John Calvin Commentary Genesis 15

The word of the Lord came. When Abram’s affairs were prosperous and were proceeding according to his wish, this vision might seem to be superfluous, especially since the Lord commands His servant, as one sorrowful and afflicted with fear, to be of good courage. Therefore, certain writers conjecture that Abram, having returned after the deliverance of his nephew, was subjected to some annoyance of which no mention is made by Moses, just as the Lord often humbles His people, lest they should exult in their prosperity. They further suppose that when Abram had been dejected, he was again revived by a new oracle.

But since there is no warrant for such conjecture in the words of Moses, I think the cause was different. First, although he was applauded on all sides, it is not to be doubted that various surmises entered into his own mind. For, notwithstanding Chedorlaomer and his allies had been overcome in battle, Abram had so provoked them that they might, with fresh troops and renewed strength, attack the land of Canaan again.

Nor were the inhabitants of the land free from the fear of this danger. Secondly, as signal success commonly draws its companion, envy, along with it, Abram began to be exposed to many disadvantageous remarks after he had dared to enter into conflict with an army that had conquered four kings.

An unfavourable suspicion might also arise that perhaps, eventually, he would turn the strength he had tried against foreign kings upon his neighbors and upon those who had hospitably received him. Therefore, as the victory was an honor to him, so it cannot be doubted that it rendered him formidable and an object of suspicion to many, while it inflamed the hatred of others, since everyone would imagine some danger to himself from his bravery and good success.

It is therefore not strange that he should have been troubled and should have anxiously pondered many things, until God animated him anew with the confident expectation of His assistance. There might also be another purpose to be served by the oracle: namely, that God would address and correct an opposite fault in His servant.

For it was possible that Abram might be so elated with victory as to forget his own calling and to seek the acquisition of dominion for himself, as one who, wearied with a wandering course of life and with perpetual vexations, desired a better fortune and a quiet state of existence.

And we know how liable men are to be ensnared by the blandishments of prosperous and smiling fortune. Therefore, God anticipates the danger; and before this vanity takes possession of the mind of the holy man, He recalls to his memory the spiritual grace granted to him, so that he, entirely acquiescing in it, may despise all other things.

Yet, because this expression, Fear not, sounds as if God would soothe His sorrowing and anxious servant with some consolation, it is probable that he had need of such confirmation, because he perceived that many malignantly stormed against his victory and that his old age would be exposed to severe annoyances.

It might, however, be that God did not forbid him to fear because he was already afraid, but so that he might learn courageously to despise and to count as nothing all the favor of the world and all earthly wealth. It is as if He had said, ‘If only I am favorable to you, there is no reason why you should fear. Contented with Me alone in the world, pursue, as you have begun, your pilgrimage, and rather depend on heaven than attach yourself to earth.’ However this might be, God recalls His servant to Himself, showing that far greater blessings were treasured up for him in God, so that Abram might not rest satisfied with his victory.

Moses says that God spoke to him in a vision, by which he intimates that some visible symbol of God’s glory was added to the word, so that greater authority might be given to the oracle. And this was one of two ordinary methods by which the Lord was formerly accustomed to manifest Himself to His prophets, as it is stated in the book of Numbers (Genesis 12:6).

Fear not, Abram. Although the promise comes last in the text, it yet has precedence in order, because on it depends the confirmation by which God frees the heart of Abram from fear. God exhorts Abram to be of a tranquil mind; but what foundation is there for such security, unless by faith we understand that God cares for us and learn to rest in His providence?

The promise, therefore, that God will be Abram’s shield and His exceeding great reward, holds the first place; to which is added the exhortation that, relying upon such a guardian of his safety and such an author of his felicity, he should not fear. Therefore, to make the sense of the words clearer, the causal particle is to be inserted.

‘Fear not, Abram, because I am thy shield.’ Moreover, by the use of the word “shield,” He signifies that Abram would always be safe under His protection. In calling Himself Abram’s “reward,” He teaches Abram to be satisfied with Himself alone. And as this was, with respect to Abram, a general instruction given for the purpose of showing him that victory was not the chief and ultimate good which God had designed him to pursue, so let us know that the same blessing is promised to us all in the person of this one man.

For, by this voice, God daily speaks to His faithful ones; inasmuch as having once undertaken to defend us, He will take care to preserve us in safety under His hand and to protect us by His power. Now, since God ascribes to Himself the office and property of a shield for the purpose of rendering Himself the protector of our salvation, we ought to regard this promise as a brazen wall, so that we should not be excessively fearful in any dangers.

And since men, surrounded with various and innumerable desires of the flesh, are at times unstable and are then too much addicted to the love of the present life, the other member of the sentence follows, in which God declares that He alone is sufficient for the perfection of a happy life to the faithful.

For the word “reward” has the force of inheritance or felicity. Were it deeply engraved on our minds that in God alone we have the highest and complete perfection of all good things; we should easily fix bounds to those wicked desires by which we are miserably tormented. The meaning then of the passage is this: that we shall be truly happy when God is favorable to us, for He not only pours upon us the abundance of His kindness but offers Himself to us, that we may enjoy Him.

Now what more is there that men can desire when they really enjoy God? David knew the force of this promise when he boasted that he had obtained a goodly lot because the Lord was his inheritance (Psalms 16:6). But since nothing is more difficult than to curb the depraved appetites of the flesh, and since the ingratitude of man is so vile and impious that God scarcely ever satisfies them; the Lord calls Himself not simply “a reward,” but an exceeding great reward, with which we ought to be more than sufficiently contented.

This truly furnishes most abundant material and most solid support for confidence. For whoever is fully persuaded that his life is protected by the hand of God and that he never can be miserable while God is gracious to him; and who consequently resorts to this haven in all his cares and troubles, will find the best remedy for all evils.

Not that the faithful can be entirely free from fear and care as long as they are tossed by the tempests of contentions and miseries; but because the storm is hushed in their own breast; and since the defense of God is greater than all dangers, faith triumphs over fear.

And Abram said, Lord God. The Hebrew text has יחוה אדונת (Adonai Jehovah). From this title it is inferred that some special mark of divine glory was stamped upon the vision, so that Abram, having no doubt about its author, confidently broke out in this expression. For since Satan is a wonderful adept at deceiving, and deludes people with so many deceptions in the name of God, it was necessary that some sure and notable distinction should appear in true and heavenly oracles, which would not allow the faith and the minds of the holy fathers to waver.

Therefore, in the vision that is mentioned, the majesty of the God of Abram was manifested, which would suffice for the confirmation of his faith. Not that God appeared as he really is, but only to the extent that he might be comprehended by the human mind. But Abram, in overlooking a promise so glorious, in complaining that he is childless, and in murmuring against God for having until now given him no seed, seems to conduct himself with little modesty.

What was more desirable than to be received under God’s protection and to be happy in the enjoyment of Him? The objection, therefore, that Abram raised, by disparaging the incomparable benefit offered to him and refusing to be content until he receives offspring, appears to lack reverence. Yet the liberty he took admits of excuse; first, because the Lord permits us to pour into his bosom those cares by which we are tormented and those troubles with which we are oppressed.

Secondly, the purpose of the complaint is to be considered. For he does not simply declare that he is alone, but, seeing that the fulfillment of all the promises depended upon his seed, he, not improperly, requires that such a necessary pledge should be given to him. For if the blessing and salvation of the world were not to be hoped for except through his seed, when that principal point seemed to fail him, it is not surprising that other things would seem to vanish from his sight, or at least would not appease his mind nor satisfy his desires.

And this is the very reason why God not only regards with favor the complaint of his servant, but immediately gives a favorable answer to his prayer. Moses indeed attributes to Abram that affection which is naturally inherent in us all; but this is no proof that Abram did not look higher when he so earnestly desired to be the progenitor of an heir. And certainly these promises had not faded from his recollection: To thy seed will I give this land, and In thy seed shall all nations be blessed; the former of these promises is so connected to all the rest, that if it is taken away, all confidence in them would perish, while the latter promise contains in it the whole gratuitous pledge of salvation. Therefore Abram rightly includes in it everything that God had promised.

I go childless. The language is metaphorical. We know that our life is like a race. Abram, seeing he was of advanced age, says that he has proceeded so far that little of his course still remains. ‘Now,’ he says, ‘I am come near the goal; and the course of my life being finished, I shall die childless.’ He adds, for the sake of aggravating the indignity, ‘that a foreigner would be his heir.’ For I do not doubt that Damascus is the name of his country, and not the proper name of his mother, as some falsely suppose; as if he had said, ‘Not one of my own relatives will be my heir, but a Syrian from Damascus.’ For, perhaps, Abram had bought him in Mesopotamia.

He also calls him the son of משק (mesek), about the meaning of which word grammarians do not agree. Some derive it from שקק (shakak), which means to run to and fro, and translate it steward or superintendent, because he who manages a large house runs here and there attending to his business.

Others derive it from שוק (shook), and render it cup-bearer, which seems incongruous to me. I rather adopt a different translation, namely, that he was called the son of the deserted house (filius derelictionis), because משק mashak sometimes signifies to leave.

Yet I do not think he is so called because Abram was about to leave all things to him, but because Abram himself had no hope left in any other. It is therefore (in my judgment) just as if he called him the son of a house destitute of children, because this was a proof of a deserted and barren house, that the inheritance was devolving upon a foreigner who would occupy the empty and deserted place.

He afterwards contemptuously calls him his servant, or his home-born slave, ‘the son of my house (he says) will be my heir.’ He thus speaks in contempt, as if he would say, ‘My condition is wretched, who shall not have even a freeman for my successor.’

However, it is asked how he could be both a Damascene and a home-born slave of Abram. There are two solutions to the difficulty: either that he was called the son of the house, not because he was born, but only because he was educated in it; or, that he sprang from Damascus, because his father was from Syria.

This shall not be your heir. From this we infer that God had approved Abram's wish. From which also follows the other point: Abram had not been driven by any fleshly motive to offer up this prayer, but by a pious and holy desire to enjoy the blessing promised to him.

For God not only promises him a seed, but a great people, whose number would equal the stars of heaven. Those who interpret the passage allegorically, implying that a heavenly seed was promised to him that could be compared with the stars, may hold their own opinion; but we maintain what is more sound: namely, that Abram's faith was increased by the sight of the stars.

For the Lord, to affect His own people more deeply and to penetrate their minds more effectively, after He has reached their ears here by His word, also captures their eyes with external symbols, so that eyes and ears might be in agreement.

Therefore, the sight of the stars was not unnecessary; God intended to impress this thought upon Abram's mind: ‘He who by His word alone suddenly produced such a numerous host with which He might adorn the previously vast and desolate heaven—will He not be able to replenish my desolate house with offspring?’

It is not necessary, however, to imagine a nocturnal vision, just because the stars, which are hidden from our sight during the day, would then have appeared. For since the whole occurred in a vision, Abram had a wonderful scene set before him, which would clearly reveal hidden things to him.

Therefore, though he perhaps did not move a step, it was still possible for him to be led out of his tent in the vision.

The question now arises concerning which seed this promise refers to. It is certain that neither the posterity of Ishmael nor of Esau is to be included in this account, because the legitimate seed is to be determined by the promise, which God determined should remain in Isaac and Jacob. Yet the same doubt arises regarding the posterity of Jacob, because many who could trace their descent from him according to the flesh cut themselves off, as degenerate sons and aliens, from the faith of their fathers.

I answer, that this term seed is, in a general sense, extended to the whole people whom God has adopted for Himself. But since many were alienated by their unbelief, we must look to Christ, who alone distinguishes true and genuine sons from those who are illegitimate. By pursuing this method, we find Abram's posterity reduced to a small number, so that afterwards it may be increased all the more. For in Christ, the Gentiles also are gathered together and are by faith ingrafted into the body of Abram, so as to have a place among his legitimate sons. More will be said on this point in the seventeenth chapter (Genesis 17:1).

And he believed in the Lord. None of us would be able to conceive the rich and hidden doctrine which this passage contains, unless Paul had carried his torch before us (Romans 4:3). But it is strange, and seems like a wonder, that when the Spirit of God has kindled so great a light, yet the greater part of interpreters wander with closed eyes, as in the darkness of night.

I omit the Jews, whose blindness is well known. But it is (as I have said) monstrous that those who have had Paul as their luminous expositor should so foolishly have corrupted this passage. However, it thus appears that in all ages, Satan has labored at nothing more assiduously than to extinguish, or to smother, the gratuitous justification of faith, which is here expressly asserted.

The words of Moses are, “He believed in the Lord, and he counted it to him for righteousness.” In the first place, Abram's faith is commended because by it he embraced the promise of God; it is commended, in the second place, because from this Abram obtained righteousness in the sight of God, and that by imputation.

For the word חשב (chashab), which Moses uses, is to be understood as relating to the judgment of God, just as in Psalm 106:31, where the zeal of Phinehas is said to have been counted to him for righteousness. The meaning of the expression will, however, more fully appear by comparison with its opposites. In Leviticus 7:18, it is said that when expiation has been made, iniquity ‘shall not be imputed’ to a man.

Again, in Leviticus 17:4, ‘Blood shall be imputed unto that man.’ So, in 2 Samuel 19:19, Shimei says, ‘Let not the king impute iniquity unto me.’ Nearly of the same import is the expression in 2 Kings 12:15, ‘They reckoned not with the man into whose hand they delivered the money for the work;’ that is, they required no account of the money, but allowed them to administer it, in perfect confidence.

Let us now return to Moses. Just as we understand that those to whom iniquity is imputed are guilty before God, so those to whom he imputes righteousness are approved by him as just persons; therefore Abram was received into the number and rank of just persons by the imputation of righteousness.

For Paul, to show us distinctly the force and nature, or quality of this righteousness, leads us to the celestial tribunal of God.

Therefore, those who apply this term to Abram's character as an honest man foolishly trifle, as if it meant that Abram was personally held to be a just and righteous man.

Others, just as unskillfully, corrupt the text, saying that Abram is here ascribing to God the glory of righteousness because he ventures to acquiesce confidently in His promises, acknowledging Him to be faithful and true. For although Moses does not expressly mention the name of God, yet the accustomed method of speaking in the Scriptures removes all ambiguity.

Lastly, it shows no less stupor than impudence, when this faith is said to have been imputed to him for righteousness, to mingle with it any meaning other than that Abram's faith was accepted by God in place of righteousness.

However, it seems absurd that Abram should be justified by believing that his seed would be as numerous as the stars of heaven, for this could be nothing but a particular faith, which would by no means suffice for the complete righteousness of man. Besides, what could an earthly and temporal promise avail for eternal salvation?

I answer:

1. The believing of which Moses speaks is not to be restricted to a single clause of the promise here referred to, but embraces the whole.
2. Abram did not form his estimate of the promised seed from this divine communication alone, but also from others, where a special benediction is added.

From this we infer that he did not expect some common or undefined seed, but that seed in which the world was to be blessed. Should anyone stubbornly insist that what is said in common of all Abram's children is forcibly distorted when applied to Christ, it must be said, in the first place, that it cannot be denied that God now again repeats the promise previously made to his servant, in order to answer his complaint.

But we have said—and the thing itself clearly proves—that Abram was so strongly impelled to desire seed out of regard for the promised benediction. From this it follows that this promise was not taken by him separately from others. But to pass all this over, we must, I say, consider what is being discussed here to form a judgment of Abram's faith.

God does not promise to his servant only this or that thing, as he sometimes grants special benefits to unbelievers, who are without the taste of his paternal love; but he declares that He will be propitious to him, and confirms him in the confidence of safety, as he relies upon His protection and His grace.

For he who has God for his inheritance does not exult in fading joy but, as one already elevated towards heaven, enjoys the solid happiness of eternal life. Indeed, it is to be maintained as an axiom that all the promises of God, made to the faithful, flow from the free mercy of God, and are evidences of that paternal love and of that gratuitous adoption on which their salvation is founded.

Therefore, we do not say that Abram was justified because he laid hold of a single word regarding the offspring to be born, but because he embraced God as his Father. And truly, faith does not justify us for any other reason than that it reconciles us to God; and it does so, not by its own merit, but because we receive the grace offered to us in the promises and have no doubt of eternal life, being fully persuaded that we are loved by God as sons.

Therefore, Paul reasons from contraries that he to whom faith is imputed for righteousness has not been justified by works (Romans 4:4). For whoever obtains righteousness by works, his merits come into the account before God. But we apprehend righteousness by faith when God freely reconciles us to himself. From this it follows that the merit of works ceases when righteousness is sought by faith, for it is necessary that this righteousness should be freely given by God and offered in his word, so that anyone may possess it by faith.

To make this more intelligible, when Moses says that faith was imputed to Abram for righteousness, he does not mean that faith was that first cause of righteousness which is called the efficient cause, but only the formal cause; as if he had said that Abram was therefore justified because, relying on the paternal loving-kindness of God, he trusted to His pure goodness, and not to himself, nor to his own merits.

For it is especially to be observed that faith borrows a righteousness from elsewhere, of which we, in ourselves, are destitute; otherwise, it would be in vain for Paul to set faith in opposition to works when speaking of the mode of obtaining righteousness. Besides, the mutual relation between the free promise and faith leaves no doubt on the subject.

We must now notice the circumstance of time. Abram was justified by faith many years after he had been called by God; after he had left his country as a voluntary exile, making himself a remarkable example of patience and of continence; after he had entirely dedicated himself to sanctity and after he had, by exercising himself in the spiritual and external service of God, aspired to an almost angelic life.

It therefore follows that, even to the end of life, we are led towards the eternal kingdom of God by the righteousness of faith. On this point, many are too grossly deceived. For they grant, indeed, that the righteousness which is freely bestowed on sinners and offered to the unworthy is received by faith alone; but they restrict this to a moment of time, so that he who first obtained justification by faith may afterwards be justified by good works.

By this method, faith is nothing other than the beginning of righteousness, whereas righteousness itself consists in a continual course of works. But those who trifle in this way must be altogether insane. For if the angelic uprightness of Abram, faithfully cultivated through so many years in one uniform course, did not prevent him from fleeing to faith to obtain righteousness, where else on earth will such perfection be found that can stand in God’s sight?

Therefore, by considering the time when this was said to Abram, we certainly gather that the righteousness of works is not to be substituted for the righteousness of faith in such a way that one perfects what the other has begun, but that holy men are only justified by faith as long as they live in the world.

If anyone objects that Abram previously believed God when he followed Him at His call and committed himself to His direction and guardianship, the solution is ready: we are not here told when Abram first began to be justified or to believe in God, but that in this one place it is declared, or related, how he had been justified through his whole life.

For if Moses had spoken thus immediately on Abram’s first vocation, the cavil of which I have spoken would have been more specious—namely, that the righteousness of faith was only initial (so to speak) and not perpetual. But now, since after such great progress he is still said to be justified by faith, it therefore easily appears that the saints are justified freely even until death.

I confess, indeed, that after the faithful are born again by the Spirit of God, the method of justifying differs, in some respect, from the former. For God reconciles to himself those who are born only of the flesh and who are destitute of all good; and since he finds nothing in them except a dreadful mass of evils, he counts them just by imputation.

But those to whom he has imparted the Spirit of holiness and righteousness, he embraces with his gifts. Nevertheless, so that their good works may please God, it is necessary that these works themselves should be justified by gratuitous imputation, for some evil is always inherent in them. Meanwhile, however, this is a settled point: that men are justified before God by believing, not by working, while they obtain grace by faith because they are unable to deserve a reward by works.

Paul also, in thus contending that Abram did not merit by works the righteousness which he had received before his circumcision, does not impugn the above doctrine. Paul's argument is of this kind: Abram's circumcision was posterior to his justification in the order of time and therefore could not be its cause, for of necessity the cause precedes its effect.

I also grant that Paul, for this reason, contends that works are not meritorious, except under the covenant of the law, of which covenant circumcision is put as the earnest and the symbol. But since Paul is not here defining the force and nature of circumcision, regarded as a pure and genuine institution of God, but is rather disputing the sense attached to it by those with whom he deals, he therefore does not allude to the covenant which God had previously made with Abram, because the mention of it was unnecessary for the present purpose.

Both arguments are therefore valid: first, that Abram's righteousness cannot be ascribed to the covenant of the law, because it preceded his circumcision; and, secondly, that the righteousness even of the most perfect individuals perpetually consists in faith, since Abram, with all the excellency of his virtues, after his daily and even remarkable service of God, was nevertheless justified by faith.

Finally, this also is worthy of observation: that what is related here concerning one man is applicable to all the sons of God. For since he was called the father of the faithful, not without reason, and since, furthermore, there is only one method of obtaining salvation, Paul properly teaches that a real and not merely personal righteousness is described in this passage.

I am the Lord that brought thee. Since it greatly concerns us to have God as the guide of our whole life, so that we may know that we have not rashly entered on some doubtful path, the Lord therefore confirms Abram in the course of his vocation and reminds him of the original benefit of his deliverance. It is as if He had said, ‘I, after I stretched out My hand to you, to lead you out from the labyrinth of death, have extended My favor toward you so far.

You, therefore, respond to Me in turn by constantly advancing; and maintain your faith steadfastly, from the beginning even to the end.’ This is said not only with respect to Abram—so that he, gathering together the promises of God made to him from the very beginning of his life of faith, should form them into one whole—but also so that all the pious may learn to regard the beginning of their vocation as flowing perpetually from Abram, their common father. In this way, they may securely boast with Paul that they know in whom they have believed (2 Timothy 1:12). Furthermore, they may know that God, who in the person of Abram had separated a church for Himself, would be a faithful keeper of the salvation entrusted to Him.

That the Lord declares Himself to have been Abram’s deliverer for this very purpose becomes clear because He connects the promise He is now about to give with the prior redemption. It is as if He were saying, ‘I do not now for the first time begin to promise you this land.

For it was on this account that I brought you out of your own country, to make you the lord and heir of this land. Now therefore I make a covenant with you in the same way; lest you consider yourself to have been deceived or fed with empty words; and I command you to remember the first covenant, so that the new promise, which after many years I now repeat, may be more firmly supported.’