NOTES for Gen 13:1-18

A moment comes when Abraham remains alone, having separated even from his nephew Lot, with whom he had wandered for quite a long time. It is then, when this has happened, that God addresses Abraham, reminding him of the promises given back in Haran concerning the future of the land to which Abraham has come and the destiny of his descendants, who are to take possession of it.

Why not earlier? Why not when Abraham and Lot were still walking together? The answer to the question may be the choice Lot made about the place of his future residence. Abraham, as is not hard to notice, keeps away from large cities. If he is ever in them, it is only when he has no other option, for example when he has to survive dry and therefore barren years. Then there is nowhere else to go, and Abraham seeks refuge in cities. In general, however, he tries to stay away from cities for a whole range of reasons, both political and spiritual. Life in a city is in some ways easier, but there are more temptations there too. It is comparatively easy to assimilate there, but then Abraham would have had to give up following his God, the One who had called Abraham after Himself.

Abraham did not know everything about his God, but he knew enough to understand that he needed both political and spiritual independence in order to remain faithful to his God. Lot looks at things differently. He likes the land near Sodom, and he is ready to go where the land is good, even if the people there are evil. This is his essential difference from Abraham, and therefore God does not reveal His plans to Lot. God is silent until Lot has made his choice, until he has gone where his own heart leads him, the heart that liked the land of Sodom. But when Lot leaves, God reveals to Abraham the future of his descendants, for Abraham too has made his choice, remaining where God led him from the beginning and not trying to look for better, more comfortable places to live. God does not keep each person from choosing his own, but He leads only the one who chooses His way, as Abraham chose that way.

To describe the relationship between God and the human person, biblical authors often use the concept of a union, or, in biblical language, a covenant between God and the human person. The whole Bible can be read as the history of revelation and the history of covenant. The two are inseparable: before such a relationship can become possible, God must make Himself visible to the human person and stretch out His hand. Otherwise there will be no relationship between the human person and God. No one can reach God by his own powers. Neither theological knowledge, nor intuition, nor mystical illumination will help here. The most a person can learn about God is to sense that there is Something about which nothing can be told and which cannot be described, and that this Something at the same time is above everything that exists in the world. Pagans knew of this supreme Principle, and many of them believed that the source of everything around us and the cause of everything that happens around us had to be sought there. But no one in the pagan world ever tried to address this unknown Something with a request or with gratitude: it was too far away, and no relationship with it was possible. The God of Abraham is different: He not only addresses Abraham first, but also establishes with him a firm and lasting relationship without which no union is possible. Of course, for God these relationships are completely open from the very beginning. In making a union with Abraham, in His eternity He already sees not only the whole history of the people of God, but also the birth of Christ, His death on the cross, the Resurrection, and even the return of the Risen One in glory. But what God has conceived in eternity unfolds in time, and therefore His relationship with His people also develops in time. Then the Covenant that is one in God's eternity breaks up in time into many covenants that succeed one another, so that for several centuries commentators and biblical scholars have argued about how many covenants there are in the Bible after all. In fact, should the promise God gave Abraham already in Palestine (vv. 14-17) be considered a confirmation of the earlier covenant, or its renewal? Or is this yet another, a second covenant with Abraham? There is no unambiguous answer to this question. A covenant is a living, developing relationship that grows like a tree. Just as with a tree it is not always easy to determine where the trunk ends and the crown begins, and still less can the two be separated, so in the history of the covenant it is not always easy to determine where one stage ends and another begins. Only at the end of the path, when God's purpose is fully embodied, does everything become clear.

The entire history set out in the Pentateuch is the history of the covenant, the history of those relations between God and His people whose description forms the Bible's historical thread, tying together its books, though they are so unlike one another. And now, when Abraham and Lot have gone in different directions, God confirms the covenant previously made with Abraham, again repeating that the land he sees around him will belong to his descendants. Is there a connection between these two events?

At first glance, Lot's separation can have nothing to do with God's covenant with Abraham. Lot, it appears, does not look very deeply into anything connected with the covenant: like most of Abraham's fellow tribesmen, he leaves relations with God to the leader's discretion. But God, as can be seen, is not indifferent to which tribes will make up His people. At first glance, why is Lot's clan worse than Abraham's, especially since they are relatives, and fairly close ones at that? Meanwhile, the answer to the question is not hard to find in the text itself: Lot is ready to settle anywhere, as long as he likes the local landscape and climate. His surroundings do not frighten him: he apparently thinks that the sins of the local inhabitants, among whom he will have to live, will not touch him. Abraham acts far more cautiously in this regard and tries to keep away from the Palestinian cities with their corruption (in every sense of the word), although that choice forced him to give up the chance to settle in lands far more favorable in natural and climatic terms than the Samaritan steppe in which he had to live.

Had Lot and Abraham remained together, the latter would have had to take the former's demands into account, and this would inevitably have limited his ability to decide where to live and where to go next. By separating from Lot, Abraham frees his hands and receives the freedom of action necessary for the leader of God's people. And then God confirms His covenant with him.