Genesis Chapters 13, 14 Commentary by Mark Dunagan

Genesis Chapters 13-14

13:1 While nothing had been said about Lot going down into Egypt with Abram and Sarai, here we learn that he had also made the journey. Nothing is said about Lot’s wife or family until we find them in Sodom.

13:2 Abram was extremely rich, therefore we cannot say that God is always for the poor and against the rich. Poverty can be the result of laziness (Prov. 6:11; 13:18; 20:13; 23:21; 28:19), and both conditions have advantages and disadvantages (Proverbs 30:5-6; Ecclesiastes 5:10-11). Being rich in livestock would enable Abram to either sell these animals for gold or silver or trade them for such goods as food, clothing, tent material or other services.

13:3-4 Abram came back to Bethel. “This may have been a time of reflection and meditation for Abram. The very fact that he survived a potentially disastrous situation in Egypt must have been cause for special praise to his God” (Davis p.

178). In addition, this may have also been a time of confession, repentance and prayer for attempting to rely on his own wisdom rather than trusting in God. 13:5-6 Lot also was a wealthy man, but the immediate area which Abram and Lot occupied couldn’t support their herds.

Once again, the land appears to be failing Abram, yet he does not abandon the land, and neither does he opt for human wisdom. Rather, he manifests generosity. “Abram was fully aware of the danger that was presented by the strife between his herdsmen and those of Lot. The local residents could readily use this kind of division as an opportunity to attack them and drive them out” (Aalders p. 278). Abram was a very sensitive man (13:8). “His proposal, being selfless as well as practical, resolved the immediate tension without creating any future ones” (Kidner p. 118).

1

Here we find a great example of a peace-maker (Romans 12:18). Since Abram had already renounced everything for a relationship with God, he could afford to be unselfish. He also takes the first step, he takes the initiative. And of all people, the professed people of God should be able to work out their differences.

His example here shows us how to respond in touchy situations: 1. Take the initiative, don’t wait for things to explode. 2. Let others have the first choice. 3.

Put family peace above personal desires.

13:10 Abram had apparently learned a valuable lesson in Egypt. While Abram by all rights should of had priority; he graciously offered it to Lot. Abram wasn’t focused on the physical, his mind was on a greater city (Hebrews 11:10). “Lot seized the opportunity to his own advantage (as he thought). He had been infected with the luxury and excitement of Egypt, and was not longer content to be a “stranger and pilgrim in the land (Heb. 11:13)” (Morris p. 303). This verse is also giving us some ancient detail concerning this area of Palestine before God destroyed the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah. In this plain five prosperous cities were found. This valley was like the eastern section of the Nile Delta, which was renowned for being well watered and very fertile. In the vicinity of Bethel, there is a viewpoint, in fact one of the greatest viewpoints in all of Palestine. From here one can see the Jordan Valley and the northern end of the Dead Sea. 13:12 Abram would spend his life in the more mountainous region of Palestine, that is, the hill country. This separation is a providential way of finally separating Abram from his father’s household (12:1). Lot didn’t move into the city of Sodom immediately, possibly having some reservations about living among people who were extremely wicked (13:13). And yet, eventually we find him in the city (14:12). Kidner notes, “Lot, choosing the things that are seen, found them corrupt (13) and insecure; choosing selfishly, he was to grow ever more isolated and unloved. Abram, on the other hand, found liberation” (p.

118). “Little did he know that the physical beauty of the area was small compensation for the destruction and calamity yet to come” (Davis p. 179).

The older I yet the more I find myself being a big believer in living in an area which is spiritually beneficial to myself and my family. Lot appears to have chosen the possibility for wealth over the possibility for spiritual wealth. Men especially need to be careful that they don’t move their families into an environment which while being physical prosperous, is very deficient in spiritual support.

2

Choosing a place of good pasture and available water probably seemed like a good idea at the time, but Lot equally failed to properly estimate the influence of Sodom on his family. Lot may have been strong enough to resist the temptations or culture of Sodom, but his family was not able to in the end. While God commands us to reach the people who live in places like Sodom, we must be careful not to become like the very people we are trying to reach.

13:14 The promises of God are renewed to Abram. The promise of land to his descendants and the promise of his descendants becoming a great nation. The reader should note that other passages make it clear that possession of the land “forever” was conditioned upon the nation’s faithfulness to God (Deut. 28:21; Joshua 23:14-16). What Abram saw from Bethel with his eyes, he was now to explore with his steps in detail. God is giving Abram the keys to the land and telling him, “It’s yours, go and take it for a spin!”

13:18 Probably after obeying God and inspecting the land, Abram finally settles down in the vicinity of Hebron, by the oaks of Mamre (MAM reh). This is located about twenty miles south of Bethlehem, and became Abram’s home-base for the rest of his life. Near here he would purchase the only property that he actually owned in the land, the burial cave of Machpelah. As we have been reading note that Abram’s tent and altar summed up his life. He always remembered that he was a pilgrim on this earth and he always remembered his God! Hebron was an ancient city, having been built seven years before Zoan (Tanis) in Egypt (Numbers 13:22).

Chapter 14 This chapter contains so many fascinating details. Here we see Abram the warrior and we meet the mysterious Melchizedek just for a moment.

14:1 First of all some definitions: “Amraphel” (Am rah fell), “Shinar” refers to Babylon, “Arioch”(AIR ih ock), “Ellasar” (el LAY sar), ”Chedorlaomer” (ked awr LAY oh muhr), “Elam” refers to the country situated east of Babylon, “Tidal” (TIE duhl), and “Goiim” (GOY yim), is a word which means “nations”.

Further in the chapter we learn that Chedorlaomer was the leader of this confederation of kings from the east (14:4). At some point previously a military expedition from the east had subdued Palestine and placed the various tribes and cities in this region under tribute (taxation). In the 13th year, it appears that much of Palestine had revolted, because these kings equally attackother tribes and towns besides the five cities of the plain (14:5-7).

3

14:2 “Bera” (BEE rah). “Birsha” (BURR shah), “Shinab” (SHIGH nab), “Shemeber” (shem EE bur).

14:3 Apparently we are here being told about a valley long since covered by the Dead Sea, yet we are not told whether the Dead Sea was the result of the destruction in chapter 19, or that such a destruction only increased its size.

14:5 “Rephaim” pronounced (REF ih yuhm), appears to have been a race of giants (Deut. 3:11,13). “Asheroth-karnaim” (ASH tah rahth kar NAY em), was probably located east of the Sea of Galilee, across the Jordan River. “Shavenkiriathaim” (SHAY vuh kir ih uh THAY uhm), is a plain east of the Jordan near the city of Kiriathaim in the territory later referred to as Moab.

14:6 “Horites”: Apparently the whole region had rebelled, because the above kings are moving down the east side of the river Jordan, attacking the Horites in the hill country of Seir, which later was inhabited by the Edomites. They pushed as far south as “El-paran”, which may have been a port city on the Red Sea. Then they turned back (12:7), and hit Kadesa Barnea which is located on the southern border of Canaan. They also attacked various desert tribes, including the Amalekites and Amorites. They did all of this before engaging the five cities of the plain in battle. “The purpose of these preliminary battles was no doubt to eliminate the possibility of an attack from the rear while they were occupied with the five kings…After thus routing all who might stand in their way, the eastern confederacy then turned its full attention to the rebellious kings of the five cities of the south” (Morris pp. 314,315).

13:8 Instead of waiting to be attacked, the kings of the five cities chose the time and place of the battle (13:8-10). “Their reasoning was obvious. The Valley of Siddim had many tar pits, and the local warriors knew this area and were confident that the invading forces would be impeded by this treacherous terrain” (Aalders p. 286).

Abram the Warrior 14:10-14 Word reaches Abram concerning what had happened not only to the cities in the plain, but also concerning Lot his nephew.

Here we encounter the first use of the term “Hebrew” (13:13). Many feel that “Eber” (Genesis 10:24) is the source for the term. Some say the word means “one

4

who has passed over”, i.e. from the east side of the Euphrates to the western side.

“The term ‘habiru’ has been found in a number of archaeological texts from soon after the time of Abram, but does not seem to apply exclusively to the children of Israel. It is apparently used in such a way as to suggest simply any moving tribe” (Morris p. 316). Archaeology has only agreed with the accuracy of this chapter. “Particularly remarkable and worthy of special emphasis is the fact that all of them (the cities mentioned in this chapter) were destroyed at the end of that period in the nineteenth century B.C., with only a few of them having ever been reoccupied” (Davis p. 180). Morris quotes Dr. Nelson Glueck, the leading Palestinian archaeologist of modern times, “Centuries earlier, another civilization of high achievement had flourished between the 21st and 19th centuries B.C., till it was savagely liquidated by the kings of the East. According to the Biblical statements, which have been borne out by archaeological evidence, they gutted every city and village at the end of that period from Ashtaroah-Karnaim in southern Syria through all of Trans-Jordan and the Negev to Kadesh-Barnea in Sinai (Genesis 14:1-7) (Nelson Glueck, Rivers in the Desert, p. 11) (p. 312).

14:13 “Eshcol” is pronounced (ESH cuhl). Such men would be eager to join Abram, seeing that their own people had been attacked (14:7).

Here we find two important character qualities in Abram: 1. He had the courage to face a powerful foe and yet attack. 2. He was prepared. He had taken the time to train his men for a potential conflict. We never know when we will be required to do hard things---we need to be preparing ourselves as well (2 Timothy 2:20-21).

14:14 Abram pursued this army throughout the entire length of Palestine. As for those who are skeptical concerning Abram’s success in defeating such forces, let us remember: 1. Abram’s allies (14:13). 2. “The surprise and confusion which would reinforce, at the purely natural level, a well-planned night-attack (Kidner p. 120). 3. There are many examples in Scripture (lest we forget Gideon) as well as secular history of small forces winning spectacular victories over vastly superior forces. In addition, Abram and his men routed them all the way north of Damascus. Davis notes, “This episode again shows the unique character of Abraham. He could have let Lot remain in captivity as vengeance for the difficulties Lot had caused him. But whatever weaknesses Abraham had, vindictiveness (holding a grudge) was not one of them” (p. 181).

5

Melchizedek 14:18 Obviously, Melchizedek served the same God as Abraham (14:18-20).

“Salem” appears to be an early name for Jerusalem (Psalm 76:2) and it means “peace”. The name Melchizedek means “king of righteousness” (Hebrews 7:2).

Abram gave Melchizedek a tenth of the spoils, and was blessed by this priestking. Abram clearly understood that Melchizedek was his superior (Hebrews 7).

From other passages we learn that Melchizedek was one of a kind, that is, his father had not been a priest and no son or successor assumed his position after he died (Hebrews 7:3). Here we find a godly man, a man who knew about the true God, who ruled over what must have been a Canaanite city and population.

He was an exception in a very pagan world. In some way he had carried on the tradition from the time of Paradise when mankind recognized only one true God. The book of Hebrews informs us that he was a type of Christ, a priest-king, one who is both a king and priest while ruling (Zech. 6:12-13; Psalm 110:1-4). The Hebrew writer also makes it clear that Melchizedek was a man (Hebrews 7:4), he was not an angel or half God half man.

Melchizedek was part of a small group of believers in the true God who existed in the Old Testament and who either came into contact with Abram or later with the Jewish nation. For all we know this may be the first time that Melchizedek and Abram have met, they might be strangers to one another, but they both serve the same God. Today the same thing happens. A Christian may travel halfway across the country or across the world and find other believers.

Applications 

One can faithfully serve God, even when you are in the minority.



The Faithful have always been in the minority and we should never be discouraged by this fact.



Live for God and it is likely that you will be in the right place at the right time.



God uses those who serve Him---so serve Him and don’t miss out.



Have your heart focused on the heavenly city and money will be your servant and not your master.

6

Kidner notes, “For Abram the harder battle begins, for there is a profound contrast between the two kings who come to meet him. Melchizedek, king and priest, his name and title expressive of the realm of right and good….The king of Sodom, on the other hand, makes a handsome and businesslike offer…Such a climax shows what was truly at stake in this chapter of international events. The struggle of kings, the far-ranging armies and the spoil of a city are the smallchange of the story; the crux is the faith or failure of one man” (pp. 120,121).

14:21-24 Abraham had learned another lesson in Egypt, and refused to link himself with ungodly men. Abraham wants to have nothing to do with what belongs to the King of Sodom (14:23), the message is clear, “You and I have nothing in common”.

The king of Sodom could have greatly increased Abram’s wealth, but Abram did not want people to focus on him or the king of Sodom. He wanted people to see the God that he served and how God had blessed him. Abram could sacrifice such goods because he had previously set his mind on a heavenly reward and not an earthly one (Hebrews 11:16). One of the best ways to avoid greed is to have one’s heart set on the eternal treasures (Hebrews 11:26).

7