Abram’s Shortcoming During the Famine

Introduction

The Bible is a cohesive book inspired by the Holy Spirit and written by human authors. From the liberal mindset, it is merely a collection of incoherent writings by ancient people groups to determine how they are to answer the fundamental questions about life. Even in Old Testament studies, there is an attempt to separate the Pentateuch, and even Genesis, into unnatural divisions.

Yet we have seen thus far how the Lord God, Creator of the heavens and earth, condescends and reveals Himself to those whom He predestined. The Lord is steadfast, unchangeable, and the keeper of His covenant. Since the Bible is one story, we would expect to see similar themes throughout. In fact, we have seen how sinful man is thrown away from the presence of God.

Here, in Genesis 12:10-20, another important theme is brought forth, namely, the exodus. This passage serves as a foretaste of what not only Israel is to face in the exodus from Egypt, but also that of Christ. God’s people are expulsed from the land due to famine and later due to disobedience. And there we find the fundamental problem of man, his sin.

Though we are told of Abram in Hebrews 11:8 “By faith Abraham obeyed when he was called to go out to a place that he was to receive as an inheritance. And he went out, not knowing where he was going” we still see the challenge all believers face in this life, the struggle of sinning rather than trusting in the promises of God. Thus, we will look at the text in three ways: (1) Abram’s instruction (vv. 10-13), (2) Pharaoh’s abduction (vv. 14-16), and (3) Abram’s expulsion (vv. 17-20). In light of the text, our doctrine will look Christ as the object of faith in uncertainty. , in light of Abram and Pharaoh. Finally, in terms of application, we will look at the usefulness of trusting in the Lord.

Text:

(1) Abram’s instruction (vv. 10-13)

(2) Pharaoh’s abduction (vv. 14-16)

(3) Abram’s expulsion (vv. 17-20)

Doctrine: Christ as the Object of Faith in Uncertainty

Application: The Usefulness of Trusting in the Lord

(1) Abram’s instruction (vv. 10-13)

Why does Abram leave the promised land where God had told him in Genesis 12:7 “To your offspring I will give this land”? Does this indicate a distrust in Abram or unfaithfulness? Verse 10 provides us with the reason for why Abram left, which is twofold.

First, we are told that there was a severe famine in the land. In fact, all three of the patriarchs would migrate from their land as a means of survival from famine. Isaac would only journey locally to Gerar in Genesis 26:1-2. Both Abram (Gen 12.10-20) and Jacob (Gen 47:11-13) went to Egypt where they could survive. Egypt would serve as a suitable location for Israel during these two famine events as the Nile River would provide a stable agricultural environment than Canaan.

Typically, a famine would represent either divine curse or divine absence (cf. Deut 28:23-24; Ruth 1:1, 6; Amos 4:6-8). However, there is no hint in the text that would allude to the fact that the famine was due to divine chastisement against Abram. Stephen, in Acts 7:11 provides added clarity to the effects of the famine even during the time of Joseph, “Now there came a famine throughout all Egypt and Canaan, and great affliction, and our fathers could find no food.”

It could be argued that Abram had the interests of others on his mind rather than his own. As you remember, we see the wealth of Abram given in Genesis 12:5 “And Abram took Sarai his wife, and Lot his brother’s son, and all their possessions that they had gathered, and the people that they had acquired in Haran.” Abram’s obedience in going into the land but also in his preservation of those under his own care would support going to Egypt.

The second point as to why Abram left was its temporary nature. Abram went with the purpose of “sojourning” (גור). To sojourn has the idea of remaining in an area of temporary residence as an alien, or a dependent. It would seem that Abram, in traveling to Egypt, was forgoing the promise of the Lord. However, it appears clear from the text itself that Abram’s purpose was to temporarily avert the famine of the land, as we see his return in Genesis 13.1. Both the famine and the nature of Abram’s sojournings do not imply disobedience; rather, a resolve to adapt to circumstances outside of his own control while still depending upon the Lord.

One would think that if Abram were to go against what the Lord declared, he could have just as easily left and returned to his homeland, settling in either Haran of Ur. Yet, Abram was called by the Lord to forsake his home country and father’s reputation for the sake of following the Lord God. Hence, Abram leaving for Egypt is not to be equated with abandoning the Lord’s command; rather, being led to a place where famine would not destroy him or his household.

Yet there is another important aspect to Abram traveling to Egypt. Abram’s temporary exodus from the land of promise into the land of Egypt and back to the land of promise would typify Israel’s dramatic movement in the Book of Exodus. Egypt would be a distinct nation used by God to preserve His people.

We also see this in the life of Christ as well. Remember, Jesus is the fullness and completeness of all those who were before Him. Jesus as the true Israel, the greater Abraham and Moses, was also temporarily exiled to the land of Egypt. In Matthew 2:13–15, the Lord uses Egypt, the place of slavery and bondage for His own people, to be the place of security for Jesus, and also to fulfill the prophecy of the Lord. Matthew records, “Now when they had departed, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream and said, “Rise, take the child and his mother, and flee to Egypt, and remain there until I tell you, for Herod is about to search for the child, to destroy him.” And he rose and took the child and his mother by night and departed to Egypt and remained there until the death of Herod. This was to fulfill what the Lord had spoken by the prophet, “Out of Egypt I called my son.”” 

Just as Abram temporarily sojourns and returns to the land of promise, so also does Christ, the one who takes away the sins of the world, return, as Matthew records in 2:19-23. Once again, this place, which represented hardship and bondage for Israel, would be the place for safe keeping of the Lord Jesus and also a fulfillment of more biblical promise.

Though the Bible gives no direct evaluation of Abram’s sojourning to Egypt, as it is up to the reader, nonetheless, Abram’s actions are in violation of faithful obedience and trust in the Lord. This is what we see in Genesis 12.11-13. Abram demises a plan with the hopes of preserving his own life. His ruse, which is based on a half-truth (Gen 20:12), does not represent faith and trust in the Lord’s ability to protect him. But here, we see how fickle man can often be in response to the Lord’s promise. Abram was too focused on his own ability to ensure the promise comes to pass rather than the Lord’s ability.

Abram must have had an awareness of customs and practices in other cultures. He also has an awareness of the state of man apart from the Lord’s effectual calling. In the parallel account in Genesis 20:11 we are given insight into the reasons why Abram lies, “Abraham said, “I did it because I thought, ‘There is no fear of God at all in this place, and they will kill me because of my wife.’” Even if Egypt had a customary cultural practice of killing the husband and taking the wife, his actions were not in accordance with trust in the Lord’s provision. In fact, as we will see later, Abram’s ruse places his own wife in danger, as well as the lives of the Egyptians.

More important is the parallel to the Garden of Eden in this exchange. Rather than relying upon the promises of God, Abram gives up his wife for the preservation of his own life. In a similar manner, as both Adam and Eve were standing in the midst of the serpent, Eve being deceived, Adam was given a second chance, so to speak.

Remember, to Adam was given the curse for disobedience (Gen 2.15-17). Now even though both partook of the fruit, Adam had a chance to offer himself up as the sacrifice. If Adam demonstrated true, unadulterated, and genuine commitment to his wife but also as the federal head, or representative, of all mankind, he should have offered himself. Instead, Adam replies to the Lord and blames Him, Genesis 3:12 “The man said, “The woman whom you gave to be with me, she gave me fruit of the tree, and I ate.”” 

Why are we making this comparison in Genesis 12? Both Adam and Abram were given a promise from God. Yet, both decided to operate in accordance with their sinful disposition by putting their bride at risk of death. And what makes this more beautiful, is that we are told Christ, as the Second Adam, not only obeyed the Law in its entirety, not only lived a perfect, sinless life, but also bore the curse of the punishment required for His bride’s disobedience, namely, us.

This should show that despite our own efforts and failings in obeying the Lord or demonstrating a life of faithfulness, we have Someone who has done it on our behalf. The Lord Jesus Christ who set aside His divine privileges for the sake of bearing the curse that His bride deserved and thereby redeeming her. Though Abram would instruct Sarai to go along with the lie to preserve his own life, we have a Redeemer who stands in the truth and gives His own life that His bride may be preserved.

(2) Pharaoh’s abduction (vv. 14-16)

Just as verses 11-13 are reminiscent of the Garden, specifically as it relates to Abram, Adam, and Christ, so also do we see patterns and similarities regarding Abram’s entering into Egypt. What was the response of Eve after Satan’s final discourse? Genesis 3:6 “So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate, and she also gave some to her husband who was with her, and he ate.”

A similar pattern is represented with Pharaoh and his princes. First, in verse 15, they “saw her.” Just as Eve “saw that the tree was good for good.” Second, “they praised her.” To praise here is where we get the word Hallelujah, which means praise the Lord. The Hebrew word “hallel” is used, which is frequently used as a way to admire or desire another person. Even so, Eve sees the fruit as a delight to her eyes, something praiseworthy. Finally, the action of taking. Sarai was “taken into Pharaoh’s house.” The same word for “take” which can also mean “to seize” is used in Genesis 3.6 and 12:15.

What are we to make of this? As the Preacher exclaims in Ecclesiastes 1:9 “What has been is what will be, and what has been done is what will be done, and there is nothing new under the sun.” In the same way, we see the far extension of sins depravity in the life of the descendants of Ham, the Egyptians. Even as it pertains to sin, there is nothing new under the sun.

Thus we also see the universality of sin portrayed. Sin is not merely result of cultural conditioning. Nor is man born in a state of neutrality and learn sin. Nor is man inherently good. This modern form of liberalism in teaching on the nature of man is anti-thetical to the clear teachings of the Scriptures. Romans 3:10–11 “as it is written: “None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God.” Romans 3:23 “for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.” Likewise, the Egyptians are not only born under Ham, but more importantly, as with all mankind, they are born in Adam, the first transgressor, the one who brought death into the entire world.

Lastly, in verse 16, we see how Abram benefitted from such a ruse. Again, it would be blasphemous to assume that God condoned Abram’s sin of lying; however, as God is in the business of doing so, He makes the sinful actions of wicked men turn out for His glory and the good of His elect. As Sarai is taken away, Abram is given more on his account.

One final and brief note on the importance of being students of God’s Word. Thus far, we have seen, only in verses 10-16 mind you, biblical doctrines such as God’s covenantal faithfulness, man’s obedience, man’s depravity, comparisons to Christ as the head of the Church, and categories of Redemption.

(3) Abram’s expulsion (vv. 17-20)

One commentator writes on this drastic change from Abram to the Lord as “a history under the control of Abraham’s plan … to a history under the control of Yahweh’s plan.” This is not to say the Lord has been inactive; rather, the emphasis has been upon Abram’s sojourning to the land and his lie regarding his wife. Now, the Lord acts.

There is no indication from the text that Sarai was violated. If anything, God undertakes the role of justice in Pharaoh’s sin by inflicting him and his house with plagues. As we have seen thus far in combination with the Exodus account, Pharaoh is stricken with “great plagues” because of Abram’s wife Sarai. Pharaoh responds in three successive questions as he likely demonstrates indignation toward Abram for such a plot.

You can imagine the frustration of Pharaoh as one who was oblivious to the reasons for the plague until it was revealed to him. Though we are not told the specific way in which Pharaoh found out, he was nonetheless fuming due to Abram’s lie. Not only did it cost Pharaoh additional resources, such as sheep, oxen, donkeys, servants, and camels, but it also impacted their livelihood.

Though we are not given Abram’s response, it may have been something similar to his interaction with Abimelech in Genesis 20. Regardless, Abram is released from Egypt with additional wealth and the sanctity of his own wife, Sarai. Here we have another prefiguring of the Exodus of Israel with Abram. The Lord plagues Egypt, Pharaoh (eventually) let’s Israel go, they leave with more wealth than they had previously.

Why does the Lord punish Pharaoh? As verses 18-19 point, Pharaoh was unaware of the circumstance before him. Ignorance does not exclude culpability. As we are reminded from Paul in  Romans 2:15 “[Gentiles] show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them.” Pharaoh even demonstrates a knowledge of right and wrong in his questioning and in his anger in Abram’s lie.

Due to Abram’s ruse, Pharaoh decides to expulse him from Egypt. What is clear, is that the had been providentially superintending all of these actions. As stated, Abram was able to leave with more than what he arrived with. Hamilton notes, “That Pharaoh put men in charge of him is a further expression of his concern that nothing happen to Abram and his entourage to arouse further the wrath of Abram’s deity against Egypt” [Victor P. Hamilton, The Book of Genesis, Chapters 1–17, The New International Commentary on the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1990), 385–386.]

The word used “to send away” is the same word used when the Lord forces Adam and Eve out of the Garden. Likewise, it will be the same word used of the wicked Pharaoh in the time of Moses for getting rid of the Israelites after the death of the firstborn sons.

In a world full of uncertainty, especially for Abram, we are reminded that the Lord is our object of faith in times of uncertainty. And as the Westminster Divines assert, all actions of the Old Testament saints were “fore-signifying Christ to come, which were for that time sufficient and efficacious, through the operation of the Spirit, to instruct and build up the elect in faith in the promised Messiah.” This topic brings us to our doctrine of Christ as the object of faith in uncertainty.

Doctrine: Christ as the Object of Faith in Uncertainty

Hebrews 11:1 “Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.” 

Faith, as we are told by the author of Hebrews is assurance and conviction. Conviction in Greek refers to the act of presenting evidence for the truth and assurance refers to a claim that can be authenticated. Assurance and conviction come through the power of the Holy Spirit. Abram was convinced of the objective promises of God. Though he certainly errs and sins by lying about his own wife there still remains a dependency upon the Lord God.

As Calvin notes in his Institutes, “No sooner does he enter the land in which he was ordered to dwell, than he is driven from it by famine. In the country to which he retires to obtain relief, he is obliged, for his personal safety, to expose his wife to prostitution. This must have been more bitter than many deaths” (ICR). Abram goes into a land of unknown. Is taken out of the land of unknown to another land of unknown. Though he places his personal safety above that of his wife, which causes Pharaoh to be punished, he nonetheless takes heart of the promises of God.

Even more important is the aspect of Abram’s faith where he does not see the fullness of the promises. We looked at this last week in relation to Hebrews 11:13 “These all died in faith, not having received the things promised, but having seen them and greeted them from afar, and having acknowledged that they were strangers and exiles on the earth.” Abram’s faith was upon Christ’s work, which was yet to come. In the same way, our faith must rest solely upon the promises of Christ as given to us in the Holy Scriptures as our sole rule and authority for faith and practice.  Based upon Him alone, we can trust in the Lord.

Application: The Usefulness of Trusting in the Lord

Use 1. Persevere in God’s promise.

Genesis 12:10 “Now there was a famine in the land. So Abram went down to Egypt to sojourn there, for the famine was severe in the land.”  Hebrews 11:8 “By faith Abraham obeyed when he was called to go out to a place that he was to receive as an inheritance. And he went out, not knowing where he was going.” 

Circumstance, in verse 10 at least, did not prevent Abram from trusting in the Lord. In fact, just as the Lord called Abram into a land full of enemies, the Lord also sovereignly protects Abram in Egypt despite his lying to Pharaoh.

I am not sure we realize just how impactful post-Enlightenment thought has been in our lives. As Christians, we often shrill at the idea of individuality and subjectivity in the Christian experience and life. Yet for some reason, when we think about God’s promises, our actions reflect a post-Enlightenment mind rather than a Scripture-focused one. What do I mean? You may be struggling with sin in some meaningful way, which, all Christians do to be honest. Yet the assumption is that because you don’t feel like you are in Christ or do not feel justified, then surely the promises of God are nullified.

Do you see the hypocrisy in that thinking? We speak all day of objective truth, yet inwardly, we are impacted by post-Enlightenment rationalism that the subjective blots out the objective. I have observed that you can tell what a pastor or theologian struggles with based upon what they write about. And I think, to a degree, that is accurate in the Puritans. We assume that they had it all together. Yet, I am also wondering that since they were not so heavily influenced on individualism and subjectivity, i.e. post-Enlightenment or post-Modernism, those categories of individualism and subjective thought was just not as prevalent.

To persevere in the promise of God means to look to His objective, sturdy, unchangeable promises. If God declares in His Word that He has justified you and glorified you in the same small sentence (Rom 8.30), then perhaps we should weigh the promises of God over and against how we feel any given day. Is this not what we see in the life of Abram? He was not concerned with food nor safety in going to the land of Canaan and enduring the famine, yet followed the Lord’s promise. Following the promise gets you to where you need to go.

Did Abram fall short, of course he did. He lies twice and lies with another woman. Yet, we are still told by the author of Hebrews that he faithfully obeyed the calling of the Lord. This is by no means a license to sin or to act like sin has no consequences, however. Which brings us to our second point, remember sin’s consequences.

Use 2. Remember sin’s consequences.

Genesis 12:17 “But the Lord afflicted Pharaoh and his house with great plagues because of Sarai, Abram’s wife.” 

There may be times where you feel as though you’ve advanced so far in your walk with Christ that you have forgotten the consequences of sin, or even temptation as it were. Yet, even Abram, who not only received directly revelation from the Lord also had Him appear, was not averse to the temptations of sin. Rather than trusting in the Lord, he trusts in his own ability to deceive.

Is this not also the demeanour of man as well? How often do we assume the role of God in attempting to bring about our own will than that of the Lord’s? Sin finds its root often in the first temptation in the Garden in Genesis 3:5 “For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”” Remembering sin’s consequences means we reflect upon its temporal and eternal nature. 

If we look to the plagues of Egypt, we are often taken back by the level and magnitude of God’s wrath upon sinners. Or, we could turn to Sodom and Gomorrah, and see the extent of God’s displeasure for sin. Or, we could even look back to the Flood and have a brief picture of God’s judgment for wickedness. Yet, none of these compare to the eternal judgment and consequences to come for those who are not in Christ.

We are told by Christ Himself in Matthew 13:41–42 “The Son of Man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all law-breakers, and throw them into the fiery furnace. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” Do you notice the one who is sending forth the angels in wrath? It is Christ, or to put it another way, the Triune God.

No one has the opportunity to stand before God and claim He has not made Himself known. He has revealed Himself in the creation and He has revealed His eternal Law in man’s conscience. Thus, all are without excuse, all have fallen short of His glory, there are none who do good, all have gone astray, and all are dead in their sins and trespasses (cf. Romans 3:10-23; Ephesians 2:1-3). 

There are no works man can bring to appease God’s wrath for Law breakers. As Paul reminds us in Romans 6:23 “For the wages of sin is death”

To finish the rest of Romans 6.23, “but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.” We should remember the consequences of sin both temporally and eternally, yet also, to remember that the consequences of sin have been paid on your behalf. Jesus laid down His own life for His sheep, as the Suffering Servant, as the Great High Priest, and as the prophet better than Moses (cf. John 10:10-30; Isaiah 52:13-53:12; Hebrews 4:14-16; 7:22).

As the hymn goes, “Jesus paid it all, all to Him I owe, sin had left a crimson stain, He washed me white as snow.” Although we suffer the consequences of sin in this life, whether by ommission, or ignorance, or by commission, or purposefulness, the Lord is willing and able to forgive. Perkins writes of a hypothetical dialogue between Satan and a Christian. Often in life, we feel as though sin has broken our stance before the Lord. Perkins writes,

Satan. Indeed, this is very true in the children of God, but you are sold under sin, and with great pleasure do commit sin, and love it with your whole heart. Otherwise, you would not fall to sin again after repentance, and commit even one and the same sin so often as you do. You hypocrite, your behavior turns all the favor of God from you.

Christian. [Regarding salvation, and struggles of Abram and David as examples (cf. Gen 12.10-20)].  I know it by experience that God has turned my filthy sins to my great profit, and to the amendment of my life, like as the good physician is able to make a sovereign medicine (from rank poison) to preserve life [Rom. 8:28]. [William Perkins, The Works of William Perkins, ed. J. Stephen Yuille, Joel R. Beeke, and Derek W. H. Thomas, vol. 8 (Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2019), 563-64]

Remember the consequences of sin and who paid the price on your behalf.