The Fallible · Synthetic · Study Bible
Abram Rescues Lot
Genesis 14:10–16 — Abram Rescues Lot. Each verse below carries the full apparatus: the Berean Standard Bible, the vocalized original (tap any word), and a parsed breakdown of every term transcribed from the interlinear. Synthesized commentary, canonical threads, and the reading of Christ gather at the end, over the whole unit.
10Now the Valley of Siddim was full of tar pits, and as the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah fled, some men fell into the pits, but the survivors fled to the hill country.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
wə·‘ê·meq ha·śid·dīm ḥê·mār be·’ĕ·rōṯ be·’ĕ·rōṯ me·leḵ- sə·ḏōm wa·‘ă·mō·rāh way·yā·nu·sū way·yip·pə·lū- šām·māh wə·han·niš·’ā·rîm nā·sū he·rāh
Literal — word-for-word from the original
“And-the-Valley (‘êmeq) of-Siddim was pits, pits (be’ĕrōṯ be’ĕrōṯ) of-bitumen (ḥêmār); and-the-king-of Sodom and-Gomorrah fled (way·yā·nusū), and-they-fell there (šām·māh); and-the-survivors fled to-the-hill-country (he·rāh).”
Where the English smooths the original
The Hebrew idiom gives be’erôth be’erôth ḥêmar , “pits, pits of bitumen” = “all bitumen pits.” Cf. 2 Kings 3:16 , “trenches, trenches” = “nothing but trenches.”
Layers of this natural asphalte, well known both to the Greeks and Romans as pia Judaica, Judean pitch, still exist on the western side of the Dead Sea; and the places whence it had been dug out, and which are often very deep, formed dangerous impediments in the way of the defeated side.
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.Poole then argues the kings’ persons escaped (v. 17); “fell” means their armies were slain.
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.
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 themHenry’s note spans 14:1–12; he reads the war as recorded only because Lot, though righteous, was swept up in Sodom’s losses.
11The four kings seized all the goods of Sodom and Gomorrah and all their food, and they went on their way.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
way·yiq·ḥū ’eṯ- kāl- rə·ḵuš sə·ḏōm wa·‘ă·mō·rāh wə·’eṯ- kāl- ’ā·ḵə·lām way·yê·lê·ḵū
Literal — word-for-word from the original
“And-they-took (way·yiq·ḥū) all the-goods (rᵉḵuš) of-Sodom and-Gomorrah and-all their-food (’āḵəlām), and-they-went (way·yê·lê·ḵū).”
Where the English smooths the original
The victorious troops did not wait; but after inflicting punishment hurried off, like a predatory horde, with their booty.
This implies the reading רכב rekeb, which is not supported by other authorities, nor suitable to the context.Barnes weighs the Septuagint’s reading of the “goods” (rᵉkuš) as “cavalry” (reḵeḇ) and rejects it.
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
12They also carried off Abram’s nephew Lot and his possessions, since Lot was living in Sodom.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
way·yiq·ḥū ’eṯ- way·yê·lê·ḵū ’aḇ·rām ben- ’ă·ḥî lō·wṭ wə·’eṯ- rə·ḵu·šōw wə·hū yō·šêḇ bis·ḏōm
Literal — word-for-word from the original
“And-they-took Lot (Lôwṭ) the-son-of the-brother-of Abram, and-his-possessions (rᵉḵušōw), and-they-went; and-he was-dwelling (yō·šêḇ) in-Sodom.”
Where the English smooths the original
Notice this minute description of Lot and the mention of his residence in Sodom, as if chap. 13 had not immediately preceded. In Genesis 14:14 ; Genesis 14:16 , Lot is spoken of as Abram’s brother.
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.
Lot now suffered for his cohabitation with bad neighbours.
The godly are plagued many times with the wicked: therefore their company is dangerous.Geneva’s marginal gloss on Lot’s capture — the oldest voice in the unit, drawing the principle the narrative enacts.
13Then an escapee came and reported this to Abram the Hebrew. Now Abram was living near the Oaks of Mamre the Amorite, a brother of Eshcol and Aner, all of whom were bound by treaty to Abram.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
hap·pā·lîṭ way·yā·ḇō way·yag·gêḏ lə·’aḇ·rām hā·‘iḇ·rî wə·hū šō·ḵên bə·’ê·lō·nê mam·rê hā·’ĕ·mō·rî ’ă·ḥî ’eš·kōl wa·’ă·ḥî ‘ā·nêr wə·hêm ba·‘ă·lê ḇə·rîṯ- ’aḇ·rām
Literal — word-for-word from the original
“And-the-fugitive (hap·pā·lîṭ) came and-told to-Abram the-Hebrew (hā·‘iḇrî); and-he was-dwelling by-the-oaks (’êlōnê) of-Mamre the-Amorite, brother-of Eshcol and-brother-of Aner; and-they were lords-of-a-covenant (ba‘ălê ḇərîṯ) of-Abram.”
Where the English smooths the original
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.From Maclaren’s sermon “Abram the Hebrew” on this verse.
Abram had not occupied Mamre without the consent of the dominant Amorites, and probably there was also a league for mutual defence between him and them.
We have here an account of the only military action we ever find Abram engaged in, and to this he was not prompted by avarice or ambition, but purely by a principle of charity.
The name “Hebrew” here occurs for the first time in Scripture. It is a title used of Israelites, either by foreigners, or in speaking of them to foreigners, or in contrast with foreigners.
14And when Abram heard that his relative had been captured, he mobilized the 318 trained men born in his household, and they set out in pursuit as far as Dan.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
’aḇ·rām way·yiš·ma‘ kî ’ā·ḥîw niš·bāh way·yā·req ’eṯ- šə·mō·nāh ‘ā·śār ū·šə·lōš mê·’ō·wṯ ḥă·nî·ḵāw yə·lî·ḏê ḇê·ṯōw way·yir·dōp̄ ‘aḏ- dān
Literal — word-for-word from the original
“And-Abram heard (way·yiš·ma‘) that his-brother had-been-taken-captive (niš·bāh); and-he-emptied-out (way·yā·req) his-trained-men (ḥănîḵāw), born-of his-house, three-hundred and-eighteen, and-he-pursued as-far-as Dan (Dān).”
Where the English smooths the original
Heb., led forth, or literally, let them loose, let them pour forth, the verb indicating both their number and also their haste. The word for trained comes from the same root as the name Enoch
He drew-out his trained servants, or his catechised 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.”
The old Jewish commentators explained it by pointing out that the numerical value of the Heb. letters of the name “Eliezer,” Abram’s steward ( Genesis 15:2 ), was 318.Cambridge sets the gematria and a lunar-myth theory side by side as equally ingenious and improbable.
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.
15During the night, Abram divided his forces and routed Chedorlaomer’s army, pursuing them as far as Hobah, north of Damascus.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
lay·lāh hū way·yê·ḥā·lêq ‘ă·lê·hem wa·‘ă·ḇā·ḏāw way·yak·kêm way·yir·də·p̄êm ‘aḏ- ḥō·w·ḇāh ’ă·šer miś·śə·mōl lə·ḏam·mā·śeq
Literal — word-for-word from the original
“And-he-divided-himself (way·yê·ḥā·lêq) against-them by-night (lay·lāh), he and-his-servants, and-he-struck (way·yak·kêm) them, and-he-pursued them as-far-as Hobah, which is-to-the-left (miś·śə·mōl) of-Damascus.”
Where the English smooths the original
he divided his men into companies, who fell upon the enemy by night from different sides
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
Skinner rightly points out that “it is idle to pretend that Abram’s victory was merely a surprise attack on the rearguard, and the recovery of part of the booty. A pursuit carried so far implies the rout of the main body of the enemy”
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.
16He retrieved all the goods, as well as his relative Lot and his possessions, together with the women and the rest of the people.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
way·yā·šeḇ ’êṯ kāl- hā·rə·ḵuš wə·ḡam ’eṯ- ’ā·ḥîw lō·wṭ ū·rə·ḵu·šōw hê·šîḇ wə·ḡam ’eṯ- han·nā·šîm wə·’eṯ- hā·‘ām
Literal — word-for-word from the original
“And-he-brought-back (way·yā·šeḇ) all the-goods, and-also his-brother (’āḥîw) Lot and-his-possessions he-brought-back, and-also the-women (han·nā·šîm) and-the-people (hā·‘ām).”
Where the English smooths the original
He brought back all the goods which the victorious kings had taken from the princes and people mentioned before in this chapter.
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
Abram rescued the captives. As we have opportunity, we must do good to all.From Henry’s note spanning 14:13–16.
The verse-by-verse work is done. What follows gathers the whole unit. All three layers below are machine-generated (⚙). Weigh them; they have no authority.
AI synthesis — woven from the public-domain voices above and the original text; generated and fallible.
The unit opens not with Abram but with a battlefield that fights for no one. The Valley of Siddim, the narrator says, was בֶּאֱרֹת בֶּאֱרֹת חֵמָר — and the Hebrew stammers the noun: “pits, pits of bitumen.” Cambridge reads the doubling as a Hebrew superlative — “pits, pits of bitumen” = “all bitumen pits,” on the model of 2 Kings 3:16’s “trenches, trenches” = “nothing but trenches.” Ellicott grounds the pitch in geology: layers of “Judean pitch” known to Greeks and Romans, the holes “often very deep,” forming “dangerous impediments in the way of the defeated side.” Poole notes the bitter irony the kings of the plain built into their own strategy — they chose this ground “that their adversaries being ignorant of the place might unawares fall into those pits, which they by their knowledge of it thought to escape,” only to be undone there themselves.
What exactly happened when they “fell there” the Hebrew leaves open, and the voices honestly divide. Keil and the Pulpit take it literally — the asphalt-pits made the ground “unfavourable for flight,” and the defeated stumbled in. Poole and Gill argue the verb “fell” here means were slain (as in Josh 8:25; 1 Sam 4:10), since v. 17 will show the king of Sodom alive. The narrator records the rout, not the manner of death. The survivors flee הֶרָה, “to the mountain” — the same refuge Lot will one day seek when Sodom itself is undone (19:30).
The camera turns abruptly to the winners. Cambridge marks the seam: “The subject is abruptly transferred to the victorious army… the victorious troops did not wait; but after inflicting punishment hurried off, like a predatory horde, with their booty.” The same verb takes the goods (v. 11) and the man (v. 12): לָקַח, “they took.” And here the narrator’s real reason for telling the story surfaces — Lot. Matthew Henry sees the whole war as recorded only for his sake: had “Abram and Lot… not been concerned,” Scripture would have passed the campaign over in silence.
The capture of Lot is told as the harvest of a choice. The narrator pointedly re-describes him, Cambridge notes, “as if chap. 13 had not immediately preceded,” and pins the cause in five Hebrew words at the verse’s end: “and he was dwelling in Sodom.” The Pulpit measures the fall — “a considerable declension in spiritual life to behold him a citizen of Sodom” — and JFB hears the conscience that should now “upbraid him for his selfish folly.” Poole states it flatly: “Lot now suffered for his cohabitation with bad neighbours.” The wealth he chose the fertile plain to gain (13:10–11) is, by the same word rᵉḵuš, the first thing seized.
Then the first new name in the chapter’s second half, and the first of its kind in all Scripture: Abram the Hebrew. The word הָעִבְרִי arrives, fittingly, in a Canaanite’s report — Maclaren hears it as a nickname, “the man from the other side,” following “the ancient Greek translation… ‘The man from the other side,’ the man that had come across the water.” Cambridge records both its novelty and its function: “The name ‘Hebrew’ here occurs for the first time in Scripture. It is a title used of Israelites, either by foreigners, or in speaking of them to foreigners.” Whether it means the immigrant from beyond the Euphrates (so the Septuagint) or the descendant of Eber (so Cambridge, Calvin, Benson) is genuinely undecided — and the verse lets the ambiguity stand.
The verse also discloses, almost in passing, that Abram is not alone: he is בַּעֲלֵי בְרִית, “lord of a covenant” with Mamre, Eshcol, and Aner — Ellicott’s “league for mutual defence,” and the first occurrence of the great covenant-word bᵉrîṯ in Genesis, here human rather than divine. Poole draws the principle the alliance teaches: “it is not simply and universally unlawful to make a league with persons of a false religion.” The pilgrim who lives in a tent under the oaks is nonetheless bound to his neighbors — and, as Benson notes, his coming war is moved “not… by avarice or ambition, but purely by a principle of charity.”
When Abram hears that his brother is taken, he acts at once. The verb is arresting: וַיָּרֶק, which Ellicott renders “let them loose, let them pour forth, the verb indicating both their number and also their haste.” His men are חֲנִיכָיו, “trained,” from the root of Enoch and dedication — Keil’s “practised in arms,” Benson’s “catechised servants… instructed in the principles of religion.” Their number, 318, has drawn endless ingenuity; Cambridge soberly notes the old gematria (the letters of Eliezer, Abram’s steward, total 318) and a modern lunar-myth theory, judging both to share “a certain kind of resemblance in their ingenuity and their improbability.” JFB simply reckons the household it implies: “what a large establishment he must have had.”
The campaign reaches Dan — a name, Cambridge grants, that is “strictly speaking, an anachronism” (Laish was renamed Dan only in Judges 18), “though quite intelligible,” and not without the symbolic weight of victory “at the furthest northern limit of the future Israelite country” — though Keil dissents, locating a different Dan in Gilead. The battle itself is a model of asymmetric war: Abram “divided himself” (Keil: “fell upon the enemy by night from different sides”); JFB compares the desert raids of “Arab chiefs” who strike the sleeping foe. Cambridge refuses to shrink the result — “a pursuit carried so far implies the rout of the main body of the enemy.” The pursuit ends north of Damascus, at Hobah, “on the left hand” — Barnes: the Easterner faces dawn, so “the north at the left.”
The unit ends on a single, doubled verb of restoration: וַיָּשֶׁב … הֵשִׁיב, “he brought back… he brought back.” The word of return deliberately answers the word of taking in vv. 11–12. Poole sums the completeness — “He brought back all the goods which the victorious kings had taken” — and Gill marks how far the rescue overflowed its occasion: Abram recovered “not only that belonged to Lot, but to Sodom and Gomorrah, who had been taken and carried captive.” The deliverer who went out for one kinsman returns with the captives, the women, and the whole people. Matthew Henry draws the plain charge of the unit: “Abram rescued the captives. As we have opportunity, we must do good to all.” The man called brother’s son in v. 12 is twice called simply brother here — recovered, restored, and re-claimed.
Read under the rule that Scripture alone is the final authority — offered as a reading to be tested, not a verdict to be trusted — three things in this unit press on the conscience. First, the chapter is a quiet meditation on the cost of Lot’s choice. Genesis does not moralize; it simply notes, at the precise hinge of his capture, that “he was dwelling in Sodom.” The wealth he moved toward the plain to gain (13:10–11) is the very rᵉḵuš seized first, and the danger he pitched his tent toward becomes the captivity he is dragged into. The Hebrew lets the geography do the preaching. Second, the rescue is the first portrait in Scripture of the man of faith as deliverer — and it is charity, not conquest. Abram, who lives in a tent and waits on the promise, does not seize the land he could; he pours out his trained household by night to recover one kinsman, and brings back everyone. Benson is right that the action springs “purely by a principle of charity,” and Henry rightly universalizes it: “we must do good to all.” Third, the title earned here — Abram the Hebrew, “the man from the other side” — names the believer’s standing in the world. The first man of the covenant is known to the nations as the foreigner, the one who crossed over; he fights for the city of the plain without belonging to it, bound by treaty yet dwelling apart. The narrative that will rise, in the verses just beyond this unit, to Melchizedek and the tithe (vv. 18–20) is grounded first in this: a stranger who keeps faith with his neighbors, and a God who gives the victory (v. 20) to the one who waited for it.
The man who lives in a tent and waits for a city is the one who, when the kings have fled, brings everyone home. — a reading to be tested, not a verse
AI-generated connections. Each carries a verification badge with a recorded basis; contested links are flagged.
The word for the valley’s pitch, חֵמָר (ḥêmār, H2564), occurs only three times in all Scripture, and the Verifier ties this verse to both of the others: Babel, where the builders used “bitumen for mortar” (Gen 11:3), and the Nile, where Moses’ mother daubed the basket with “bitumen and pitch” (Exod 2:3). Because the lexeme is so rare (3 occurrences), this is a genuine verbal link rather than a chance overlap. The same substance binds the tower of human pride, seals the ark of an infant deliverer, and pits the ground that swallows the kings of Sodom — a single material running through three very different scenes of human building, rescue, and ruin.
Genesis 14:10 · Genesis 11:3 · Exodus 2:3
basis: shared rare lexeme ḥêmār (H2564), only 3 occurrences in Scripture (Gen 11:3; Exod 2:3; Gen 14:10) — Verifier-computed; rarity makes the verbal link genuine, not chance
The three Amorite confederates introduced in v. 13 — Mamre, Eshcol, and Aner — return by name at the end of the same chapter (14:24), where Abram, refusing Sodom’s spoil for himself, insists that “Aner, Eshcol, and Mamre… take their share.” The Verifier records three shared lexemes: אֶשְׁכֹּל Eshcol (H812, only 6 occurrences), עָנֵר Aner (H6063, only 3 occurrences), and מַמְרֵא Mamre (H4471). Two of the three are genuinely rare proper names, so this is a true verbal continuity — but it is continuity within one account, the same allies framing the campaign, not an external quotation.
Genesis 14:13 · Genesis 14:24
basis: shared rare proper names Eshcol (H812, 6×) + Aner (H6063, 3×) + Mamre (H4471); same allies reappear at 14:24 — Verifier-computed; rarity of the names makes the verbal tie genuine
Abram’s home “by the oaks of Mamre” (14:13) ties back to 13:18, where he first “moved his tent and came and dwelt by the oaks of Mamre,” and forward to 18:1, where “the LORD appeared to him by the oaks of Mamre.” The Verifier confirms shared lexemes אֵלוֹן ’êlôn (“oak/terebinth,” H436, only 9 occurrences) and מַמְרֵא Mamre (H4471). The same grove is the patriarch’s settled dwelling, his base for the rescue, and the place of the Lord’s visitation — a structural anchor for the Abraham narrative, marked verbally by the recurring (and uncommon) word for the sacred trees.
Genesis 14:13 · Genesis 13:18 · Genesis 18:1
basis: shared lexemes ’êlôn (H436, 9×) + Mamre (H4471); the oaks of Mamre as recurring locale (13:18 dwelling, 14:13 base, 18:1 theophany) — Verifier-computed; tiered structural as recurring setting, not a quotation
The paired names Sodom and Gomorrah (14:10–12) recur across Scripture as the byword for cities ripe for judgment — Genesis 13:10; 19:28; Deuteronomy 32:32; Isaiah 1:9. The Verifier finds shared lexemes סְדֹם Sodom (H5467, 38 occurrences) and עֲמֹרָה Gomorrah (H6017, 19 occurrences) in each. Because these are common proper names that simply co-occur — not a rare lexeme nor a quotation — we deliberately under-claim here against the Verifier’s default “verbal” tier: the names ringing together across the canon is a thematic motif (the doomed cities) carried by recurring nouns, not a verbal allusion in the citation sense. Genesis 14 shows the pair already imperiled by war, long before the fire of chapter 19; the prophets later make them the standing image of a people deserving destruction.
Genesis 14:10 · Genesis 13:10 · Genesis 19:28 · Deuteronomy 32:32 · Isaiah 1:9
basis: shared proper names Sodom (H5467, 38×) + Gomorrah (H6017, 19×) — Verifier returns these but they are common co-occurring names, not rare or a quotation; deliberately downgraded from ‘verbal’ to thematic (the proverbial doomed-cities motif)
Lot’s “possessions” (רְכֻשׁ, rᵉḵuš, H7399), seized in vv. 11–12 and restored in v. 16, are verbally linked by the Verifier to 12:5 (the substance Abram and Lot gathered in Haran) and to 14:21 (the goods the king of Sodom asks Abram to keep). The word, occurring 27 times, is the thread of movable wealth running through the Abraham–Lot story: the substance that grew so great the two had to part (13:6), the goods Lot lost to the four kings, and the spoil Abram will refuse to take for himself. The connection is structural — the same keyword tracing the theme of possessions through the cycle — rather than a quotation.
Genesis 14:12 · Genesis 12:5 · Genesis 14:21
basis: shared lexeme rᵉkûš (H7399, 27×) + Lôwṭ (H3876) with 12:5; rᵉkûš + Sodom with 14:21 — Verifier-computed; common keyword tracing the ‘possessions’ theme, so tiered structural not verbal
The first occurrence of “Hebrew” (עִבְרִי, H5680) in Scripture (14:13) is read by Cambridge, Benson, and the Pulpit as the patronymic “descendant of Eber” (Gen 10:24; 11:14), the same root standing behind Joshua’s later summary that the fathers “dwelt beyond the River” (Josh 24:2). The Verifier returns no shared original-language lexeme between Genesis 14:13 and Joshua 24:2 — the connection is interpretive (the meaning of the name, and the “crossing over” it may encode), argued by the commentators, not asserted by a shared Strong’s number. We flag it accordingly: the etymology of ‘iḇrî (from Eber, or from ‘āḇar, “to cross over”) is itself the disputed point, so the link to Joshua 24:2 must be argued, not claimed as verbal.
Genesis 14:13 · Genesis 10:24 · Joshua 24:2
basis: Verifier finds NO shared lexeme between Gen 14:13 and Josh 24:2; the tie rests on the contested etymology of ‘iḇrî (‘Hebrew’ = descendant of Eber, or ‘one who crossed over’) — interpretive, not verbal; flagged because the basis itself is disputed
AI-generated reading; weigh it against the text.
This unit is the immediate setup for the figure the New Testament treats as the great type of Christ’s priesthood. Abram’s victory over the kings (14:14–16) is precisely the occasion on which Melchizedek, “king of Salem… priest of God Most High,” comes out to bless him (14:18–20) — and Hebrews 7:1 names this very scene: “this Melchizedek… met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings and blessed him.” The triumphant, tithe-giving deliverer of Genesis 14 stands at the threshold of the only Old-Testament priest-king, whom Psalm 110 and Hebrews 5–7 make the pattern of the Messiah. Because this reaches from Hebrew narrative to a Greek epistle, no shared Strong’s lexeme is possible; the link is the express citation of the scene in Hebrews 7:1, and the typology of Melchizedek it introduces is ancient and widely held.
Genesis 14:14 · Genesis 14:16 · Hebrews 7:1
Abram’s rescue of his captive brother — going out at cost, by night, to bring back the taken and set the prisoners free — has been read as a figure of Christ the deliverer who comes after his own. Maclaren draws the line in his exposition of this passage, urging that the man of faith who lives well apart from the world is precisely the one fitted to redeem it: “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.” The pattern is the gospel in miniature: the man of faith who does not belong to the doomed city nonetheless lays down his ease to redeem those held by a stronger power, and brings them home — rᵉḵuš, Lot, the women, and all the people (v. 16) restored. Maclaren himself disciplines the figure, adding that “Abram is in that respect the Old Testament type of a God-fearing hero, with the actual sword in his hands.” Its New Testament counterpart, he insists, fights without one — a caution against pressing the military letter too far. This is a typological reading (figural, not a stated prophecy); it is widely echoed in devotional exegesis but novel in this specific application rather than a fixed item of ancient creedal teaching, and is offered to be weighed against the text.
Genesis 14:14 · Genesis 14:16
The biblical text is the Berean Standard Bible (BSB), public domain (CC0). Hebrew/Greek text, transliteration, morphology and Strong’s are transcribed from the Berean interlinear (CC0) + Strong’s lexicons (PD); the literal renderings, divergence notes, word notes and all synthesis are this tool’s own work (⚙) — fallible; verify them.
Named voices, quoted verbatim from public-domain works:
The biblical text is the Berean Standard Bible (BSB), public domain. The named voices are quoted verbatim from public-domain commentaries on Genesis 14 (Ellicott, Benson, Henry, Barnes, Jamieson-Fausset-Brown, Poole, Gill, Geneva Study Bible, Cambridge Bible, Pulpit Commentary, Keil & Delitzsch, and Maclaren), each attributed and linked to its BibleHub source. The Hebrew is the Masoretic tradition; transliterations, parsings, glosses, and Strong’s numbers follow the Berean interlinear. The literal renderings, the “where the English smooths the Hebrew” divergences, the word-notes, the movements, and the Sola reading are this tool’s own work (⚙) — careful but fallible; weigh them against the text. Unit-specific honesty notes: (1) v. 10 — the verb “fell” (nāphal) is genuinely ambiguous: Keil and the Pulpit read literal stumbling into the asphalt-pits, while Poole and Gill read it as were slain, since the king of Sodom is alive in v. 17; the text does not decide. (2) v. 13 — the meaning of ‘iḇrî (“Hebrew”) is undecided between “immigrant from beyond the Euphrates” (LXX ὁ περάτης) and “descendant of Eber”; both are recorded and neither is asserted as certain. (3) v. 14 — Dan is, by wide agreement (Cambridge, and implied by Joshua 19:47 / Judges 18:29), the later name of Laish, making its use here an editorial updating of an older place-name; Keil dissents, arguing for a separate Dan in Gilead. The 318 retainers attract a Jewish gematria (Eliezer = 318) and a modern lunar-myth theory, both recorded by Cambridge as ingenious and improbable; we assert neither. (4) The Sodom/Gomorrah thread is deliberately under-claimed: the Verifier’s default tiers the shared proper names as “verbal,” but common co-occurring place-names are not a quotation, so we downgrade to structural/thematic (the proverbial doomed-cities motif). (5) The “Abram the Hebrew → Eber / Joshua 24:2” thread is flagged: the Verifier finds no shared lexeme, and the basis is the contested etymology of the name itself, which must be argued rather than asserted. (6) Cross-Testament threads and the Melchizedek/Christ readings (Hebrews 7:1) cannot carry a shared Strong’s lexeme and are tiered structural/typological on the strength of the named NT citation, never ‘verbal.’ The second Christ reading (Abram as kinsman-deliverer) is marked novel, a figural application offered to be tested, not an ancient creedal datum. This unit does not contain Joshua 1:5, so the mandatory Joshua 1:5 → Hebrews 13:5 flag does not apply here.
✦ = human, public-domain source, quoted and named. ⚙ = machine synthesis, to be verified. Flagged cross-references are left visible on purpose — the verifier working in the open. “Search the Scriptures daily, whether those things were so.” (Acts 17:11)