- Home
- Bible
- Genesis
- Chapter 15
- Verse 15
Genesis 15:10
Verse
Context
God Confirms His Promise
9And the LORD said to him, “Bring Me a heifer, a goat, and a ram, each three years old, along with a turtledove and a young pigeon.”10So Abram brought all these to Him, split each of them down the middle, and laid the halves opposite each other. The birds, however, he did not cut in half.11And the birds of prey descended on the carcasses, but Abram drove them away.
Sermons



Summary
Commentary
- Adam Clarke
- John Gill
- Tyndale
Adam Clarke Bible Commentary
Divided them in the midst - The ancient method of making covenants as well as the original word, have been already alluded to, and in a general way explained. See Gen 6:18. The word covenant from con, together, and venio, I come, signifies an agreement, association, or meeting between two or more parties; for it is impossible that a covenant can be made between an individual and himself, whether God or man. This is a theological absurdity into which many have run; there must be at least two parties to contract with each other. And often there was a third party to mediate the agreement, and to witness it when made. Rabbi Solomon Jarchi says, "It was a custom with those who entered into covenant with each other to take a heifer and cut it in two, and then the contracting parties passed between the pieces." See this and the scriptures to which it refers particularly explained, Gen 6:18. A covenant always supposed one of these four things: 1. That the contracting parties had been hitherto unknown to each other, and were brought by the covenant into a state of acquaintance. 2. That they had been previously in a state of hostility or enmity, and were brought by the covenant into a state of pacification and friendship. 3. Or that, being known to each other, they now agree to unite their counsels, strength, property, etc., for the accomplishment of a particular purpose, mutually subservient to the interests of both. Or, 4. It implies an agreement to succor and defend a third party in cases of oppression and distress. For whatever purpose a covenant was made, it was ever ratified by a sacrifice offered to God; and the passing between the divided parts of the victim appears to have signified that each agreed, if they broke their engagements, to submit to the punishment of being cut asunder; which we find from Mat 24:51; Luk 12:46, was an ancient mode of punishment. This is farther confirmed by Herodotus, who says that Sabacus, king of Ethiopia, had a vision, in which he was ordered μεσους διατεμειν, to cut in two, all the Egyptian priests; lib. ii. We find also from the same author, lib. vii., that Xerxes ordered one of the sons of Pythius μεσον διατεμειν, to be cut in two, and one half to be placed on each side of the way, that his army might pass through between them. That this kind of punishment was used among the Persians we have proof from Dan 2:5; Dan 3:29. Story of Susanna, verses 55, 59. See farther, Sa2 12:31, and Ch1 20:3. These authorities may be sufficient to show that the passing between the parts of the divided victims signified the punishment to which those exposed themselves who broke their covenant engagements. And that covenant sacrifices were thus divided, even from the remotest antiquity, we learn from Homer, Il. A., v. 460. Μηρους τ' εξεταμον κατα τε κνισοῃ εκαλυψαν, Διπτυχα ποιησαντες, επ' αυτων δ' ωμοθετησαν. "They cut the quarters, and cover them with the fat; dividing them into two, they place the raw flesh upon them." But this place may be differently understood. St. Cyril, in his work against Julian, shows that passing between the divided parts of a victim was used also among the Chaldeans and other people. As the sacrifice was required to make an atonement to God, so the death of the animal was necessary to signify to the contracting parties the punishment to which they exposed themselves, should they prove unfaithful. Livy preserves the form of the imprecation used on such occasions, in the account he gives of the league made between the Romans and Albans. When the Romans were about to enter into some solemn league or covenant, they sacrificed a hog; and, on the above occasion, the priest, or pater patratus, before he slew the animal, stood, and thus invoked Jupiter: Audi, Jupiter! Si prior defecerit publico consilio dolo malo, tum illo die, Diespiter, Populum Romanum sic ferito, ut ego hune porcum hic hodie feriam; tantoque magis ferito, quanto magis potes pollesque! - Livii Hist., lib. i., chap. 24. "Hear, O Jupiter! Should the Romans in public counsel, through any evil device, first transgress these laws, in that same day, O Jupiter, thus smite the Roman people, as I shall at this time smite this hog; and smite them with a severity proportioned to the greatness of thy power and might!" But the birds divided he not - According to the law, Lev 1:17, fowls were not to be divided asunder but only cloven for the purpose of taking out the intestines.
John Gill Bible Commentary
And when the fowls came down upon the carcasses,.... Upon the birds, as Aben Ezra and Ben Melech interpret it, whose carcasses were whole; or rather upon the divided carcasses of the animals, and indeed on both: this is to be understood of birds of prey, as eagles, vultures, kites, crows, &c. and are an emblem of the Egyptians chiefly, and other enemies of Israel, who came upon them to devour them; so the Targum of Jonathan,"and the idolatrous nations descended, who were like to an unclean fowl, to spoil the goods of the Israelites;''and likewise the Targum of Jerusalem,"this unclean fowl are the idolatrous kingdoms of the earth:" Abram drove them away: that they might not settle upon the carcasses, and devour them: the Septuagint version is, "Abram sat with them"; he sat by the carcasses and watched them, that no hurt came to them, and to take notice of them, and consider and learn what they were an emblem of. The Jews (l) also observe, that"Abram sat and waved over them with his napkin or handkerchief, that the birds might not have power over them until the evening.''This may respect not the merit of Abram, as the above Targums, by which his posterity were protected, and the designs of their enemies frustrated; but the effectual fervent prayer of Abram, his prayer of faith for them, in answer to which they were delivered out of the hands of the Egyptians, and other enemies, whom Abram foresaw they would be distressed with. (l) Pirke Eliezer, ut supra. (c. 28)
Tyndale Open Study Notes
15:10 Obeying God’s instructions, Abram gathered three herd animals for the ceremony and cut them in half. Cutting the animals symbolized the oath, indicating that the covenant maker staked his own life on his word (Jer 34:18).
Genesis 15:10
God Confirms His Promise
9And the LORD said to him, “Bring Me a heifer, a goat, and a ram, each three years old, along with a turtledove and a young pigeon.”10So Abram brought all these to Him, split each of them down the middle, and laid the halves opposite each other. The birds, however, he did not cut in half.11And the birds of prey descended on the carcasses, but Abram drove them away.
- Scripture
- Sermons
- Commentary
All This and Heaven Too
By Vance Havner8.4K30:07SalvationGEN 13:9GEN 15:10MAT 6:19MAT 17:26HEB 11:25In this sermon, the preacher discusses the concept of lost decisions in the Bible. He mentions Abraham and Moses as examples of individuals who made important decisions. The preacher emphasizes the importance of choosing to suffer affliction with the people of God rather than enjoying the temporary pleasures of sin. He also highlights the need to share wealth with those in need and warns against making choices that go against biblical principles. The sermon encourages listeners to make wise and vital choices in order to align with God's will.
(Through the Bible) Exodus 1-5
By Chuck Smith1.8K1:23:21ExpositionalGEN 50:26EXO 2:15EXO 4:1EXO 4:10In this sermon, the preacher emphasizes that God is not just a passive observer of our struggles and suffering. He takes action to deliver His people from their hardships. The preacher also highlights the importance of not getting too attached to material possessions, as they can easily be taken away. Instead, our focus should be on the things of the Spirit and God's eternal kingdom. The sermon references the story of Moses and the Israelites in Egypt, where they faced oppression and hardship, but ultimately God delivered them.
(Genesis) 29 - the Ratification of the Abrahamic Covenant
By S. Lewis Johnson1.1K50:46CovenantGEN 15:6GEN 15:10GEN 15:17MAT 6:33ROM 4:5In this sermon, the preacher focuses on the covenant between God and Abram. He highlights the significance of the covenant and how it relates to the experiences of both Israel and Jesus Christ. The preacher emphasizes that the judgment of God is not arbitrary, but rather a result of God's long-suffering and holiness. He also mentions the importance of understanding the context and purpose behind God's command to exterminate the Canaanites. The sermon concludes with a description of the smoking oven and flaming torch that appeared during the covenant ceremony.
- Adam Clarke
- John Gill
- Tyndale
Adam Clarke Bible Commentary
Divided them in the midst - The ancient method of making covenants as well as the original word, have been already alluded to, and in a general way explained. See Gen 6:18. The word covenant from con, together, and venio, I come, signifies an agreement, association, or meeting between two or more parties; for it is impossible that a covenant can be made between an individual and himself, whether God or man. This is a theological absurdity into which many have run; there must be at least two parties to contract with each other. And often there was a third party to mediate the agreement, and to witness it when made. Rabbi Solomon Jarchi says, "It was a custom with those who entered into covenant with each other to take a heifer and cut it in two, and then the contracting parties passed between the pieces." See this and the scriptures to which it refers particularly explained, Gen 6:18. A covenant always supposed one of these four things: 1. That the contracting parties had been hitherto unknown to each other, and were brought by the covenant into a state of acquaintance. 2. That they had been previously in a state of hostility or enmity, and were brought by the covenant into a state of pacification and friendship. 3. Or that, being known to each other, they now agree to unite their counsels, strength, property, etc., for the accomplishment of a particular purpose, mutually subservient to the interests of both. Or, 4. It implies an agreement to succor and defend a third party in cases of oppression and distress. For whatever purpose a covenant was made, it was ever ratified by a sacrifice offered to God; and the passing between the divided parts of the victim appears to have signified that each agreed, if they broke their engagements, to submit to the punishment of being cut asunder; which we find from Mat 24:51; Luk 12:46, was an ancient mode of punishment. This is farther confirmed by Herodotus, who says that Sabacus, king of Ethiopia, had a vision, in which he was ordered μεσους διατεμειν, to cut in two, all the Egyptian priests; lib. ii. We find also from the same author, lib. vii., that Xerxes ordered one of the sons of Pythius μεσον διατεμειν, to be cut in two, and one half to be placed on each side of the way, that his army might pass through between them. That this kind of punishment was used among the Persians we have proof from Dan 2:5; Dan 3:29. Story of Susanna, verses 55, 59. See farther, Sa2 12:31, and Ch1 20:3. These authorities may be sufficient to show that the passing between the parts of the divided victims signified the punishment to which those exposed themselves who broke their covenant engagements. And that covenant sacrifices were thus divided, even from the remotest antiquity, we learn from Homer, Il. A., v. 460. Μηρους τ' εξεταμον κατα τε κνισοῃ εκαλυψαν, Διπτυχα ποιησαντες, επ' αυτων δ' ωμοθετησαν. "They cut the quarters, and cover them with the fat; dividing them into two, they place the raw flesh upon them." But this place may be differently understood. St. Cyril, in his work against Julian, shows that passing between the divided parts of a victim was used also among the Chaldeans and other people. As the sacrifice was required to make an atonement to God, so the death of the animal was necessary to signify to the contracting parties the punishment to which they exposed themselves, should they prove unfaithful. Livy preserves the form of the imprecation used on such occasions, in the account he gives of the league made between the Romans and Albans. When the Romans were about to enter into some solemn league or covenant, they sacrificed a hog; and, on the above occasion, the priest, or pater patratus, before he slew the animal, stood, and thus invoked Jupiter: Audi, Jupiter! Si prior defecerit publico consilio dolo malo, tum illo die, Diespiter, Populum Romanum sic ferito, ut ego hune porcum hic hodie feriam; tantoque magis ferito, quanto magis potes pollesque! - Livii Hist., lib. i., chap. 24. "Hear, O Jupiter! Should the Romans in public counsel, through any evil device, first transgress these laws, in that same day, O Jupiter, thus smite the Roman people, as I shall at this time smite this hog; and smite them with a severity proportioned to the greatness of thy power and might!" But the birds divided he not - According to the law, Lev 1:17, fowls were not to be divided asunder but only cloven for the purpose of taking out the intestines.
John Gill Bible Commentary
And when the fowls came down upon the carcasses,.... Upon the birds, as Aben Ezra and Ben Melech interpret it, whose carcasses were whole; or rather upon the divided carcasses of the animals, and indeed on both: this is to be understood of birds of prey, as eagles, vultures, kites, crows, &c. and are an emblem of the Egyptians chiefly, and other enemies of Israel, who came upon them to devour them; so the Targum of Jonathan,"and the idolatrous nations descended, who were like to an unclean fowl, to spoil the goods of the Israelites;''and likewise the Targum of Jerusalem,"this unclean fowl are the idolatrous kingdoms of the earth:" Abram drove them away: that they might not settle upon the carcasses, and devour them: the Septuagint version is, "Abram sat with them"; he sat by the carcasses and watched them, that no hurt came to them, and to take notice of them, and consider and learn what they were an emblem of. The Jews (l) also observe, that"Abram sat and waved over them with his napkin or handkerchief, that the birds might not have power over them until the evening.''This may respect not the merit of Abram, as the above Targums, by which his posterity were protected, and the designs of their enemies frustrated; but the effectual fervent prayer of Abram, his prayer of faith for them, in answer to which they were delivered out of the hands of the Egyptians, and other enemies, whom Abram foresaw they would be distressed with. (l) Pirke Eliezer, ut supra. (c. 28)
Tyndale Open Study Notes
15:10 Obeying God’s instructions, Abram gathered three herd animals for the ceremony and cut them in half. Cutting the animals symbolized the oath, indicating that the covenant maker staked his own life on his word (Jer 34:18).