about 3000 B.C. Asimov’s Guide to the Bible p.74 says that early Egyptian chronicles call the city "Urusalim", which implies that the "salem" part of Jerusalem goes back as least as far as the "Jebus" part.

Bible Query: Gen 14:18

Q: Does Gen 14:18 teach a "Melchizedek priesthood" of people as Mormons teach?

A: No. Genesis 14 only mentions one individual named Melchizedek. Hebrews 7:23-24 says this Melchizedek was a type of Jesus. Nothing in the Bible suggests we need any more priests today besides Jesus. See When Cultists Ask p.27-28 for more info.

Bible Query: Gen 14:23

Q: In Gen 14:23 (KJV), why are shoe latchlets mentioned, when they did not have shoes with latchlets back then?

A: This King James Version expression is better translated "sandal thongs".

Critics Ask: Gen 14:1

GENESIS 14 —Is the account of Abraham’s defeat of the Mesopotamian kings historically reliable?

PROBLEM: Genesis presents this battle as factually true. But, according to the Documentary Hypothesis of biblical criticism, this story is a later addition and totally fictitious.

SOLUTION: We possess very little information about this period apart from Genesis itself. As a result, while we do not have direct archaeological confirmation, there is no good reason to doubt the event. Such doubt usually stems from an anti-biblical bias.

Furthermore, there is indirect support for the validity of this account. Noted archaeologist W.F. Albright has observed that, “In spite of our failure hitherto to fix the historical horizon of chapter 14 , we may be certain that its contents are very ancient. There are several words and expressions found nowhere else in the Bible and are now known to belong to the second millennium [ B .C. ]. The names of the towns in Transjordania are also known to be very ancient” (Alleman and Flack, Old Testament Commentary, Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1954, 14). In light of this, there is no good reason to doubt the authenticity of the biblical account of Abraham’s battle with these Mesopotamian kings.   

Critics Ask: Gen 14:18

GENESIS 14:18-20 —Who was Melchizedek?

PROBLEM: There is some debate over the nature of Melchizedek. Was he a historical person, a super-normal being, or just a mythical figure?

SOLUTION: Based on Hebrews 7 , some have interpreted Melchizedek as being an angel or even an appearance of Christ. This is not likely since the author of Hebrews was using Melchizedek to be a type of Christ. In Genesis, Melchizedek is presented in an ordinary, historical manner. He meets and speaks with Abraham in an ordinary manner. There is no reason, archaeological or otherwise, to question the historical character of Melchizedek.   

Critics Ask: Gen 14:19

GENESIS 14:18-20 —Who was Melchizedek?

PROBLEM: There is some debate over the nature of Melchizedek. Was he a historical person, a super-normal being, or just a mythical figure?

SOLUTION: Based on Hebrews 7 , some have interpreted Melchizedek as being an angel or even an appearance of Christ. This is not likely since the author of Hebrews was using Melchizedek to be a type of Christ. In Genesis, Melchizedek is presented in an ordinary, historical manner. He meets and speaks with Abraham in an ordinary manner. There is no reason, archaeological or otherwise, to question the historical character of Melchizedek.   

Critics Ask: Gen 14:20

GENESIS 14:18-20 —Who was Melchizedek?

PROBLEM: There is some debate over the nature of Melchizedek. Was he a historical person, a super-normal being, or just a mythical figure?

SOLUTION: Based on Hebrews 7 , some have interpreted Melchizedek as being an angel or even an appearance of Christ. This is not likely since the author of Hebrews was using Melchizedek to be a type of Christ. In Genesis, Melchizedek is presented in an ordinary, historical manner. He meets and speaks with Abraham in an ordinary manner. There is no reason, archaeological or otherwise, to question the historical character of Melchizedek.   

Introduction / Outline

JFB: Genesis (Book Introduction)

GENESIS, the book of the origin or production of all things, consists of two parts: the first, comprehended in the first through eleventh chapters, gives a general history; the second, contained in the subsequent chapters, gives a special history. The two parts are essentially connected; the one, which sets out with an account of the descent of the human race from a single pair, the introduction of sin into the world, and the announcement of the scheme of divine mercy for repairing the ruins of the fall, was necessary to pave the way for relating the other, namely, the call of Abraham, and the selection of his posterity for carrying out the gracious purpose of God. An evident unity of method, therefore, pervades this book, and the information contained in it was of the greatest importance to the Hebrew people, as without it they could not have understood the frequent references made in their law to the purposes and promises of God regarding themselves. The arguments that have been already adduced as establishing the Mosaic origin of the Pentateuch prove of course that Moses was the author of Genesis. The few passages on which the rationalists grounded their assertions that it was the composition of a later age have been successfully shown to warrant no such conclusion; the use of Egyptian words and the minute acquaintance with Egyptian life and manners, displayed in the history of Joseph, harmonize with the education of Moses, and whether he received his information by immediate revelation, from tradition, or from written documents, it comes to us as the authentic work of an author who wrote as he was inspired by the Holy Ghost (2Pe 1:21).

JFB: Genesis (Outline)

• THE CREATION OF HEAVEN AND EARTH. (Gen 1:1-2)
• THE FIRST DAY. (Gen 1:3-5)
• SECOND DAY. (Gen 1:6-8)
• THIRD DAY. (Gen 1:9-13)
• FOURTH DAY. (Gen 1:14-19)
• FIFTH DAY. The signs of animal life appeared in the waters and in the air. (Gen 1:20-23)
• SIXTH DAY. A farther advance was made by the creation of terrestrial animals, all the various species of which are included in three classes: (1) cattle, the herbivorous kind capable of labor or domestication. (Gen 1:24-31)
• THE NARRATIVE OF THE SIX DAYS' CREATION CONTINUED. The course of the narrative is improperly broken by the division of the chapter. (Gen 2:1)
• THE FIRST SABBATH. (Gen 2:2-7)
• THE GARDEN OF EDEN. ( Gen 8-17)
• THE MAKING OF WOMAN, AND INSTITUTION OF MARRIAGE. (Gen 2:18-25)
• THE TEMPTATION. (Gen 3:1-5)
• THE FALL. (Gen 3:6-9)
• THE EXAMINATION. (Gen 3:10-13)
• THE SENTENCE. (Gen 3:14-24)
• BIRTH OF CAIN AND ABEL. (Gen. 4:1-26)
• GENEALOGY OF THE PATRIARCHS. (Gen. 5:1-32)
• WICKEDNESS OF THE WORLD. (Gen. 6:1-22)
• ENTRANCE INTO THE ARK. (Gen. 7:1-24)
• ASSUAGING OF THE WATERS. (Gen 8:1-14)
• DEPARTURE FROM THE ARK. (Gen 8:15-22)
• COVENANT. (Gen 9:1-7)
• RAINBOW. (Gen. 9:8-29)
• GENEALOGIES. (Gen. 10:1-32)
• CONFUSION OF TONGUES. (Gen. 11:1-32) the whole earth was of one language. The descendants of Noah, united by the strong bond of a common language, had not separated, and notwithstanding the divine command to replenish the earth, were unwilling to separate. The more pious and well-disposed would of course obey the divine will; but a numerous body, seemingly the aggressive horde mentioned (Gen 10:10), determined to please themselves by occupying the fairest region they came to.
• CALL TO ABRAM. (Gen. 12:1-20)
• RETURN FROM EGYPT. (Gen. 13:1-18)
• WAR. (Gen. 14:1-24)
• DIVINE ENCOURAGEMENT. (Gen. 15:1-21)
• BESTOWMENT OF HAGAR. (Gen. 16:1-16)
• RENEWAL OF THE COVENANT. (Gen. 17:1-27)
• ENTERTAINMENT OF ANGELS. (Gen 18:1-8)
• REPROOF OF SARAH. An inquiry about his wife, so surprising in strangers, the subject of conversation, and the fulfilment of the fondly cherished promise within a specified time, showed Abraham that he had been entertaining more than ordinary travellers (Heb 13:2). (Gen 18:9-15)
• DISCLOSURE OF SODOM'S DOOM. (Gen 18:16-22)
• ABRAHAM'S INTERCESSION. (Gen 18:23-33)
• LOT'S ENTERTAINMENT. (Gen. 19:1-38)
• ABRAHAM'S DENIAL OF HIS WIFE. (Gen. 20:1-18)
• BIRTH OF ISAAC. (Gen 21:1-13)
• EXPULSION OF ISHMAEL. (Gen 21:14-21)
• COVENANT. (Gen 21:22-34)
• OFFERING ISAAC. (Gen. 22:1-19)
• AGE AND DEATH OF SARAH. (Gen 23:1-2)
• PURCHASE OF A BURYING-PLACE. (Gen. 23:3-20)
• A MARRIAGE COMMISSION. (Gen 24:1-9)
• THE JOURNEY. (Gen. 24:10-67)
• SONS OF ABRAHAM. (Gen 25:1-6)
• DEATH OF ABRAHAM. (Gen 25:7-11)
• DESCENDANTS OF ISHMAEL. Before passing to the line of the promised seed, the historian gives a brief notice of Ishmael, to show that the promises respecting that son of Abraham were fulfilled--first, in the greatness of his posterity (compare Gen 17:20); and, secondly, in their independence. (Gen 25:12-18)
• HISTORY OF ISAAC. (Gen 25:19-34)
• SOJOURN IN GERAR. (Gen. 26:1-35)
• INFIRMITY OF ISAAC. (Gen. 27:1-27)
• THE BLESSING. (Gen. 27:28-46)
• JACOB'S DEPARTURE. (Gen. 28:1-19)
• JACOB'S VOW. (Gen 28:20-22)
• THE WELL OF HARAN. (Gen. 29:1-35)
• DOMESTIC JEALOUSIES. (Gen. 30:1-24)
• JACOB'S COVENANT WITH LABAN. (Gen. 30:25-43)
• ENVY OF LABAN AND SONS. (Gen. 31:1-21)
• LABAN PURSUES JACOB--THEIR COVENANT AT GILEAD. (Gen. 31:22-55)
• VISION OF ANGELS. (Gen 32:1-2)
• MISSION TO ESAU. (Gen 32:3-32)
• KINDNESS OF JACOB AND ESAU. (Gen 33:1-11)
• THE PARTING. (Gen 33:12-20)
• THE DISHONOR OF DINAH. (Gen. 34:1-31) Though freed from foreign troubles, Jacob met with a great domestic calamity in the fall of his only daughter. According to JOSEPHUS, she had been attending a festival; but it is highly probable that she had been often and freely mixing in the society of the place and that she, being a simple, inexperienced, and vain young woman, had been flattered by the attentions of the ruler's son. There must have been time and opportunities of acquaintance to produce the strong attachment that Shechem had for her.
• REMOVAL TO BETHEL. (Gen 35:1-15)
• BIRTH OF BENJAMIN--DEATH OF RACHEL, &c. (Gen 35:16-27)
• DEATH OF ISAAC. (Gen 35:28-29)
• POSTERITY OF ESAU. (Gen. 36:1-43)
• PARENTAL PARTIALITY. (Gen 37:1-4)
• THE DREAMS OF JOSEPH. (Gen. 37:5-36)
• JUDAH AND FAMILY. (Gen. 38:1-30)
• JOSEPH IN POTIPHAR'S HOUSE. (Gen. 39:1-23)
• TWO STATE PRISONERS. (Gen 40:1-8)
• THE BUTLER'S DREAM. (Gen 40:9-15)
• THE BAKER'S DREAM. (Gen 40:16-23)
• PHARAOH'S DREAM. (Gen. 41:1-24)
• JOSEPH INTERPRETS PHARAOH'S DREAMS. (Gen 41:25-36)
• JOSEPH MADE RULER OF EGYPT. (Gen. 41:37-57)
• JOURNEY INTO EGYPT. (Gen. 42:1-38)
• PREPARATIONS FOR A SECOND JOURNEY TO EGYPT. (Gen 43:1-14)
• ARRIVAL IN EGYPT. (Gen. 43:15-30)
• THE DINNER. (Gen 43:31-34)
• POLICY TO STAY HIS BRETHREN. (Gen. 44:1-34)
• JOSEPH MAKING HIMSELF KNOWN. (Gen. 45:1-28)
• SACRIFICE AT BEER-SHEBA. (Gen 46:1-4)
• IMMIGRATION TO EGYPT. (Gen. 46:5-27)
• ARRIVAL IN EGYPT. (Gen 46:28-34)
• JOSEPH'S PRESENTATION AT COURT. (Gen. 47:1-31)
• JOSEPH'S VISIT TO HIS SICK FATHER. (Gen. 48:1-22)
• PATRIARCHAL BLESSING. (Gen. 49:1-33)
• MOURNING FOR JACOB. (Gen. 50:1-26)

TSK: Genesis (Book Introduction)

The Book of Genesis is the most ancient record in the world; including the History of two grand and stupendous subjects, Creation and Providence; of each of which it presents a summary, but astonishingly minute and detailed accounts. From this Book, almost all the ancient philosophers, astronomers, chronologists, and historians have taken their respective data; and all the modern improvements and accurate discoveries in different arts and sciences, have only served to confirm the facts detailed by Moses, and to shew, that all the ancient writers on these subjects have approached, or receded from, truth and the phenomena of Nature, in exactly the same proportion as they have followed or receded from, the Mosaic history. The great fact of the deluge is fully confirmed by the fossilised remains in every quarter of the globe. Add to this, that general traditions of the deluge have been traced among the Egyptians, Chinese, Japanese, Hindoos, Burmans, ancient Goths and Druids, Mexicans, Peruvians, Brazilians, North American Indians, Greenlanders, Otaheiteans, Sandwich Islanders, and almost every nation under heaven; while the allegorical turgidity of these distorted traditions sufficiently distinguishes them from the unadorned simplicity of the Mosaic narrative. In fine, without this history the world would be in comparative darkness, not knowing whence it came, nor whither it goeth. In the first page, a child may learn more in an hour, than all the philosophers in the world learned without it in a thousand years. (The original publisher remembers these words addressed to him and other boys in the year 1780, by his excellent tutor, the later Rev. John Ryland, of Northampton.)

TSK: Genesis 14 (Chapter Introduction)

Overview

Gen 14:1, The battle of four kings against the king of Sodom and his allies; Gen 14:12, Lot is taken prisoner; Gen 14:14, Abram rescues him; Gen 14:17, Melchizedek blesses Abram at his return, who gives him tithes; Gen 14:21, The rest of the spoil, his partners having had their portions he restores to the king of Sodom.

Poole: Genesis 14 (Chapter Introduction)

CHAPTER 14

Several kings wage war against the king of Sodom, &c.; Lot is taken prisoner, Gen 14:1-12 . Abram rescues him, Gen 14:13-16 . The king of Sodom congratulates him his victory, Gen 14:17 . Melchizedek king of Salem blesses him; to him Abram gives tithes, Gen 14:18-20 . The king of Sodom offers to give Abram the goods taken in victory, Gen 14:21 ; which Abram refuses to accept, Gen 14:22-24 .

i.e. Of a people which came to him out of several nations, (being allured possibly by his fame, or by promises and privileges granted to them), and put themselves under his government. Or Goiim is the name of a certain place or country, so called from the confluence of divers people or nations thither, as Tyrus is called the mart of nations, Isa 23:3 , upon the same account.

MHCC: Genesis (Book Introduction)

Genesis is a name taken from the Greek, and signifies " the book of generation or production;" it is properly so called, as containing an account of the origin of all things. There is no other history so old. There is nothing in the most ancient book which exists that contradicts it; while many things recorded by the oldest heathen writers, or to be traced in the customs of different nations, confirm what is related in the book of Genesis.

MHCC: Genesis 14 (Chapter Introduction)

(Gen 14:1-12) The battle of the kings, Lot is taken prisoner.

(Gen 14:13-16) Abram rescues Lot.

(Gen 14:17-20) Melchizedek blesses Abram.

(Gen 14:21-24) Abram restores the spoil.

Matthew Henry: Genesis (Book Introduction)

An Exposition, with Practical Observations, of The First Book of Moses, Called Genesis

We have now before us the holy Bible, or book, for so bible signifies. We call it the book, by way of eminency; for it is incomparably the best book that ever was written, the book of books, shining like the sun in the firmament of learning, other valuable and useful books, like the moon and stars, borrowing their light from it. We call it the holy book, because it was written by holy men, and indited by the Holy Ghost; it is perfectly pure from all falsehood and corrupt intention; and the manifest tendency of it is to promote holiness among men. The great things of God's law and gospel are here written to us, that they might be reduced to a greater certainty, might spread further, remain longer, and be transmitted to distant places and ages more pure and entire than possibly they could be by report and tradition: and we shall have a great deal to answer for if these things which belong to our peace, being thus committed to us in black and white, be neglected by us as a strange and foreign thing, Hos 8:12. The scriptures, or writings of the several inspired penmen, from Moses down to St. John, in which divine light, like that of the morning, shone gradually (the sacred canon being now completed), are all put together in this blessed Bible, which, thanks be to God, we have in our hands, and they make as perfect a day as we are to expect on this side of heaven. Every part was good, but all together very good. This is the light that shines in a dark place (2Pe 1:19), and a dark place indeed the world would be without the Bible.

We have before us that part of the Bible which we call the Old Testament, containing the acts and monuments of the church from the creation almost to the coming of Christ in the flesh, which was about four thousand years - the truths then revealed, the laws then enacted, the devotions then paid, the prophecies then given, and the events which concerned that distinguished body, so far as God saw fit to preserve to us the knowledge of them. This is called a testament, or covenant ( diatheke ), because it was a settled declaration of the will of God concerning man in a federal way, and had its force from the designed death of the great testator, the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world, Rev 8:8. It is called the Old Testament, with relation to the New, which does not cancel and supersede it, but crown and perfect it, by the bringing in of that better hope which was typified and foretold in it; the Old Testament still remains glorious, though the New far exceeds in glory, 2Co 3:9.

We have before us that part of the Old Testament which we call the Pentateuch, or five books of Moses, that servant of the Lord who excelled all the other prophets, and typified the great prophet. In our Saviour's distribution of the books of the Old Testament into the law, the prophets, and the psalms, or Hagiographa , these are the law; for they contain not only the laws given to Israel, in the last four, but the laws given to Adam, to Noah, and to Abraham, in the first. These five books were, for aught we know, the first that ever were written; for we have not the least mention of any writing in all the book of Genesis, nor till God bade Moses write (Exo 17:14); and some think Moses himself never learned to write till God set him his copy in the writing of the ten Commandments upon the tables of stone. However, we are sure these books are the most ancient writings now extant, and therefore best able to give us a satisfactory account of the most ancient things.

We have before us the first and longest of those five books, which we call Genesis, written, some think, when Moses was in Midian, for the instruction and comfort of his suffering brethren in Egypt: I rather think he wrote it in the wilderness, after he had been in the mount with God, where, probably, he received full and particular instructions for the writing of it. And, as he framed the tabernacle, so he did the more excellent and durable fabric of this book, exactly according to the pattern shown him in the mount, into which it is better to resolve the certainty of the things herein contained than into any tradition which possibly might be handed down from Adam to Methuselah, from him to Shem, from him to Abraham, and so to the family of Jacob. Genesis is a name borrowed from the Greek. It signifies the original, or generation: fitly is this book so called, for it is a history of originals - the creation of the world, the entrance of sin and death into it, the invention of arts, the rise of nations, and especially the planting of the church, and the state of it in its early days. It is also a history of generations - the generations of Adam, Noah, Abraham, etc., not endless, but useful genealogies. The beginning of the New Testament is called Genesis too (Mat 1:1), Biblos geneseos the book of the genesis, or generation, of Jesus Christ. Blessed be God for that Book which shows us our remedy, as this opens our wound. Lord, open our eyes, that we may see the wondrous things both of thy law and gospel!

Matthew Henry: Genesis 14 (Chapter Introduction)

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

Constable: Genesis (Book Introduction)

Introduction

Title

Each book of the Pentateuch (the first five books of the Old Testament, called the Torah [instruction] by the Jews) originally received its title in the Hebrew Bible from the first word or words in the book.¹ The Hebrew word translated "in the beginning" is beresit. The English title "Genesis," however, has come to us from the Latin Vulgate translation of Jerome (Liber Genesis). The Latin title came from the Septuagint translation (the Greek translation of the Old Testament made about 300 years before Christ). "Genesis" is a transliteration of the Greek word geneseos, the Greek word that translates the Hebrew toledot. This Hebrew word is the key word in identifying the structure of Genesis, and the translators have usually rendered it "account" or "generations" (2:4; 5:1; 6:9; 10:1; 11:10, 27; 25:12, 19; 36:1, 9; 37:2).

Date

The events recorded date back to the creation of the world.

Many Christians believe the earth is millions of years old. They base this belief on the statements of scientists and understand Scripture in the light of these statements. Likewise, many Christians believe that the human race began hundreds of thousands of years ago for the same reason.

Most evangelicals who take the Scriptures seriously believe that the earth is not much older than 10, 000 years. They base this on the genealogies in Scripture (Gen. 5; 10; 11; et al.), which they understand to be "open" (i.e., not complete). Evangelicals usually hold to a more recent date for man's creation, also for the same reason.

A smaller group of evangelicals believes that the genealogies are either "closed" (i.e., complete) or very close to complete. This leads us to date the creation of the world and man about 6, 000 years ago.²

Liberal interpreters have placed the date of composition of Genesis much later than Moses' lifetime.

If one accepts Mosaic authorship, as most conservative evangelicals do, the date of composition of Genesis must be within Moses' lifetime (ca. 1525-1405 B.C.). This book was perhaps originally intended to encourage the Israelites to trust in their faithful, omnipotent God as they anticipated entrance into the Promised Land from Kadesh Barnea or from the Plains of Moab.³ Moses may have written it earlier to prepare them for the Exodus,⁴ but this seems less likely.

Writer

The authorship of the Pentateuch has been the subject of great controversy among professing Christians since Spinoza introduced "higher criticism" of the Bible in the seventeenth century. The "documentary hypothesis," which developed from his work, is that Moses did not write the Pentateuch, as most scholars in Judaism and the church until that day believed. Instead, it was the product of several writers who lived much later than Moses. A redactor (editor) or redactors combined these several documents into the form we have now. These documents (J, E, D, P, and others) represent a Yahwistic tradition, an Elohistic tradition, a Deuteronomic tradition, a Priestly tradition, etc.⁵

The evidence that Moses wrote the Pentateuch is conclusive if one believes that Jesus Christ spoke the truth when He attributed authorship to Moses (Matt. 19:8; Mark 7:10; Luke 18:29-31; 20:37; 24:27; John 7:19). Jesus Christ did not specifically say that Moses wrote Genesis, but in our Lord's day the Jews regarded the Pentateuch (Torah) as a whole unit. They recognized Moses as the author of all five books. Consequently they would have understood what Jesus said about any of the five books of Moses as an endorsement of the Mosaic authorship of them all.⁶

Scope

The events recorded in Genesis stretch historically from Creation to Joseph's death, a period of at least 2500 years. The first part of the book (ch. 1-11) is not as easy to date precisely as the second part (ch. 12-50). The history of the patriarchs recorded in this second main division of the text covers a period of about 300 years.

The scope of the book progressively and consistently narrows. The selection of content included in Genesis points to the purpose of the divine author: to reveal the history of and basic principles involved in God's relationship with people.⁷

Purpose

Genesis provides the historical basis for the rest of the Bible and the Pentateuch, particularly the Abrahamic Covenant. Chapters 1-11 give historical background essential to understanding that covenant, and chapters 12-50 record the covenant and its initial outworking. The Abrahamic Covenant continues to be the basic arrangement by which God operates in dealing with humanity throughout the Pentateuch and the rest of the Bible.

"The real theme of the Pentateuch is the selection of Israel from the nations and its consecration to the service of God and His Laws in a divinely appointed land. The central event in the development of this theme is the divine covenant with Abraham and its . . . promise to make his offspring into the people of God and to give them the land of Canaan as an everlasting inheritance."⁸

Genesis provides an indispensable prologue to the drama that unfolds in Exodus and the rest of the Pentateuch. The first 11 chapters constitute a prologue to the prologue.

"Two opposite progressions appear in this prologue [chs. 1-11]: (a) God's orderly Creation with its climax in His blessing of man, and (b) the totally disintegrating work of sin with its two greatest curses being the Flood and the dispersion at Babel.⁹ The first progression demonstrates God's plan to bring about perfect order from the beginning in spite of what the reader may know of man's experience. The second progression demonstrates the great need of God's intervention to provide the solution for the corrupt human race."¹⁰

Theology

"The subject matter of the theology in Genesis is certainly God's work in establishing Israel as the means of blessing the families of the earth. This book forms the introduction to the Pentateuch's main theme of the founding of the theocracy, that is, the rule of God over all Creation. It presents the origins behind the founding of the theocracy: the promised blessing that Abraham's descendants would be in the land.

"Exodus presents the redemption of the seed out of bondage and the granting of a covenant to them. Leviticus is the manual of ordinances enabling the holy God to dwell among His people by making them holy. Numbers records the military arrangement and census of the tribes in the wilderness, and shows how God preserves His promised blessings from internal and external threats. Deuteronomy presents the renewal of the covenant.

"In the unfolding of this grand program of God, Genesis introduces the reader to the nature of God as the sovereign Lord over the universe who will move heaven and earth to establish His will. He seeks to bless mankind, but does not tolerate disobedience and unbelief. Throughout this revelation the reader learns that without faith it is impossible to please God' (Heb. 11:6)."¹¹

Message¹²

The message of the Bible might be the best place to begin our study of the Old Testament. What is the Bible all about? We could state it as follows: God desires to glorify Himself by blessing humankind.

The message of the Pentateuch (Torah) is that people can experience God's blessing by trusting Him (believing His word) and by obeying Him (following His initiative).

Genesis is in the Bible primarily to teach us this lesson. People can enjoy a personal relationship with God and thereby realize their own fulfillment as human beings only through trust in God and obedience to God. This is the message statement. Genesis reveals that God is faithful to His promises and powerful enough to bring them to fulfillment.

Genesis reveals that God originally intended people to have an immediate relationship with their Creator. Evidences for this are as follows.

1. God made man as a special creation (2:7).

2. He made man with special care (2:7).

3. He made man in His own image (1:26-27).

4. He regarded man as His son (1:28-30).

5. He consistently demonstrated concern for man's welfare (3:9).

God's immediate relationship with Adam was broken by the Fall (ch. 3). In the Fall man did two things.

1. He failed to trust God's goodness with his mind.

2. He rebelled against God's government with his will (3:6).

God then took the initiative to re-establish the relationship with man that He had created man to enjoy. He provided a covering for man's sin until He would finally remove it. This temporary covering came through the sacrificial system.

Throughout Genesis we see that people in general consistently failed to trust and obey God (e.g., in Noah's day, at Babel, in the patriarchal period).

Genesis also records what God has done to encourage people to trust and obey Him. It is only by living by these two principles that people can enjoy a relationship with God and realize all that God created them to experience.

On the one hand, Genesis reveals much about the person and work of God. This revelation helps us trust and obey Him. It is through His personal revelations to the main characters in Genesis that God revealed Himself initially (e.g., Adam and Eve, Noah, the patriarchs).

On the other hand, Genesis reveals much about the nature of man. Not only did God reveal the perversity of man, but He also identified positive examples of faith and obedience in the lives of the godly.

In Genesis we learn that faith in God is absolutely essential if we are to have fellowship with Him and realize our potential as human beings.

Faith is the law of life. If one lives by faith he flourishes, but if he does not, he fails. The four patriarchs are primarily examples of what faith is and how it manifests itself. In each of their lives we learn something new about faith.

Abraham's faith demonstrates unquestioning obedience. When God told him to do something, he did it. This is the most basic characteristic of faith. That is one reason why Abraham is "the father of the faithful." God revealed Himself nine times to Abraham and each time Abraham's response was unquestioning obedience.

Isaac's faith helps us see the quality of passive acceptance that characterizes true faith in God. This was his response to God's two revelations to him.

Jacob's story is one of conflict with God until he came to realize his own limitations. Then he trusted God. We can see his faith in his acknowledged dependence on God. God's seven revelations to him eventually led him to this position.

Joseph's life teaches us what God can do with a person who trusts Him consistently in the face of adversity. The outstanding characteristic of Joseph's life was his faithful loyalty to God. He believed God's two revelations to him in dreams even though God's will did not seem to be working out as he thought it would. Patient faith and its reward shine through the story of Joseph.

Faith, the key concept in Genesis, means trusting that what God has prescribed is indeed best for me and waiting for God to provide what He has promised. A person of faith is one who commits to acting on this basis even though he or she may not see how it is best.

The Pentateuch is all about God, man, and our relationship. In our study of it, we will be building a model to show how each new book builds on what has preceded. The key concept in Genesis is faith.

Constable: Genesis (Outline)

Outline

The structure of Genesis is very clear. The phrase "the generations of" (toledot in Hebrew, from yalad meaning "to bear, to generate") occurs ten times (really eleven times since 36:9 repeats 36:1), and in each case it introduces a new section of the book.¹³ The first part of Genesis is introductory and sets the scene for what follows. An outline of Genesis based on this structure is as follows.

1. Introduction 1:1-2:3

2. The generations of heaven and earth 2:4-4:26

3. The generations of Adam 5:1-6:8

4. The generations of Noah 6:9-9:29

5. The generations of the sons of Noah 10:1-11:9

6. The generations of Shem 11:10-26

7. The generations of Terah 11:27-25:11

8. The generations of Ishmael 25:12-18

9. The generations of Isaac 25:19-35:29

10. The generations of Esau 36:1-43

11. The generations of Jacob 37:1-50:26

A full expository outline designed to highlight the relative emphases of the book follows. We shall follow this outline in these notes as we seek to unpack the message of the book.

I. Primeval events 1:1-11:26

A. The story of creation 1:1-2:3

1. An initial statement of creation 1:1

2. Conditions at the time of creation 1:2

3. The six days of creation 1:3-31

4. The seventh day 2:1-3

B. What became of the creation 2:4-4:26

1. The garden of Eden 2:4-3:24

2. The murder of Abel 4:1-16

3. The spread of civilization and sin 4:17-26

C. What became of Adam 5:1-6:8

1. The effects of the curse on humanity ch. 5

2. God's sorrow over man's wickedness 6:1-8

D. What became of Noah 6:9-9:29

1. The Flood 6:9-8:22

2. The Noahic Covenant 9:1-17

3. The curse on Canaan 9:18-29

E. What became of Noah's sons 10:1-11:9

1. The table of nations ch. 10

2. The dispersion at Babel 11:1-9

F. What became of Shem 11:10-26

II. Patriarchal narratives 11:27-50:26

A. What became of Terah 11:27-25:11

1. Terah and Abraham's obedience 11:27-12:9

2. Abram in Egypt 12:10-20

3. Abram's separation from Lot ch. 13

4. Abram's military victory ch. 14

5. The Abrahamic covenant ch. 15

6. The birth of Ishmael ch. 16

7. The sign of circumcision ch. 17

8. Yahweh's visit to Abraham 18:1-15

9. Abraham's intercession for Lot 18:16-33

10. The destruction of Sodom ch. 19

11. Abraham's sojourn at Gerar ch. 20

12. The birth of Isaac 21:1-21

13. Abimelech's treaty with Abraham 21:22-34

14. The sacrifice of Isaac 22:1-19

15. The descendants of Nahor 22:20-24

16. The purchase of Sarah's tomb ch. 23

17. The choice of a bride for Isaac ch. 24

18. Abraham's death 25:1-11

B. What became of Ishmael 25:12-18

C. What became of Isaac 25:19-35:29

1. Isaac's twin sons 25:19-26

2. The sale of the birthright 25:27-34

3. Isaac and Abimelech 26:1-11

4. Isaac's wells 26:12-33

5. Jacob's deception for Isaac's blessing 26:34-28:9

6. Jacob's vision at Bethel 28:10-22

7. Jacob's marriages and Laban's deception 29:1-30

8. Jacob's mishandling of God's blessings 29:31-30:24

9. Jacob's new contract with Laban 30:25-43

10. Jacob's flight from Haran ch. 31

11. Jacob's attempt to appease Esau 32:1-21

12. Jacob at the Jabbok 32:22-32

13. Jacob's meeting with Esau and his return to Canaan ch. 33

14. The rape of Dinah and the revenge of Simeon and Levi ch. 34

15. Jacob's return to Bethel ch. 35

D. What became of Esau 36:1-37:1

E. What became of Jacob 37:2-50:26

1. God's choice of Joseph 37:2-11

2. The sale of Joseph into Egypt 37:12-36

3. Judah and Tamar ch. 38

4. Joseph in Potiphar's house ch. 39

5. The prisoners' dreams and Joseph's interpretations ch. 40

6. Pharaoh's dreams and Joseph's interpretation ch. 41

7. Joseph's brothers' first journey into Egypt ch. 42

8. Joseph's brothers' second journey into Egypt ch. 43

9. Joseph's last test and its results ch. 44

10. Joseph's reconciliation with his brothers 45:1-15

11. Israel's move to Egypt 45:16-46:30

12. Joseph's wise leadership 46:31-47:27

13. Jacob's worship in Egypt 47:28-48:22

14. Jacob's blessing of his sons 49:1-28

15. Deaths and a promise yet to be fulfilled 49:29-50:26¹⁴

Constable: Genesis

Bibliography

Aalders, Gerhard Charles. Genesis. The Bible Student's Commentary series. 2 vols. Translated by William Heynen. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1981.

Aharoni, Yohanan, and Michael Avi-Yonah. The Macmillan Bible Atlas. Revised ed. New York: Macmillan Publishing Co., 1977.

Albright, William Foxwell. "Abram the Hebrew: A New Archaeological Interpretation." Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 163 (October 1961):36-54.

_____. The Archaeology of Palestine. 1949. Revised ed. Pelican Archaeology series. Harmondsworth, Middlesex, England: Penguin Books, 1956.

_____. The Biblical Period from Abraham to Ezra. New York: Harper Torchbooks, 1963.

Alexander, John F. "Sabbath Rest." The Other Side 146 (November 1983):8-9.

Alexander, T. Desmond. "Genesis 22 and the Covenant of Circumcision." Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 25 (1983):17-22.

_____. "Lot's Hospitality: A Clue to His Righteousness." Journal of Biblical Literature 104:2 (June 1985):289-91.

Allis, Oswald T. The Five Books of Moses. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1949.

_____. God Spake by Moses. Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1951.

Alter, Robert. The Art of Biblical Narrative. New York: Basic, 1981.

Ancil, Ralph E. "Is Creation More than a Model of Origins?" Creation Social Science and Humanities Quarterly 5:2 (Winter 1982):3-13.

Anderson, Bernhard W. "Creation and Ecology." American Journal of Theology and Philosophy 4:1 (January 1983):14-30.

Anderson, Don. Abraham: Delay Is Not Denial. Neptune, N.J.: Loizeaux Brothers, Kingfisher Books, 1987.

Anderson, Gary. "The Interpretation of Genesis l:1 in the Targums." Catholic Biblical Quarterly 52:1 (January 1990):21-29.

Anderson, J. Kerby and Harold G Coffin. Fossils in Focus. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1977.

Andrews, Gini. Your Half of the Apple. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1972.

Aufenson-Vance, Deborah. "Lot's Wife Remembers." Adventist Review 163:8 (February 20, 1986):5.

Archer, Gleason L., Jr. "Old Testament History and Recent Archaeology from Abraham to Moses." Bibliotheca Sacra 127:505 (January-March 1970):3-25.

Bacchiocchi, Samuele. "Sabbatical Typologies of Messianic Redemption." Journal for the Study of Judaism. 17:2 (December 1986):153-76.

Baldwin, Joyce G. The Message of Genesis 12-50. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1986.

Ballard, Bruce W. "The Death Penalty: God's Timeless Standard for the Nations?" Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 43:3 (September 2000):471-87.

Bar-Deroma, H. "The River of Egypt (Nahal Mizraim)." Palestinian Exploration Quarterly 92 (1960):37-56.

Barker, Kenneth L. "The Antiquity and Historicity of the Patriarchal Narratives." In A Tribute to Gleason Archer, pp. 131-39. Edited by Walter C. Kaiser, Jr. and Ronald F. Youngblood. Chicago: Moody Press, 1986.

Barr, James. "Why the World Was Created in 4004 B.C.: Archbishop Ussher and Biblical Chronology." Bulletin of John Rylands University Library of Manchester 67:2 (Spring 1985):575-608.

Barre, Lloyd M. "The Riddle of the Flood Chronology." Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 41 (June 1988):3-20.

Baxter, J. Sidlow. Explore the Book. 6 vols. London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott, 1951.

Baylis, Charles P. "The Author of Hebrews' use of Melchizedek from the Context of Genesis." Th.D. dissertation, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1989.

Beit-Arieh, Itzhaq. "New Evidence on the Relations between Canaan and Egypt during the Proto-Dynastic Period." Israel Exploration Journal 34:1 (1984):20-23.

_____. "New Light on the Edomites." Biblical Archaeological Review. 14:2 (March-April 1988):28-41.

Ben-Tor, Amnon. "The Trade Relations of Palestine in the Early Bronze Age." Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 29:1 (February 1986):1-27.

Berg, S. B. The Book of Esther: Motifs, Themes, and Structure. Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation series, 44. Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1979.

Blenkinsopp, Joseph. "Abraham and the Righteous of Sodom." Journal of Jewish Studies 33:1-2 (Spring-Autumn 1982):119-32.

Blosser, Oliver R. "Was Nimrod-Sargon of Agade, the First King of Babylon?" It's About Time, June 1987, pp. 10-13.

Bock, Darrell L. "Interpreting the Bible--How Texts Speak to Us." In Progressive Dispensationalism, pp. 76-105. By Craig A. Blaising and Darrell L. Bock. Wheaton: Victor Books, 1993.

Boice, James M. Genesis. 2 vols. Ministry Resources Library series. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1982, 1985.

Briggs, Peter. "Testing the Factuality of the Conquest of Ai Narrative in the Book of Joshua." A paper presented at the annual meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society, Colorado Springs, Colo., Nov. 15, 2001.

Bright, John. A History of Israel. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1959.

Broshi, Magen. "The Credibility of Josephus." Journal of Jewish Studies 33:1-2 (Spring-Autumn 1982):379-84.

Brotzman, Ellis R. "Man and the Meaning of Nephesh." Bibliotheca Sacra 145:580 (October-December 1988):400-9.

Brueggemann, W. "From Dust to Kingship." Zeitschrift für die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 84 (1972):1-18.

_____. Genesis. Interpretation series. Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1982.

Bury, J. B.; S. A. Cook; and F. E. Adcock, eds. The Cambridge Ancient History. 12 vols. 2nd ed. reprinted. Cambridge: University Press, 1928.

Busenitz, Irvin A. "Woman's Desire for Man: Genesis 3:16 Reconsidered." Grace Theological Journal 7:2 (Fall 1986):203-12.

Bush, George. Notes on Genesis. New York: Ivison, Phinney & Co., 1860; reprint ed., 2 vols., Minneapolis: James and Klock Publishing Co., 1976.

Calvin, John. Commentaries on the First Book of Moses Called Genesis. Translated by John King. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1948.

_____. Genesis. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1979.

Campbell, Donald K. "Passing the Test." Kindred Spirit 9:2 (Summer 1985):9-10.

Cardona, Dwardu. "Jupiter--God of Abraham (Part III)." Kronos 8:1 (Fall 1982):63-77.

Carmichael, Calum M. "Forbidden Mixtures." Vetus Testamentum 32:4 (1982):394-415.

Carnell, Edward John. An Introduction to Christian Apologetics. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1948.

Cassuto, Umberto. A Commentary on the Book of Genesis. Part II. From Noah to Abraham, Genesis VI:9--XI:32. Translated by Israel Abrahams. Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1964.

Caylor, Duane K. "Capital Punishment, a different Christian perspective." Reformed Journal 36:7 (July 1986):10-12.

Chafer, Lewis Sperry. Systematic Theology. 8 vols. Dallas: Dallas Seminary Press, 1947.

Chalmers, Thomas. Posthumous Works of the Rev. Thomas Chalmers. Vol. 1: Daily Scripture Readings. Edinburgh: Sutherland and Knox, 1851.

Chisholm, Robert B., Jr. "Evidence from Genesis." In A Case for Premillennialism: A New Consensus, pp. 35-54. Edited by Donald K. Campbell and Jeffrey L. Townsend. Chicago: Moody Press, 1992.

Chitwood, Arlen L. Judgment Seat of Christ. Norman, Okla.: The Lamp Broadcast, Inc., 1986.

"Cities of the Dead Sea Plain." Buried History. 18:3 (September 1982):35-48.

Clifford, Richard J. "Cosmogonies in the Ugaritic Texts and in the Bible." Orientalia 53:2 (1984):183-201.

Clines, David J. A. The Theme of the Pentateuch. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament supplement series, no. 10. Sheffield, England: Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, 1978.

Coats, George W. Genesis, with an Introduction to Narrative Literature. Forms of Old Testament Literature series. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1983.

Cole, Timothy J. "Enoch, a Man Who Walked with God." Bibliotheca Sacra 148:591 (July-September 1991):288-97.

Cooper, Robert M. "Capital Punishment: Helplessness and Power." Encounter 46:2 (Spring 1985):163-75.

Cottrell, Jack. "The Doctrine of Creation from Nothing." Seminary Review 29:4 (December 1983):157-74.

Cox, Raymond L. "What Made Abraham Laugh?" Eternity, November 1975, pp. 19-20.

Cryer, Frederick H. "The Interrelationships of Gen. 5, 32; 11, 10-11 and the Chronology of the Flood." Biblica 66:2 (1985):241-61.

Cummings, Violet M. Has Anybody Really Seen Noah's Ark? San Diego: Creation-Life Publishers, 1982.

Curtis, Edward M. "Structure, Style and Context as a Key to Interpreting Jacob's Encounter at Peniel." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 30:2 (June 1987):129-37.

Custance, Arthur C. Without Form and Void. Brockville, Ont.: By the author, or Doorway Papers, 1970.

Darby, John Nelson. Synopsis of the Books of the Bible. Revised ed. 5 vols. New York: Loizeaux Brothers Publishers, 1942.

Daube, D. Studies in Biblical Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1947.

Davis, John J. "The Camel in Biblical Narratives." In A Tribute to Gleason Archer, pp. 141-52. Edited by Walter C. Kaiser, Jr. and Ronald F. Youngblood. Chicago: Moody Press, 1986.

_____. Paradise to Prison. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1975.

Davis, M. Stephen. "Polygamy in the Ancient World." Biblical Illustrator 14:1 (Fall 1987):34-36.

_____. "Stories of the Fall in the Ancient Near East." Biblical Illustrator 13:1 (Fall 1986):37-40.

de Chardin, Pierre Teilhard. The Phenomenon of Man. New York: Harper and Row, 1959.

DeHaan, Martin Ralph. 508 Answers to Bible Questions. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing Co., 1952.

Delitzsch, Franz. A New Commentary on Genesis. 6th ed. 2 vols. Translated by Sophia Taylor. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1888-89.

_____. A System of Biblical Psychology. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1988; reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1977.

de Vaux, Roland. Ancient Israel: Its Life and Institutions. 2 vols. Translated by John McHugh. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1961.

Dever, William G. "Beersheba." Biblical Illustrator, Spring 1983, pp. 56-62.

Diakonoff, I. M. "Women in Old Babylonia Not Under Patriarchal Authority." Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 29:3 (October 1984):225-38.

Diamond, J. A. "The Deception of Jacob: A New Perspective on an Ancient Solution to the Problem." Vetus Testamentum 34:2 (1984):211-13.

Dickason, C. Fred. Angels, Elect and Evil. Chicago: Moody Press, 1975.

Dillow, Joseph C. The Waters Above: Earth's Pre-Flood Vapor Canopy. Chicago: Moody Press, 1981.

Dods, Marcus. The Book of Genesis. The Expositor's Bible series. New York: George H. Coran Co., n.d.

Dresner, Samuel. "Rachel and Leah: Sibling Tragedy or the Triumph of Piety and Compassion?" Bible Review 6:2 (April 1990):22-27, 40-42.

Driver, G. R. and John C. Miles, eds. and trans. The Babylonian Laws. 2 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1952-55.

Driver, S. R. Book of Genesis. Westminster Commentaries series. London: Methuen, 1904.

Dumbrell, William J. Covenant and Creation. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1984.

Ellis, Peter F. The Yahwist: the Bible's First Theologian. London: G. Chapman, 1969.

Ellul, J. The Meaning of the City. Translated by D. Pardee. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1970.

England, Donald. A Christian View of Origins. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1972.

Erdman, Charles R. The Book of Genesis. New York: Fleming H. Revell, 1950.

Erlandsson, Seth. "Faith in the Old and New Testaments: Harmony or Disagreement?" Concordia Theological Quarterly 47:1 (January-March 1983):1-14.

Eslinger, L. "A Contextual Identification of the bene ha'elohim and benoth ha'adam in Genesis 6:1-4." Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 13 (1979):65-73.

Evans, Carl D. "The Patriarch Jacob--An Innocent Man.'" Bible Review 2:1 (Spring 1985):32-37.

Exum, J. Cheryl. "The Mothers of Israel: The Patriarchal Narratives from a Feminist Perspective." Bible Review 2:1 (Spring 1986):60-67.

Exum, J. Cheryl and J. William Whedbee. "Isaac, Samson, and Saul: Reflections on the Comic and Tragic Visions." Semeia 32 (1884):5-40.

Family Life Conference. Little Rock, Ark.: Family Ministry, 1990.

Fawver, Jay D. and R. Larry Overstreet. "Moses and Preventive Medicine." Bibliotheca Sacra 147:587 (July-September 1990):270-85.

Feinberg, Charles Lee. "The Image of God." Bibliotheca Sacra 129:515 (July-September 1972):235-46.

Figart, Thomas O. A Biblical Perspective on the Race Problem. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1973.

Filby, Frederick A. Creation Revealed. Westwood, N.J.: Fleming H. Revell, 1963.

Finley, Thomas J. "Dimensions of the Hebrew Word for Create' (bara)." Bibliotheca Sacra 148:592 (October-December 1991):409-23.

Fishbane, Michael. "Composition and Structure in the Jacob Cycle (Gen. 25:19-35:22)." Journal of Jewish Studies 26:1-2 (Spring-Autumn 1975):15-38.

_____. Text and Texture. New York: Schocken, 1979.

Fisher, Loren R. "Abraham and His Priest-King." Journal of Biblical Literature 81 (1962):264-70.

_____. "An Amarna Age Prodigal." Journal of Semitic Studies 3:2 (April 1958):113-22.

Foh, Susan T. "What Is the Woman's Desire?" Westminster Theological Journal 37:3 (Spring 1975):376-83.

_____. Women and the Word of God. Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1979.

Fokkelman, J. P. Narrative Art in Genesis. Assen, Amsterdam: Van Gorcum, 1975.

Foster, Harry. "Jacob. Walking with a Limp." Toward the Mark, September-October 1982, pp. 97-100.

Fouts, David M. "Peleg in Gen 10:25." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 41:1 (March 1998):17-21.

Frame, Randy. "The Strange Case of Steven Linscott." Christianity Today, February 4, 1983, pp. 42-45, 47.

Frankfort, Henri. Ancient Egyptian Religion. New York: Columbia University Press, 1948; reprint ed. New York: Harper & Row Publishers, Harper Torchbooks, 1961.

Freedman, R. David. "A New Approach to the Nuzi Sistership Contract." Journal of the Ancient Near Eastern Society of Columbia University 2:2 (Summer 1970):77-85.

_____. "Put Your Hand Under My Thigh'--The Patriarchal Oath." Biblical Archaeology Review 2:2 (June 1976):3-4, 42.

_____. "Woman, A Power Equal to Man." Biblical Archaeology Review 9:1 (January-February 1983):56-58.

Friedman, Richard Elliott. "Deception for Deception." Bible Review 2:1 (Spring 1986):22-31, 68.

Gage, Warren. "The Eschatological Structure of Genesis." Paper written in Tubingen, W. Germany, November 18, 1979.

Gardener, R. F. R. Abortion: The Personal Dilemma. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1972.

Gardner, Joseph L., ed. Reader's Digest Atlas of the Bible. Pleasantville, N.Y.: Reader's Digest Association, 1985.

Geisler, Normal L. "Beware of Philosophy: A Warning to Biblical Scholars." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 42:1 (March 1999):3-19.

Geller, Stephen A. "The Struggle at the Jabbok: the Uses of Enigma in a Biblical Narrative." Journal of the Ancient Near Eastern Society 14 (1982):37-60.

Gish, Duane T. "Evolution--A Philosophy, Not a Science." Good News Broadcaster, March 1984, pp. 34-37.

Golka, Friedemann. "The Aetiologies in the Old Testament." Vetus Testamentum 26:4 (October 1976):410-28; and 27:1 (January 1977):36-47.

Gordon, Cyrus H. "Biblical Customs and the Nuzu Tablets." Biblical Archaeologist 3:1 (February 1940):1-12.

Grassi, Joseph A. "Abba, Father (Mark 14:36): Another Approach." Journal of the American Academy of Religion 50:3 (September 1982):449-58.

Gray, Elmer L. "Capital Punishment in the Ancient Near East." Biblical Illustrator 13:1 (Fall 1986):65-67.

Grayson, A. K., and J. Van Seters. "The Childless Wife in Assyria and the Stories of Genesis." Orientalia 44:4 (1975):485-86.

Green, William Henry. "Primeval Chronology." In Classical Evangelical Essays in Old Testament Interpretation, pp. 13-28. Edited by Walter C. Kaiser, Jr. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1972.

Greenberg, Blu. "Marriage in the Jewish Tradition." Journal of Ecumenical Studies 22:1 (Winter 1985):3-20.

Greenberg, M. "Another Look at Rachel's Theft of the Teraphim." Journal of Biblical Literature 81 (1962):239-48.

Greengus, Samuel. "Sisterhood Adoption at Nuzi and the Wife- Sister' in Genesis." Hebrew Union College Annual 46 (1975):5-31.

Gronbock, Jakob H. "Baal's Battle with Yam--A Canaanite Creation Fight." Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 33 (October 1985):27-44.

Guinness, Oz. The Dust of Death. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1973.

Ham, Kenneth A. The Lie: Evolution. Green Forest, Ark.: Master Books, 1987.

_____. Genesis and the Decay of the Nations. Florence, Ky.: Answers in Genesis, 1991.

Ham, Ken; Andrew Snelling; and Carl Wieland. The Answers Book. Revised ed. Green Forest, Ark.: Master Books, 1990.

Hamilton, Victor P. The Book of Genesis: Chapters 1-17. New International Commentary on the Old Testament series. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1990.

_____. The Book of Genesis: Chapters 18-50. New International Commentary on the Old Testament series. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1995.

Harbach, Robert C. Studies in the Book of Genesis. Grand Rapids: Grandville Protestant Reformed Church, 1986.

Harrison, R. K. "From Adam to Noah: A Reconsideration of the Antediluvian Patriarchs' Ages." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 37:2 (June 1994):161-68.

Harrison, William K. "The Origin of Sin." Bibliotheca Sacra 130:517 (January-March 1973):58-61.

Hasel, Gerhard F. "The Meaning of the Animal Rite in Genesis 15." Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 19 (1981):61-78.

_____. "The Sabbath in the Pentateuch." In The Sabbath in Scripture and History, pp. 21-43. Edited by Kenneth A. Strand. Washington: Review and Herald Publishing Association, 1982.

Hawkins, Kerry L. "The Theology of the Flood." Seminary Review 34:2 (December 1988):69-88.

Hays, J. Daniel. "The Cushites: A Black Nation in Ancient History." Bibliotheca Sacra 153:611 (July-September 1996):270-80.

_____. "The Cushites: A Black Nation in the Bible." Bibliotheca Sacra 153:612 (October-December 1996):396-409.

Hayward, James L. and Donald E Casebolt. "The Genealogies of Genesis 5 and 11: A Statistical Study." Origins 9:2 (1982):75-81.

Heck, Joel D. "A History of Interpretation of Genesis 49 and Deuteronomy 33." Bibliotheca Sacra 147:585 (January-March 1990):16-31.

_____. "Issachar: Slave or Freeman? (Gen. 49:14-15)." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 29:4 (December 1986):385-96.

Heidel, Alexander. The Gilgamesh Epic and Old Testament Parallels. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1946.

Helyer, Larry R. "The Separation of Abram and Lot: Its Significance in the Patriarchal Narratives." Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 26 (June 1983):77-88.

Hendel, Ronald S. "When the Sons of God Cavorted with the Daughters of Men." Bible Review 3:2 (Summer 1987):8-13, 37.

Hengstenberg, Ernst Wilhelm. Dissertations on the Genuineness of the Pentateuch. 2 vols. Translated by J. E. Ryland. Edinburgh: John B. Lowe and T. & T. Clark, 1847.

_____. Egypt and the Books of Moses. Translated by R. D. C. Robbins. Andover, Mass.: Allen, Morrill and Wardwell, 1843.

Henry, Matthew. Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible. Revised ed. 6 vols. New York: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1935.

Hens-Piazza, Gina. "A Theology of Ecology: God's Image and the Natural World." Biblical Theology Bulletin 13:4 (October 1983):107-10.

Hiebert, D. Edmond. Working with God: Scriptural Studies in Intercession. New York: Carlton Press, 1987.

Hindson, Edward E. The Philistines and the Old Testament. Baker Studies in Biblical Archaeology series. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1983.

Hodges, Zane C. The Gospel Under Siege. Dallas: By the Author, Redencion Viva, P.O. Box 141167, 1981.

Hoehner, Harold W. "The Duration of the Egyptian Bondage." Bibliotheca Sacra 126:504 (October-December 1969):306-16.

Hoffner, Harry A., Jr. "The Linguistic Origins of Teraphim." Bibliotheca Sacra 124:495 (July-September 1967):230-38.

Holt, L., Jr. and R McIntosh. Holt Pediatrics. 12th ed. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1953.

Horbury, W. "Extirpation and excommunication." Vetus Testamentum 35 (1985):13-38.

Horn, Siegfried H. Biblical Archaeology: A Generation of Discovery. Washington: Biblical Archaeology Society, 1985.

Houtman, C. "What Did Jacob See In His Dream At Bethel?" Vetus Testamentum 27:3 (July 1977):337-51.

Howard, David M., Jr. "Sodom and Gomorrah Revisited." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 27:4 (December 1984):385-400.

Howe, Frederic R. "The Age of the Earth: An Appraisal of Some Current Evangelical Positions." Bibliotheca Sacra 142:565 (January-March 1985):23-37; 566 (April-June 1985):114-29.

Howe, George. "Carbon-14 and Other Radioactive Dating Methods." Caldwell, Idaho: Bible-Science Association, 1970.

Humphreys, D. Russell. Starlight and Time. Green Forest, Ark.: Master Books, 1994.

Humphreys, W. L. Joseph and His Family: A Literary Study. Columbia, S.C.: University of South Carolina, 1988.

Hunter, Alastair G. "Father Abraham: A Structural and Theological Study of the Yahwist's Presentation of the Abraham Material." Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 35 (June 1986):3-27.

Hutchison, John C. "Darwin's Evolutionary Theory and 19th-Century Natural Theology." Bibliotheca Sacra 152:607 (July-September 1995):334-54.

Hyman, Ronald T. "Questions in the Joseph Story: The Effects and Their Implications for Teaching." Religious Education 79:3 (Summer 1984):437-55.

International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, 1939 ed. S.v. "Antedeluvian Patriarchs," by John D. Davis.

_____. S.v. "Raamses," by C. R. Conder.

Jackson, Thomas A. "Creation Stories of the Ancient Near East." Biblical Illustrator 13:1 (Fall 1986):20-25.

Jastrow, Robert. God and the Astronomers. New York: W. W. Norton and Co., 1978.

_____. Until the Sun Dies. New York: W. W. Norton and Co., 1977.

Jay, Nancy. "Sacrifice, Descent and the Patriarchs." Vetus Testamentum 38:1 (1988):52-70.

Jeske, John C. "The Gospel Adam and Eve Heard: Genesis 3:15." Wisconsin Lutheran Quarterly 81:3 (Summer 1984):182-84.

Johns, Warren H. "Strategies for Origins." Ministry, May 1981, pp. 26-28.

Johnson, Elliott E. "Premillennialism Introduced: Hermeneutics." In A Case for Premillennialism: A New Consensus, pp. 15-34. Edited by Donald K. Campbell and Jeffrey L. Townsend. Chicago: Moody Press, 1992.

Jones, Peter. "Androgyny: The Pagan Sexual Ideal." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 43:3 (September 2000):443-69.

Jordan, James B. "Rebellion, Tyranny, and Dominion in the Book of Genesis." Christianity and Civilization 3 (Summer 1983):38-80.

Josephus, Flavius. The Works of Flavius Josephus. Translated by William Whiston. Antiquities of the Jews. London: T. Nelson and Sons, 1866.

Kaiser, Walter C., Jr. "The Literary Form of Genesis 1-11." In New Perspectives on the Old Testament, pp. 48-65. Waco: Word Books, 1970.

_____. "The Promise Theme and the Theology of Rest." Bibliotheca Sacra 130:518 (April-June 1973):135-50.

_____. "The Promised Land: A Biblical-Historical View." Bibliotheca Sacra 138:552 (October-December 1981):302-12.

_____. Toward an Old Testament Theology. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1978.

Karageorghis, Vassos. "Exploring Philistine Origins on the Island of Cyprus." Biblical Archaeology Review 10:2 (March-April 1984):16-28.

Kardimon, Samson. "Adoption As a Remedy For Infertility in the Period of the Patriarchs." Journal of Semitic Studies 3:2 (April 1958):123-26.

Keil, C. F. and Franz Delitzsch. The Pentateuch. 3 vols. Translated by James Martin. Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament. N.p.; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., n.d.

Key, Thomas. "Does the Canopy Theory Hold Water?" Journal of the American Scientific Affiliation 37:4 (December 1985):223-25.

Kidner, Derek. Genesis: An Introduction and Commentary. Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries series. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1967.

Kitchen, K. A. Ancient Orient and Old Testament. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1966.

_____. The Bible In Its World. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1977.

_____. "The Old Testament in its Context: 1 From the Origins to the Event of the Exodus." Theological Students' Fellowship Bulletin 59 (1971):2-10.

_____. "The Old Testament in its Context 6." Theological Students' Fellowship Bulletin 64 (1972):2-10.

Klotz, John W. "A Creationist Environmental Ethic." Creation Research Society Quarterly 21:1 (June 1984):6-8.

_____. Genes, Genesis, and Evolution. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1970.

_____. Modern Science in the Christian Life. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1961.

Kofahl, Robert E. and Kelly L Segraves. The Creation Explanation. Wheaton: Harold Shaw Publishers, 1975.

Labuschagne, Casper J. "The Pattern of the Divine Speech Formulas in the Pentateuch." Vetus Testamentum 32:3 (1982):268-96.

LaHaye, Tim F. and John D Morris. The Ark on Ararat. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1976.

Lane, David H. "Special Creation or Evolution: No Middle Ground." Bibliotheca Sacra 151:601 (January-March 1994):11-31.

_____. "Theological Problems with Theistic Evolution." Bibliotheca Sacra 151:602 (April-June 1994):155-74.

Lang, Bernhard. "Afterlife: Ancient Israel's Changing Vision of the World Beyond." Bible Review 4:1 (February 1988):12-23.

Lange, John Peter, ed. Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures. 12 vols. Reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1960. Vol. 1: Genesis-Leviticus, by John Peter Lange and Frederic Gardiner. Translated by Tayler Lewis, A. Gosman, and Charles M. Mead.

Larkin, Clarence. The Spirit World. Philadelphia: By the Author, 1921.

Larsson, Gerhard. "The Chronology of the Pentateuch: A Comparison of the MT and LXX." Journal of Biblical Literature 102:3 (September 1983):401-9.

LaSor, William Sanford. "Biblical Creationism." Asbury Theological Journal 42:2 (1987):7-20.

Lawlor, John I. "The Test of Abraham: Genesis 22:1-19." Grace Theological Journal 1:1 (Spring 1980):19-35.

Lazenby, Henry F. "The Image of God: Masculine, Feminine, or Neuter?" Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 30:1 (March 1987):63-70.

Leupold, H. C. Exposition of Genesis. 2 vols. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1942.

Lewis, Clive Staples. Mere Christianity. New York: Macmillan, 1958.

Lewis, Jack P. "Noah and the Flood in Jewish, Christian, and Muslim Tradition." Biblical Archaeologist 47:4 (December 1984):224-39.

_____. "The Offering of Abel (Gen 4:4): A History of Interpretation." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 37:4 (December 1994):481-96.

L'Heureux, Conrad. "The Ugaritic and Biblical Rephaim." Harvard Theological Review 67 (1974):265-74.

Livingston, G. Herbert. The Pentateuch in Its Cultural Environment. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1974.

Loewen, Jacob A. "The Names of God in the Old Testament." The Bible Translator 35:2 (April 1984):201-7.

Longacre, R. E. Joseph: A Story of Divine Providence. Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1989.

Love, Vicky. Childless Is Not Less. Minneapolis: Bethany House Publishers, 1984.

Lowenthal, E. I. The Joseph Narrative in Genesis. New York: Ktav, 1973.

Lucas, Ernest. "Miracles and natural laws." Christian ARENA 38:3 (September 1985):7-10.

Luke, K. "Esau's Marriage." Indian Theological Studies 25:2 (June 1988):171-90.

_____. "Two Birth Narratives in Genesis." Indian Theological Studies 17:2 (June 1980):154-80.

Luther, Martin. Luther's Commentary on Genesis. 2 vols. Translated by J. Theodore Mueller. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1958.

_____. Luther's Works. Edited by Jaroslav Pelikan and Helmut T. Lehmann. Vol. 7: Lectures on Genesis Chapters 38-44. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1965.

MacKenzie, Roderick A. F. "The Divine Soliloquies in Genesis." Catholic Biblical Quarterly 17 (1955):277-86.

Mafico, T. J. "The Crucial Question Concerning the Justice of God." Journal of Theology for Southern Africa 42 (March 1983):11-16.

Malcolm, David. "The Seven-Day Cycle." Creation Ex Nihilo 9:2 (March 1987):32-35.

Mann, Thomas. "Jacob Takes a Bride." Bible Review 2:1 (Spring 1986):52-59.

_____. Joseph and His Brothers. New York: Knopf, 1948.

March, Frank Lewis. Studies in Creationism. Washington: Review and Herald, 1950.

Martin, Jobe. The Evolution of a Creationist. Revised ed. Rockwall, Tex.: Biblical Discipleship Publishers, 1996.

Mathews, Kenneth A. Genesis 1-11:26. New American Commentary series. N.c.: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1996.

Mathewson, Steven D. "Guidelines for Understanding and Proclaiming Old Testament Narratives." Bibliotheca Sacra 154:616 (October-December 1997):410-35.

Mattingly, Gerald L. "The Early Bronze Age Sites of Central and Southern Moab." Near Eastern Archaeological Society Bulletin 23 (Spring 1984):69-98.

Mayor, Joseph B. The Epistle of St. James. Revised 3rd ed. New York: Macmillan and Co., 1913; reprint ed. Minneapolis: Klock & Klock Christian Publishers, 1977.

McGee, J. Vernon. Ruth: The Romance of Redemption. 1943. Reprint ed. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1981.

McIlwain, William J., Jr. "My Ways Are Not Your Ways." Exegesis and Exposition 3:1 (Fall 1988):92-100.

McKenzie, Brian Alexander. "Jacob's Blessing of Pharaoh: An Interpretation of Gen 46:31-47:26." Westminster Theological Journal 45 (1983):386-99.

Mehlman, Bernard. "Genesis 31:19-39: An Interpretation." Journal of Reform Judaism 29:3 (Summer 1982):33-36.

Mendelsohn, I. "On the Preferential Status of the Eldest Son." Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 156 (December 1959):38-40.

Mennen, Doug. "How the Wise Man Overcomes Temptation." Exegesis and Exposition 3:1 (Fall 1988):83-91.

Merrill, Eugene H. "Ebla and Biblical Historical Inerrancy." Bibliotheca Sacra 140:550 (October-December 1983):302-21.

_____. "Fixed Dates in Patriarchal Chronology." Bibliotheca Sacra 137:547 (July-September 1980):241-51.

_____. Kingdom of Priests. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1987.

_____. "The Peoples of the Old Testament according to Genesis 10." Bibliotheca Sacra 154:613 (January-March 1997):3-22.

_____. "Rashi, Nicholas de Lyra, and Christian Exegesis." Westminster Theological Journal 38:1 (Fall 1975):66-79.

_____. "A Theology of the Pentateuch." In A Biblical Theology of the Old Testament, pp. 7-87. Edited by Roy B. Zuck. Chicago: Moody Press, 1991.

Milgrom, Jacob. Numbers. JPS Torah Commentary series. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1990.

_____. "Religious Conversion and the Revolt Model for the Formation of Israel." Journal of Biblical Literature 101 (1982):169-76.

Millikin, Jimmy A. "The Origin of Death." Mid-America Theological Journal 7:2 (Winter 1983):17-22.

Mills, M. S. "A Comparison of the Genesis and Lukan Genealogies (The Case for Cainan)." Th.M. thesis, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1978.

Mills, Watson E. "Sons of God: The Roman View." Biblical Illustrator, Fall 1983, pp. 37-39.

Miscall, Peter D. "The Jacob and Joseph Stories as Analogies." Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 6 (February 1978):28-40.

_____. The Workings of Old Testament Narrative. Philadelphia: Fortress Press; Chico, Ca: Scholars Press, 1983.

Mixter, Russell Lowell, ed. Evolution and Christian Thought Today. 1st ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1959.

_____. "A Letter to President Edman, March 26, 1962." Bulletin of Wheaton College, May 1962, pp. 4-5.

Monson, James M. The Land Between. Jerusalem: By the Author: P.O. Box 1276, 1983.

Morgan, G. Campbell. Living Messages of the Books of the Bible. 2 vols. New York: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1912.

Morganstern, J. "The Book of the Covenant, Part III--The Huqqim." Hebrew Union College Annual 8-9 (1931-32):1-150.

Morris, Henry M. "Biblical Catastrophism and Modern Science." Bibliotheca Sacra 125:498 (April-June 1968):107-15.

_____. "Biblical Creationism and Modern Science." Bibliotheca Sacra 125:497 (January-March 1968):20-28.

_____. "The Gap Theory." Creation Ex Nihilo. 10:1 (December 1987-February 1988):35-37.

_____. The Genesis Record. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1976.

_____. "Looking At the Original Kinds." Creation Ex Nihilo 10:4 (November 1988):15-16.

_____. Science, Scripture and the Young Earth. El Cajon, Calif.: Institute for Creation Research, 1983.

Morris, John D. The Young Earth. Green Forest, Ark.: Master Books, 1994.

Morris, Leon. The Wages of Sin. London: Tyndale Press, 1954.

Morrison, Martha A. "The Jacob and Laban Narrative in Light of Near Eastern Sources." Biblical Archaeologist 46:3 (Summer 1983):155-62.

Morrow, Lance. "In the Beginning: God and Science." Time 113 (Feb. 5, 1979), 149-50.

Morton, Glenn R. "The Carbon Problem." Creation Research Society Quarterly 20:4 (March 1984):212-19.

Muffs, Yochanan. "Abraham the Noble Warrior: Patriarchal Politics and Laws of War in Ancient Israel." Journal of Jewish Studies 33:1-2 (Spring-Autumn 1982):81-107.

Muilenburg, James. "The Birth of Benjamin." Journal of Biblical Literature 75 (1956):194-201.

Mulzac, Kenneth. "Genesis 9:1-7: Its Theological Connections with the Creation Motif." Journal of the Adventist Theological Society 12:1 (Spring 2001):65-77.

Myers, Ellen. "God's Sabbath Rest--Man's Created Destiny." Creation Social Science and Humanities Quarterly 7:3 (Spring 1985):11-14.

New Bible Dictionary, 1962 ed. S.v. "Amorites," by A. R. Millard.

_____. S.v. "Mining and Metals," by A. Stuart.

_____. S.v. "Rephaim," by T. C. Mitchell.

New Westminster Dictionary of the Bible, 1970 ed. S.v. "Chronology."

Newman, Robert C. and Herman J Eckelmann. Genesis One and the Origin of the Earth. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1977.

Nichol, Francis David, ed. The Seventh-Day Adventist Bible Commentary. 7 vols. Washington: Review and Herald Publishing Assoc., 1953-57.

Nicol, George G. "Genesis XXIX. 32 and XXXV. 22a: Reuben's Reversal." Journal of Theological Studies 31:2 (October 1980):536-39.

Noble, C. S. and J. J Naughton. "Deep-Ocean Basalts: Inert Gas Content and Uncertainties in Age Dating." Science 162 (Oct. 11, 1968):265-67.

O'Brien, J. Randall. "Flood Stories of the Ancient Near East." Biblical Illustrator 13:1 (Fall 1986):60-65.

Olson, Everett C. "The Role of Paleontology in the Formulation of Evolutionary Thought." Bioscience 16:1 (January 1966):37-40.

Pappas, Harry S. "Deception as Patriarchal Self-Defense in a Foreign Land: A Form Critical Study of the Wife-Sister Stories in Genesis." Greek Orthodox Theological Review 29:1 (Spring 1984):35-50.

Parker, Gary. Creation Facts of Life. Green Forest, Ark.: Master Books, 1994.

Parker, Joseph. The People's Bible. Vol. 1: The Book of Genesis. New York: Funk & Wagnalls Publishers, 1890.

"The Patriarchs' Wives as Sisters--Is the Anchor Bible Wrong?" Biblical Archaeology Review 1:3 (September 1975):22-26.

Patten, Donald W. "The Biblical Flood: A Geographical Perspective." Bibliotheca Sacra 128:509 (January-March 1971):36-49.

Patterson, Richard D. "The Old Testament Use of an Archetype: The Trickster." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 42:3 (September 1999):385-94

Pember, George Hawkins. Earth's Earliest Ages and Their Connection with Modern Spiritualism and Theosophy. New York: Fleming H. Revell Co., n.d.

Pentecost, J. Dwight. Prophecy for Today. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1961.

_____. Things to Come. Findlay, Ohio: Dunham Publishing Co., 1958.

_____. Thy Kingdom Come. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1990.

Peterson, Everett H. "Prehistory and the Tower of Babel." Creation Research Society Quarterly 19:2 (September 1982):87-90.

Pettinato, Giovanni. "The Royal Archives of Tell Mardekh-Ebla." Biblical Archaeologist 39 (May 1976):44-52.

Pfeiffer, Charles F. Ras Shamra and the Bible. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1962.

Pfeiffer, Charles F., and Howard F Vos. The Wycliffe Historical Geography of Bible Lands. Chicago: Moody Press, 1967.

Phillips, Anthony. Ancient Israel's Criminal Law. Oxford: Blackwell, 1970.

_____. "Some Aspects of Family Law in Pre-Exilic Israel." Vetus Testamentum 23:3 (July 1973):349-61.

Pieters, Albertus. Old Testament History. Vol. 1: Notes on Genesis. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1943.

Pink, Arthur W. Gleanings in Genesis. 1922; reprint ed. Chicago: Moody Press, 1950.

Polzin, Robert. "The Ancestress of Israel in Danger' in Danger." Semeia 3 (1975):81-98.

Poverello, Robert M. "The Angels at Sodom and Genesis Rabbah: A Study in Midrash." Exegesis and Exposition. 3:1 (Fall 1988):61-62.

Pritchard, James B., ed., Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament. 3rd ed. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1969.

"The Problem of Childlessness in Near Eastern Law." Buried History 5:4 (December 1969):106-14.

Pun, Pattle P. T. "A Theology of Progressive Creationism." Journal of the American Scientific Affiliation 39:1 (March 1987):9-19.

Rabinowitz, Isaac. "Sarah's Wish (Gen. XXI 6-7)." Vetus Testamentum 29 (July 1979):362-63.

Ramm, Bernard. The Christian View of Science and Scripture. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1954.

Ramsey, George W. "Is Name-Giving an Act of Domination in Genesis 2:23 and Elsewhere?" Catholic Biblical Quarterly. 50:1 (January 1988):24-35.

Ray, J. D. "Two Etymologies: Ziklag and Phicol." Vetus Testamentum 36:3 (July 1986):355-61.

Rendall, Ted S. "Using the Creation Account for Maximum Spiritual Profit." Prairie Overcomer 60:8 (September 1987):3-5, 22.

Rendsburg, Gary A. "Notes on Genesis XXXV." Vetus Testamentum 34:3 (July 1984):361-65.

Rice, Stanley. "Botanical and Ecological Objections to a Preflood Water Canopy." Journal of the American Scientific Affiliation 37:4 (December 1985):225-29.

Rimmer, Harry. Modern Science and the Genesis Record. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1941.

Robertson, O. Palmer. "Current Critical Questions Concerning the Curse of Ham' (Gen 9:20-27)." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 41:2 (June 1998):177-88.

Robinson, Haddon. Leadership 3:1 (Winter 1982), p. 104.

Robinson, Robert B. "Literary Functions of the Genealogies of Genesis." Catholic Biblical Quarterly 48 (October 1986):595-608.

Roehrs, Walter R. "Divine Covenants: Their Structure and Function." Concordia Journal 14:1 (January 1988):7-27.

Rogers, Cleon L., Jr. "The Covenant with Abraham and Its Historical Setting." Bibliotheca Sacra 127:507 (July-September 1970):241-56.

Rooker, Mark F. "Genesis 1:1-3: Creation or Re-Creation?" Bibliotheca Sacra 149:595 (July-September 1992):316-23; and 596 (October-December 1992):411-27.

Ross, Allan P. Creation and Blessing. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1988.

_____. "The Curse of Canaan." Bibliotheca Sacra 137:547 (July-September 1980):223-40.

_____. "The Daughters of Lot and the Daughter-in-Law of Judah: Hubris or Faith in the Struggle for Women's Rights." Exegesis and Exposition. 2:1 (Summer 1987):71-82.

_____. "The Dispersion of the Nations in Genesis 11:1-9." Bibliotheca Sacra 138:550 (April-June 1981):119-38.

_____. "Genesis." In The Bible Knowledge Commentary: Old Testament, pp. 15-101. Edited by John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1985.

_____. "Jacob at the Jabbok, Israel at Peniel." Bibliotheca Sacra 142:568 (October-December 1985):338-54.

_____. "Jacob's Vision: The Founding of Bethel." Bibliotheca Sacra 142:567 (July-September 1985):224-37.

_____. "Noah--'This One Shall Comfort Us.'" Exegesis and Exposition. 3:1 (Fall 1988):71-82.

_____. "The Table of Nations in Genesis 10--Its Content." Bibliotheca Sacra 138:549 (January-March 1981):22-34.

_____. "The Table of Nations in Genesis 10--Its Structure." Bibliotheca Sacra 137:548 (October-December 1980):340-53.

Ross, Hugh N. Creation and Time: A Biblical and Scientific Perspective on the Creation-Date Controversy. Colorado Springs: NavPress, 1994.

Roth, Ariel A. "Evidences for a Worldwide Flood." Ministry, May 1984, pp. 12-13.

Roth, Wolfgang M. W. "The Wooing of Rebekah: A Tradition-Critical Study of Genesis 24." Catholic Biblical Quarterly 34 (1972):177-87.

Rowley, Harold H. "Recent Discovery and the Patriarchal Age." In The Servant of the Lord and Other Essays on the Old Testament. 2nd ed. Revised. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1965.

Ruble, Richard L. "The Doctrine of Dreams." Bibliotheca Sacra 125:500 (October-December 1968):360-64.

Ryrie, Charles C. "The Bible and Evolution." Bibliotheca Sacra 124:493 (January-March 1967):66-78.

_____. Dispensationalism. Chicago: Moody Press, 1995.

_____. Dispensationalism Today. Chicago: Moody Press, 1965.

_____. "The Doctrine of Capital Punishment." Bibliotheca Sacra 129:515 (July-September 1972):211-17.

_____. You Mean the Bible Teaches That . . . Chicago: Moody Press, 1974.

Sailhamer, John H. "Exegetical Notes: Genesis 1:1-2:4a." Trinity Journal 5 NS:1 (Spring 1984):73-82.

_____. "Genesis." In Genesis-Numbers. Vol. 2 of The Expositor's Bible Commentary. 12 vols. Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein and Richard P. Polcyn. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1990.

_____. "The Messiah and the Hebrew Bible." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 44:1 (March 2001):5-23.

_____. "The Mosaic Law and the Theology of the Pentateuch." Westminster Theological Journal 53 (Fall 1991):241-61.

_____. The Pentateuch as Narrative. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992.

Salkin, Jeffrey K. "Dinah, The Torah's Forgotten Woman," Judaism 35:3 (Summer 1986):284-89.

Samuel, Maurice. Certain People of the Book. New York: Knopf, 1955.

_____. "Joseph--The Brilliant Failure." Bible Review 2:1 (Summer 1986):38-51, 68.

Sarna, Nahum M. "Abraham in History." Biblical Archaeology Review 3 (December 1977):5-9.

_____. Understanding Genesis. 1st ed. Heritage of Biblical Israel series, no. 1. New York: Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1966.

Sasson, J. "The Tower of Babel' As a Clue to the Redactional Structuring of the Primeval History [Gen 1-11:9]." In The Bible World: Essays in Honor of Cyrus H. Gordon, pp. 211-19. Edited by Gary Rendsburg, et al. New York: Ktav, 1980.

Saucy, Robert L. The Case for Progressive Dispensationalism. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1993.

Sauer, Erich E. The King of the Earth. Translated by Michael Bolister. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1962.

Scalise, Pamela J. "The Significance of Curses and Blessings." Biblical Illustrator 13:1 (Fall 1986):57-59.

Schaeffer, Edith. "What Is My Mess of Pottage?" Christianity Today 19:12 (March 14, 1975):50-51.

Schaeffer, Francis A. Genesis in Time and Space. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1972.

Schaub, R. Thomas and Walter E Rast. "Preliminary Report of the 1981 Expedition to the Dead Sea Plain, Jordan." Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 254 (Spring 1984):35-60.

Schneider, Hermann. "Did the Universe Start Out Structured?" Creation Research Society Quarterly 21:3 (December 1984):119-23.

Schwantes, Siegfried J. A Short History of the Ancient Near East. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1965.

Seaver, William L. "A Statistical Analysis of the Genesis Life- Spans." Creation Research Society Quarterly 20:2 (September 1983):80-87.

Seebass, Horst. "The Joseph Story, Genesis 48 and the Canonical Process." Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 35 (June 1986):29-43.

Segal, Moses Hirsch. The Pentateuch: Its Composition and Its Authorship and Other Biblical Studies. Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1967.

Selman, M. J. "The Social Environment of the Patriarchs." Tyndale Bulletin 27 (1976):114-36.

Shapiro, Marc. "The Silence of Joseph." Journal of Reform Judaism 36:1 (Winter 1989):13-17.

Sharp, Donald B. "In Defense of Rebecca." Biblical Theology Bulletin 10:4 (October 1980):164-68.

Shea, William H. "Literary Structural Parallels between Genesis 1 and 2." Origins 16:2(1989):49-68.

Shehadeh, Imad N. "Contrasts between Eastern and Western Culture." Exegesis and Exposition 2:1 (Summer 1987):3-12.

Shelley, Marshall. "The Death Penalty: Two Sides of a Growing Issue." Christianity Today, March 2, 1984, pp. 14-17.

Shepperson, Vance L. "Jacob's Journey: From Narcissism toward Wholeness." Journal of Psychology and Theology 12:3 (1984):178-87.

Sherlock, Charles. "Creationism, Creation and Scripture." Interchange 35 (1984):17-32.

Simons, J. The Geographical and Topographical Texts of the Old Testament. Leiden, Netherlands: E. J. Brill, 1959.

Skinner, John. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Genesis. International Critical Commentary series. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1930.

Slusher, Harold S. Critique of Radiometric Dating. San Diego: Creation-Life Publishers, 1973.

Smith, Gary V. "The Concept of God/the Gods as King in the Ancient Near East and the Bible." Trinity Journal 3:NS (1982):18-38.

Smith, William Robertson. Lectures on the Religion of the Semites. 3rd ed. New York: Ktav Publishing House, 1969.

Speiser, Ephraim A., ed. Genesis. 1st ed. Translated by E. A. Speiser. Anchor Bible series, no. 1. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1964.

_____. "I Know Not the Day of My Death.'" Journal of Biblical Literature 74 (1955):252-65.

Sprinkle, Joe M. "Old Testament Perspectives on Divorce and Remarriage." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 40:4 (December 1997):529-50.

Stahr, James A. "The Death Penalty." Interest, March 1984, pp. 2-3.

Sterchi, David A. "Does Genesis 1 Provide a Chronological Sequence?" Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 39:4 (December 1996):529-36.

Sternberg, Meir. The Poetics of Biblical Narrative. Bloomington, Ind.: Indiana University Press, 1985.

Stevens, R. Paul. "Family Feud." His 42:3 (December 1981):18-20.

Stigers, Harold G. A Commentary on Genesis. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1976.

Strickling, James E. "The Tower of Babel and the Confusion of Tongues." Kronos 8:1 (Fall 1982):53-62.

Student Map Manual. Jerusalem: Pictorial Archive (Near Eastern History) Est., 1979.

Sutherland, Dixon. "The Organization of the Abraham Promise Narratives." Zeitschrift für die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 95:3 (1983):337-43.

Tabick, Jacqueline. "The Snake in the Grass: The Problems of Interpreting a Symbol in the Hebrew Bible and Rabbinic Writings." Religion 16 (April 1986):155-67.

Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament. Edited by R. Laird Harris, Gleason L. Archer, Jr., and Bruce K. Waltke. 1980. S.v. "dor," by Robert D. Culver, 1:186-87.

Thiselton, A. C. "The Supposed Power of Words in the Biblical Writings." Journal of Theological Studies NS25:2 (October 1972):283-99.

Thomas, W. H. Griffith. Genesis. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1946.

Thompson, Henry. O. "The Biblical Ammonites." Bible and Spade 11:1 (Winter 1982):1-14.

Throntveit, Mark. "Are the Events in the Genesis Account Set Forth in Chronological Order? No." In The Genesis Debate, pp. 36-55. Edited by Ronald F. Youngblood. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1986.

Thurman, L. Duane. How to Think About Evolution & Other Bible-Science Controversies. 2nd ed. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1978.

Townsend, Jeffrey L. "Fulfillment of the Land Promise in the Old Testament." Bibliotheca Sacra 142:568 (October-December 1985):320-37.

Tsevat, Matitiahu. "Studies in the Book of Samuel" Hebrew Union College Annual 32 (1961):191-216.

_____. "Two Old Testament Stories (Gen. 32:23-32 and Judg. 10:1-5; 12:7-15) and their Hittite Analogies." Journal of the American Oriental Society 103:1 (January-March 1983):321-26.

Ukleja, P. Michael. "Homosexuality and the Old Testament." Bibliotheca Sacra 140:559 (July-September 1983):259-66.

Van Bebber, Mark; and Paul S Taylor. Creation and Time: A Report on the Progressive Creationist Book by Hugh Ross. Second ed. Mesa, Ariz.: Eden Communications, 1995.

Van Seters, John. "Jacob's Marriages and Ancient Near East Customs: A Reexamination." Harvard Theological Review 62:4 (October 1969):377-95.

_____. "The Problem of Childlessness in Near Eastern Law and the Patriarchs of Israel." Journal of Biblical Literature 87 (1968):401-408.

Vawter, Bruce. On Genesis: A New Reading. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1977.

von Rad, Gerhard. Genesis. Translated by John H. Marks. Revised ed. The Old Testament Library series. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1972.

Vos, Gerhardus. Biblical Theology, Old and New Testaments. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1954.

Vos, Howard F. Genesis. Everyman's Bible Commentary series. Chicago: Moody Press, 1982.

Walsh, J. T. "Genesis 2:4b-3:24: A Synchronic Approach." Journal of Biblical Literature 96 (1977):161-77.

Waltke, Bruce K. "Cain and His Offering." Westminster Theological Journal 48:2 (Fall 1986):363-72.

_____. "The Creation Account in Genesis 1:1-3." Bibliotheca Sacra 132:525 (January-March 1975):25-36; 526 (April-June 1975):136-144; 527 (July-September 1975):216-228; 528 (October-December 1975):327-342; 133:529 (January-March 1976):28-41.

_____. Creation and Chaos. Portland, Oreg.: Western Conservative Baptist Seminary, 1974.

_____. "Reflections from the Old Testament on Abortion." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 19:1 (Winter 1976):3-13.

Walvoord, John F. "The New Covenant." In Integrity of Heart, Skillfulness of Hands, pp. 186-200. Edited by Charles H. Dyer and Roy B. Zuck. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1994.

Warfield, B. B. "On the Antiquity and the Unity of the Human Race." Princeton Theological Review 9:1 (January 1911):1-25.

Wcela, Emil A. "The Abraham Stories, History and Faith." Biblical Theology Bulletin 10 (October 1970):176-81.

Weinfeld, Moshe. Deuteronomy and the Deuteronomic School. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1972.

Weir, C. J. Mullo, "The Alleged Hurrian Wife-Sister Motif in Genesis." Transactions of the Glasgow University Oriental Society 2:22 (1967-68):14-25.

Weisman, Z. "National Consciousness in the Patriarchal Promises." Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 31 (February 1985):55-73.

Wenham, Gordon J. "The Coherence of the Flood Narrative." Vetus Testamentum 28:3 (1978):336-48.

_____. Genesis 1-15. Word Biblical Commentary series. Waco: Word Books, 1987.

_____. Genesis 15-50. Word Biblical Commentary series. Waco: Word Books, 1994.

_____. "The Symbolism of the Animal Rite in Genesis 15: A Response to G. F. Hasel, JSOT 19 (1981):61-78." Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 22 (1982):134-37.

Wenham, John W. "Christ's View of Scripture." In Inerrancy, pp. 3-36. Edited by Norman L. Geisler. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1980.

West, Stuart A. "The Nuzi Tablets." Bible and Spade 10:3-4 (Summer-Autumn 1981):65-73.

Westermann, Claus. Genesis 1-11: A Commentary. Translated by John J. Scullion. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1984.

_____. Genesis 12-36: A Commentary. Translated by John J. Scullion. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1985.

_____. Genesis 37-50: A Commentary. Translated by John J. Scullion. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1986.

_____. "Promises to the Patriarchs." In The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible Supplement Volume, pp. 690-93. Edited by George Arthur Buttrick. New York: Abingdon, 1962.

Whitcomb, John C., Jr. The Early Earth. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1972.

_____. Esther: The Triumph of God's Sovereignty. Everyman's Bible Commentary series; Chicago: Moody Press, 1979.

Whitcomb, John C., and Donald B DeYoung. Review of The Waters Above: Earth's Pre-Flood Vapor Canopy, by Joseph C. Dillow. Grace Theological Journal 3:1 (Spring 1982):123-32.

Whitcomb, John C. and Henry M Morris. The Genesis Flood. Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1968.

White, Hugh C. "The Divine Oath in Genesis." Journal of Biblical Literature 92:2 (June 1973):165-79.

_____. "The Joseph Story: A Narrative that Consumes' Its Content." Semeia 31 (1985):49-69.

Whybray, R. Norman. Introduction to the Pentateuch. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1995.

Williams, John. "Joseph's Wardrobe." Harvester 64:7 (July 1985):19, 21.

Willis, David L. "Creation and/or Evolution." Journal of the American Scientific Affiliation 29:2 (June 1977):68-72.

Wilson, R. R. Genealogy and History in the Biblical World. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1977.

Wiseman, Donald J. "Abraham in History and Tradition. Part I: Abraham the Hebrew." Bibliotheca Sacra 134:534 (April-June 1977):123-30.

_____. "Abraham in History and Tradition. Part II: Abraham the Prince." Bibliotheca Sacra 134-535 (July-September 1977):228-37.

Witmer, John A. "The Doctrine of Miracles." Bibliotheca Sacra 130:518 (April-June 1973):126-34.

Wonderly, Daniel E. God's Time-Records in Ancient Sediments. Flint, Mich.: Crystal Press, 1977.

Wood, Bryant G. "Journey Down the Jabbok." Bible and Spade, Spring 1978, pp. 57-64.

Wood, Leon. A Survey of Israel's History. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1970.

Woodmorappe, John. "A Diluviological Treatise on the Stratigraphic Separation of Fossils." Creation Research Society Quarterly 20:3 (December 1983):133-85.

Woudstra, Martin H. "The Toledot of the Book of Genesis and Their Redemptive-Historical Significance." Calvin Theological Journal 5:2 (1970):184-89.

Wright, Chris. "Corruption and Dishonesty: An Old Testament Perspective." TRACI Journal 29 (April-September 1985):4-20.

_____. "Intercession or Irritation?" Third Way, February 1983, pp. 18-19.

Wright, David F. "Woman Before and After the Fall: a comparison of Luther's and Calvin's interpretation of Genesis 1-3." Churchman 98:2 (1984):126-35.

Yamauchi, Edwin M. "Anthropomorphism in Ancient Religion." Bibliotheca Sacra 125:497 (January-March 1968):29-44.

_____. "Cultural Aspects of Marriage in the Ancient World." Bibliotheca Sacra 135:539 (July-September 1978):24-152.

Young, Davis A. Christianity and the Age of the Earth. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1982.

_____. Creation and the Flood. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1977.

Young, Edward J. Genesis 3. London: Banner of Truth, 1966.

_____. In the Beginning. Edinburgh: Banner of Truth Trust, 1976.

_____. Studies in Genesis One. International Library of Philosophy and Theology series in Biblical and Theological Studies. Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1973.

Youngblood, Clark. "Wells." Biblical Illustrator 13:1 (Fall 1986):41-49.

Zimmerli, Walther. "Abraham." Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages 6 (1978):49-60.

Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible, 1975 ed. S.v. "River of Egypt," by Bruce K. Waltke.

Copyright 2003 by Thomas L. Constable

Haydock: Genesis (Book Introduction)

THE BOOK OF GENESIS.

INTRODUCTION.

The Hebrews now entitle all the Five Books of Moses, from the initial words, which originally were written like one continued word or verse; but the Septuagint have preferred to give the titles the most memorable occurrences of each work. On this occasion, the Creation of all things out of nothing, strikes us with peculiar force. We find a refutation of all the heathenish mythology, and of the world's eternity, which Aristotle endeavoured to establish. We behold the short reign of innocence, and the origin of sin and misery, the dispersion of nations, and the providence of God watching over his chosen people, till the death of Joseph, about the year of the world 2369 (Usher) 2399 (Salien and Tirinus), the year before Christ 1631. We shall witness the same care in the other Books of Scripture, and adore his wisdom and goodness in preserving to himself faithful witnesses, and a true Holy Catholic Church, in all ages, even when the greatest corruption seemed to overspread the land. (Haydock)

----------------------------------------

This Book is so called from its treating of the Generation, that is, of the Creation and the beginning of the world. The Hebrews call it Bereshith, from the word with which it begins. It contains not only the History of the Creation of the World, but also an account of its progress during the space of 2369 years, that is, until the death of Joseph.

Gill: Genesis (Book Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO GENESIS

This book, in the Hebrew copies of the Bible, and by the Jewish writers, is generally called Bereshith, which signifies "in the beginning", being the first word of it; as the other four books of Moses are also called from their initial words. In the Syriac and Arabic versions, the title of this book is "The Book of the Creation", because it begins with an account of the creation of all things; and is such an account, and so good an one, as is not to be met with anywhere else: the Greek version calls it Genesis, and so we and other versions from thence; and that because it treats of the generation of all things, of the heavens, and the earth, and all that are in them, and of the genealogy of men: it treats of the first men, of the patriarchs before the flood, and after it to the times of Joseph. It is called the "first" book of Moses, because there are four more that follow; the name the Jewish Rabbins give to the whole is חמשה חומשי תורה, "the five fifths of the law", to which the Greek word "pentateuch" answers; by which we commonly call these books, they being but one volume, consisting of five parts, of which this is the first. And that they were all written by Moses is generally believed by Jews and Christians. Some atheistical persons have suggested the contrary; our countryman Hobbes ^a would have it, that these books are called his, not from his being the author of them, but from his being the subject of them; not because they were written by him, but because they treat of him: but certain it is that Moses both wrote them, and was read, as he was in the Jewish synagogues, every sabbath day, which can relate to no other writings but these, Joh 1:45. And Spinosa, catching at some doubts raised by Aben Ezra on Deu 1:1 concerning some passages which seemed to him to have been added by another hand, forms objections against Moses being the author of the book of Genesis; which are sufficiently answered by Carpzovius ^b. Nor can Ezra be the author of the Pentateuch, as Spinosa suspects; since it is plain these writings were in being before his time, in the times of Josiah, Amaziah, yea, of David, and also of Joshua, 2Ch 34:14 nay, they are even referred to in the book of Ezra as the writings of Moses, Ezr 3:2 to which may be added, in proof of the same, Deu 31:9. Nor are there any other writings of his authentic; what are ascribed to him, as the Analepsis of Moses, his Apocalypse, and his Last Will and Testament, are apocryphal. That this book of Genesis particularly was written by him, is evident from the testimony of Philip, and even of our Lord Jesus Christ, who both testify that he wrote concerning the Messiah, Joh 1:45 as he did in this book, where he speaks of him as the seed of the woman that should break the serpent's head; as the seed of Abraham, in whom all the nations of the earth should be blessed; and as the Shiloh, to whom the gathering of the people should be, Gen 3:15. Nor is there any reason to believe that he wrote this book from the annals of the patriarchs, since it does not appear, nor is it very probable, that they had any; nor from traditions delivered down from one to another, from father to son, which is more probable, considering the length of the lives of the patriarchs: but yet such a variety of particulars respecting times, places, persons, their genealogies and circumstances, so nicely and exactly given, can scarcely be thought to be the fruit of memory; and much less is it to be imagined that he was assisted in it by Gabriel, when he lived in solitude in Midian: but it is best of all to ascribe it to divine inspiration, as all Scripture is by the apostle, 2Ti 3:16 for who else but God could have informed him of the creation, and the manner and order in which every creature was brought into being, with a multitude of things recorded in this book? the design of which is to lead men into the knowledge and worship of the one true God, the Creator of all things, and of the origin of mankind, the fall of our first parents, and their posterity in them; and to point at the means and method of the recovery of man by the Messiah, the promised seed; and to give an account of the state and case of the church of God, in the times of the patriarchs, both before and after the flood, from Adam, in the line of Seth, to Noah; and from Noah to the times of Joseph, in whose death it ends: and, according to Usher ^c, it contains an history of two thousand, three hundred, and sixty nine years.

Gill: Genesis 14 (Chapter Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO GENESIS 14

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