patrick jane forums

.
● Gen 14:1 . . Now, when King Amraphel of Shinar, King Arioch of Ellasar, King Chedorlaomer of Elam, and King Tidal of nations

Shinar was the whole of Babylonia; Ellasar was the leading tribe in its southern part; and Elam was the original kingdom of Persia.

The Hebrew word for "nations" is gowy (go'-ee) a word wielded by some Jews as a racial epithet to indicate non-Jewish peoples. But gowy isn't really all that specific. The people of Israel are called gowy at Gen 18:18, and Jacob, the father of the twelve tribes, is called a gowy at Gen 25:23. Gowy really just simply indicates a massing;  e.g. a herd of animals and/or a horde of locusts; which when extended, indicates a particular people; e.g. Iroquois, Maya, Inuit, Chinese, Pacific Islanders, Japanese, and/or Arabs, et al.

Mr. Tidal was probably the chief of a large confederacy consisting of mongrel, multi racial people; possibly a tribal area in northeastern Babylonia. America is a perfect example of Tidal's confederacy because it's a melting pot of assimilation, intermarriage, and diverse races, cultures, languages, and nationalities. The only true Americans in America are its indigenous peoples. Everybody else is either an immigrant or the posterity of an immigrant.

At one time, Amraphel was thought to be Hammurabi; the great king of Babylon. But it's now widely agreed that Hammurabi didn't arrive on the scene until many years later. The other kings remain a mystery too, having not yet been archaeologically identified.

● Gen 14:2 . . made war on King Bera of Sodom, King Birsha of Gomorrah, King Shinab of Admah, King Shemeber of Zeboiim, and the king of Bela, which is Zoar,

None of these men were "kings" in the fashion that we today think of royalty. They were more like mayors, sheiks, or chieftains. And they didn't actually have extensive realms; nor very much jurisdiction beyond the very community each one dominated.

Canaanite cities weren't really serious municipalities; but rather more like fortified hamlets-- much like the strategic villages in Viet Nam; except that just about all Canaanite towns were enclosed within stone walls made of rough boulders about six feet in diameter. Archaeologists call this type of wall a Cyclops wall. The boulder walls were usually combined with an escarpment and reinforced with earthen revetments.

Canaanite towns doubled as forts; places of refuge in time of danger, whether from sudden attack by nomadic bands or from civil wars among the Canaanites themselves. Towering perimeter walls invariably enclosed small areas, not much bigger than Ste. Peter's Square in Rome. Each of these town-forts had a water supply, but weren't really suitable for housing large populations in permanent homes.

Inside the walls lived only the chieftain, the aristocracy, wealthy merchants, and even sometimes Egyptian representatives. The rest of the inhabitants of the township-- the ranchers and farmers, the vassals and the servants and the serfs-- lived outside the walls; often in tents or simple mud hogans or wattle huts. Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob all lived in tents; viz: pavilions.

In Tell el-Hesi, probably Eglon, the town proper was just over an acre. In Tell es-Safi, formerly Gath, it was twelve acres. In Tell el-Zakariyah, formerly Megiddo, the same amount. Gezer, on the road from Jerusalem to Jaffa, occupied just over twenty acres. Even in the more built up area of Jericho, the inner fortified wall, the Acropolis proper, enclosed a space of little more than five acres; yet Jericho was an important city and one of the strongest fortresses in the country.

So the five cities of the Plain were nothing to brag about-- well, maybe in their day they might have been notable enough amongst their contemporaries.

● Gen 14:3 . . all the latter joined forces at the Valley of Siddim, now the Salt Sea.

In its early history; the valley was home to the Sedom Lagoon. Back then, water from the Red Sea was able to ebb in and out of the lagoon because the region hasn't always been land-locked like it is today. At one time the Jordan River had an easy outlet to the gulf of Aqaba. But over time, tectonic forces altered the region; preventing drainage into the gulf and trapping water in a huge basin from which they cannot now escape.
_

.
● Gen 14:4b . . and in the thirteenth year they rebelled.

El Ched wouldn't get wind of that right away of course. There was no email, no radio, no sat-com, no land line, no snail mail, no cells, nor television, nor telegraph, nor aircraft, nor motorized conveyances in that day so it would take some time for an overland caravan to return and tell him how the federation of five towns in the Valley refused to cough up their payments.

Meanwhile the local sheiks had some time to prepare themselves for attack while The Ched organized an expeditionary force.

● Gen 14:5-7 . . In the fourteenth year Chedorlaomer and the kings who were with him came and defeated the Rephaim at Ashteroth-karnaim, the Zuzim at Ham, the Emim at Shaveh-kiriathaim, and the Horites in their hill country of Seir as far as El-paran, which is by the wilderness.

. . .  On their way back they came to En-mishpat, which is Kadesh, and subdued all the territory of the Amalekites, and also the Amorites who dwelt in Hazazon-tamar.

Ched took no chances that any nearby clans would come to the aid of the Valley people. So before launching his attack against the Federation, he first subdued everyone in the region roundabout who might be sympathetic to their cause. The Ched was a very shrewd commander.

Dr.Nelson Glueck, a leading Palestine archaeologist, has this to say about El Ched's conquest:

"A punitive expedition developed into an **** of annihilation. I found that every village in their path had been plundered and left in ruins, and the countryside laid waste. The population had been wiped out or led away into captivity. For hundreds of years thereafter, the entire area was like an abandoned cemetery, hideously unkempt, with all its monuments shattered and strewn in pieces on the ground."

The invasion first crushed all the sheiks north, east, and then west of the Dead Sea before it reached the communities of Siddim, against whom the invasion had been mounted in the first place. The purpose was no doubt to eliminate the possibility of an attack from the rear while Ched was occupied fighting the Federation.

Dr.Glueck identifies Ashtaroth Karnaim, where The Ched encountered the Rephaim, as two adjacent cities in southern Syria, Tell Ashtarah and Sheikh Sa'ad, which was called Carnaim in New Testament times. The name Ashtarah comes from the name of the Greek moon goddess Astarte , equivalent to the Babylonian god Ishtar and the Canaanite goddess of sensual love Ashtaroth, whose worship was one of the sources of gross immorality among the Canaanites.

After defeating the Rephaim, Ched smashed the Horites in Mount Seir-- a mountainous region somewhat to the southeast of the Dead Sea --Esau's future turf. Then he went to El-Paran, in the southern wilderness, and then returned to Kadesh, on the western side of the Dead Sea where he crushed the people in a region that would later belong to the Amelekites. He also defeated a contingent of the Amorites, who were very probably the dominant tribe in Canaan at that time.

Some identify Hazazon-tamar as En-Gedi. If this identification is correct, then Hazazon may be Wady Husasah, northwest of 'Ain Jidy.

Another suggestion, which certainly seems very likely true, is that Hazazon-tamar is the Thamara of Eusebius, Onomasticon (85:3; 210:86), the Thamaro, of Ptol. xvi. 3. The ruin Kurnub, 20 miles west-southwest of the south end of the Dead Sea-- on the road from Hebron to Elath-- is supposed to mark this site. My maps aren't too detailed in that area but Karnub seems to be in a region triangulated by Dimona, Arad, and Be'er Sheva.

Anyway, after thus neutralizing all who might stand in his way, Ched's confederated army then turned its full attention to the five communities in the Plain. And woe and behold, Abram's nephew Lot was right smack in the middle of it all.

● Gen 14:8-9 . .Then the king of Sodom, the king of Gomorrah, the king of Admah, the king of Zeboiim, and the king of Bela, which is Zoar, went forth and engaged them in battle in the Valley of Siddim: King Chedorlaomer of Elam, King Tidal of Goiim, King Amraphel of Shinar, and King Arioch of Ellasar-- four kings against those five.

That was probably a wise move. If each town had remained behind its own walls, defending against El Ched individually on its own, he could have conquered them very easily one at a time. By combining their forces, and meeting him in the open, they stood a much better chance. But valley dwellers were no match for a seasoned expeditionary force. The men from Babylonia were battle-honed veterans.

● Gen 14:10 . .The Valley of Siddim was full of slime pits. The kings of Sodom and Gomorrah fled and fell into them while the rest fled to a mountain.

The Hebrew word translated "slime pits" is be'er (be-ayr') which is everywhere but maybe three places translated "well" as in water wells and/or cisterns. Some Bibles translate it "bitumen pit" but bitumen and slime are interpretations rather than translations. The pits apparently were natural features in the valley; viz: random sink holes.

NOTE: The level of the Dead Sea dropped a record five feet in 2012; and in the years between 1939 and 1999 it dropped eighty feet. The Sea's shrinkage has been a major problem for decades, with it's shoreline retreating as much as a mile in some spots. The process destabilizes the ground surrounding it, causing massive sink holes that have actually devoured whole villages.

The Hebrew word for "fell" is very ambiguous and could just as easily be translated "got down". Compare Gen 17:3 where Abraham fell on his face. In other words: the chieftains of Sodom and Gomorrah jumped down into some of those naturally-occurring pits like Army fox holes for cover and concealment.

● Gen 14:11-12 . . The invaders seized all the wealth of Sodom and Gomorrah and all their provisions, and went their way. They also took Lot, the son of Abram's brother, and his possessions, and departed; for he had settled in Sodom.

Talk about riches to rags! Lot went from a prosperous cattle baron to a slave in sixty minutes (so to speak).

The word for  "provisions" is 'okel (o'-kel) which means: food. Victuals were an important spoil of war in those days when supply lines were totally nonexistent. There were no heavy-drops from cargo planes, nor helicopters to ferry in  MRE's, medicine, FNG's, ammo, potable water, and things of that nature. When El Ched's army needed re-supply, they had to take it from their vanquished-- ergo: they were highly motivated; because if they wanted to eat, then they had to fight; and they had to win.
_

.
● Gen 14:15b . . and he pursued them as far as Hobah,

Unfortunately this is the only place in the entire Old Testament where Hobah is mentioned; and archaeologists have had no luck so far in discovering its exact location.

● Gen 14:15c . .which is north of Damascus.

Many, many years later, in 1918, the Hejaz Arab Army led by T.E Laurence (Laurence of Arabia) would fight the Turks in this very region and drive them out of Damascus.

Ol' Abram sure didn't want those guys to forget Canaan none too soon. It wasn't enough to beat them at Dan; no, he ran them all the way out of the country. The survivors of the invading army no doubt straggled back to their homelands as best they could, amazed at this sudden, unexpected humiliating end to what had been up till then a mighty wave of victory and conquest.

No mention of this battle has ever yet been found on any of the Babylonian or Elamite inscriptions-- which is understandable. Ancient kings were accustomed to boast only about their victories since defeat usually left them dead or in slavery.

● Gen 14:16 . . He brought back all the possessions; he also brought back his kinsman Lot and his possessions, and the women and the rest of the people.

If Abram had left the Federation's people in enemy hands and rescued only his nephew, no one would have faulted him for it. They were, after all, total strangers and had nothing in common with either Abram or Abram's religion; being "very wicked sinners against the Lord." But that would have been a terribly ignoble show of charity; not to mention downright politically stupid in a land where you needed all the friends you could get.

It's easy to imagine the tremendous amount of respect this campaign won for Abram in the eyes of all the Canaanites. He was a great sheik in that land, no doubt about it now. Abram beat a Babylonian army.

That was an impressive accomplishment; and a testimony to his cunning, his dependability, and to his courage under fire. Everyone in Canaan knew now that Abram wasn't a man to be trifled with. He's a perfect example of the old proverb: Walk softly, and carry a big stick. Abram was no bully, yet didn't allow others to bully him. Now if only he would quit lying to people about his relationship to Sarai.

NOTE: US President Theodore Roosevelt is famous for his comment about walking softly, but the way he went about obtaining the Panama Canal zone was not what I would call "soft".

● Gen 14:17 . .When he returned from defeating Chedorlaomer and the kings with him, the king of Sodom came out to meet him in the Valley of Shaveh, which is the Valley of the King.

The location of the Shaveh Valley is a total mystery; this being the only place in the entire Old Testament where it's mentioned. "Shaveh" is a transliteration of Shaveh (shaw-vay') which means: plain or level or equal.

Some feel that the Shaveh Valley was some sort of neutral zone, like a Geneva Switzerland; where rival sheiks could meet and talk turkey without fear of reprisal or assassination. The Valley of the King is thought to be a special location where kingships were publicly bestowed upon individuals-- which, if true, would imply that Abram may have been offered an opportunity to rule a portion of Canaan.

It's not unusual for victorious military commanders to be politically popular. General Dwight D. Eisenhower, the USA's 34th president, was one of those; and so was the great Shawnee chieftain Tecumseh. (had the British not reneged on their commitment to support Tecumseh's hard-won coalition of eastern tribes, the United States east of the Mississippi river might be half its size today)
_

.
● Gen 14:19-20a . . He blessed him, saying: Blessed be Abram of God Most High, Creator of heaven and earth. And blessed be God Most High, Who has delivered your foes into your hand.

At this point in time, Abram's relationship with God was very satisfactory. 'Elyown had nothing critical for Mel to say of Abram; and Mel verified that God was the reason behind Abram's success in battle. David's too.

"In your strength I can crush an army; with my God I can scale any wall (2Sam 22:30)

"He prepares me for battle; he strengthens me to draw a bow of bronze. (2 Sam 22:35)

"Blessed be the Lord, my rock, who trains my hands for war, and my fingers for battle" (Ps 144:1)

 etc.

There are Christians who, allegedly for conscience sake, are totally against all war and violence. They fail to appreciate that peace, liberty, and human rights are preserved in an evil world only by force of arms.

Conscientious objectors-- while refusing to put themselves in harm's way standing guard over their family and their country, and to lend a hand in keeping the world a relatively safe, stable place to live, sacrificing their own lives and futures if need be --don't seem to mind taking advantage of the abundance of benefits purchased by the blood of others whom they despise as baby killers and war mongers.

● Gen 14:20b . . And [Abram] gave him a tenth of everything.

According to Heb 7:1-4, this particular tenth regarded only the recent spoils of war; not of all Abram's estate in its entirety. So then, tenths should be reserved for times when you know in your heart that it was God who engineered your success.

Just exactly how King Mel disposed of Abram's tenth isn't stated; but typically contributions back then went towards a local priest's support. This principle would apply of course only if Mel was useful to Abram as a priest; viz: a source of spiritual counseling and/or a mediator between himself and God, otherwise Abram would owe him nothing.

But enough of that. A comprehensive dissertation on the Melchizedekian priesthood is located in the New Testament's open letter to the Hebrew people.

● Gen 14:21 . .Then the king of Sodom said to Abram: Give me the persons, and take the possessions for yourself.

Sheik Bera was very grateful to Abram, and asked only for the return of his fellow citizens; but not for the return of their stolen goods. Abram was more than welcome to keep it all as his reward for rescuing the people of the Plain. Although Bera and his citizens were very wicked, this is one time I have to give him some credit for showing excellent propriety.

But Abram refused. There was just no way he was going to get rich by exploiting his own neighbors' misfortunes. Although he had a perfect right, within the customs of that day, to all the spoils of war, (a tenth of which he already gave to Melchizedek) he waived it in favor of looking out for Sheik Bera's best interests. I tell you, this man Abram was incredibly gracious; and his manner of life, as a rule, made his religion, and his god, look pretty good.

● Gen 14:22-23 . .But Abram said to the king of Sodom: I swear to the Lord God Most High, Creator of heaven and earth; I will not take so much as a thread or a sandal strap of what is yours; you shall not say: It is I who made Abram rich

When you get down to it; a person's reputation is all that really matters in life; because it's really the only thing we take with us when we pass on. Abram didn't want to be known as someone who got rich through the misfortunes of others. And that is exactly what would have happened had he agreed to Bera's suggestion. You can imagine what that would have done to his influence for God in that region; and how it would have ruined Abram's own self respect. It would be awful indeed if people round about gossiped that Abram's only motive for rescuing his nephew was for profit.

Abram didn't need Bera's stuff anyway. What the heck; he had plenty back home already. Why be greedy? I mean: how much does it really take to satisfy? Does a man really have to own every skyscraper, every square foot of real estate, every drop of water, every cow, pig, and chicken, every inch of agricultural land, every fruit and vegetable seed sold around the world, every watt of electricity, every telephone system, every share of stock in a blue chip company, every software program, every car dealership, every oil well, every refinery, every electric generating plant, every natural gas supplier, a monopoly on insecticide and weed killer, every utility, and every hotel and apartment building before he feels he has enough?

When will Walmart's corporate managers finally say "Lets stop expanding. We have enough market share". They never will because Walmart's greed and its predatory nature knows no bounds.

As I watched a NetFlix documentary about corn production; the producers visited a chemical plant that makes high fructose corn syrup. The manager of the plant was asked how much market share his product had. After answering, he was then asked how much market share he would like to have; and he answered "all of it"

The Supreme Almighty God, who had so blessed Abram thus far, would surely continue to do so. Abram had far more personal honor and self respect than the predatory ENRON traders who took advantage of forest fires in California some years ago to raise that State's electric rates.

● Gen 14:24 . . For me, nothing but what my servants have used up; as for the share of the men who went with me-- Aner, Eshkol, and Mamre --let them take their share.

Abram's only request was replacement of his own provisions that his troops consumed during the mission. He didn't permit them to take a share of the spoils; and since they were his slaves; they had no say in it. But his Amorite allies spoke for themselves. If they wanted anything, it was their own decisions about it and Abram didn't interfere. I mean, after all; the cities of the plain owed the Amorite guys at least a little something as compensation for saving their bacon.
_

.
● Gen 1:27 . . So God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.

It's okay to pity people who refuse to be identified by their gender and prefer to be known as non binary, i.e. as neither male nor female. But there is no just no way on God's green earth that Bible believing Christians should ever be supportive of the non binary movement because the image and likeness of God finds its completeness in distinct male and female gender identities.

I suggest ,
the image of GOD means that they are persons, that is they are people able to marry HIM in the heavenly state. We are not animals unfit for the heavenly holy communion called marriage.  The mention of male and female is an earthly life term, not a creative term about our spirits, and is included to ensure that people did not get the wrong idea that only men could be married to GOD, not women, as would inevitably happen. 

 

.
● Gen 2:18 . .Yhvh God said: It's not good for Adam to be solitary; I will make a fitting helper for him.


That is a curious statement considering that God had given His creation an evaluation of "very good" back in Gen 1:31.

GOD said all was very good but that Adam being alone was not good. Obviously we have two uses of the word good here. Since a not good is within the very good it cannot have the meaning of a moral good but of a general good such as "HE saw everything was good for its intended purpose" with no moral quality at all without having that denigrated by the non-good of Adam's being alone.


I find 5 reasons to believe that Adam and Eve were sinners when they were sown, ie moved, into the world by the breath of GOD as per Matt 13:36-39: 37 He replied, “The One who sows the good seed is the Son of Man. 38 The field is the world, and the good seed represents the sons of the kingdom. The weeds are the sons of the evil one, 39 and the enemy who sows them is the devil. In short they are:


1.  Adam was being rebellious to seek his mate amongst the animals, that is, GOD knew HE had Eve planned so an animal wasn't in HIS plans at all making Adam to be working outside the plans of GOD, ie not faithful, ie, sinful.


2.  The root word for A&E being naked and the serpent being crafty in an evil way is the same word, `rm.* They can be read the opposite, ie, Adam and Eve were crafty and the serpent was naked.  The vowels that make them to be naked or crafty were not put into the writing until ç600AD. The reason the Rabbis and the Church Fathers chose naked for Adam and Eve was their decision that all mankind was created ON EARTH at conception (traducianism) or at birth (creationism of the soul) because as newly created in the garden they had to be innocent.


*There is also a perfectly good word about Noah that describes the nakedness  of being unclothed with absolutely no chance of thinking it meant evil.


3. Naked is a metaphor for evil in other parts of scripture. Rev 3:17 You say, ‘I am rich; I have grown wealthy and need nothing.’ But you do not realize that you are wretched, pitiful, poor, blind and naked. 18 I counsel you to buy from Me gold refined by fire so that you may become rich, white garments so that you may be clothed and your shameful nakedness not exposed, and salve to anoint your eyes so that you may see. 


Where is the sin in being unclothed in your own garden as GOD made you? Even if naked refers to sex, how could it be sinful if they were commanded to procreate? No, the telling part of this verse is "They were not ashamed!". If there was no sin in being naked then why bring up shame? They were not over 12 feet tall either but there is no hint that they should be ashamed of that.


The reference to their shame is echoed in Rev 3:17 - 18, being a sinner is shameful but those blinded by sin need their eyes opened by the Lord's salve and their shame covered by white garments, the righteous acts of the saints, Rev 19:18.


It is also curious how, when their eyes were finally opened to their sin, they saw their being naked, a nakedness they had before they ate, not their eating. The only thing that happened when they ate was that they now saw their sinfulness and were ashamed but their nakedness did not change in the least. So, if being unclothed is no sin, why did they suddenly become ashamed of their nakedness when they sinned? The answer is that naked was a metaphor for being sinful as it is in other parts of the bible.


4. Eve treats the serpent like a mentor or pastor. Is it not a sin to fraternize with a demon this way? IF she was innocent then why did GOD allow the serpent access to her and not warn her to beware of him? Not very loving I'd say...


BUT if she was already sinful and the serpent was her friend and a pretty good guy in her eyes which she had to repudiate, then HE might have let the serpent deceive her to open her eyes to her own sinfulness and to the serpent's sin so she would never choose him over her GOD ever again.


5. The bible is pretty clear that the law / commands are given to sinners: 1 Timothy 1:9  We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers... and then only to convict them of their sinfulness: Romans 3:20...For the Law merely brings awareness of, conviction of, sin.


Thus for Adam and Eve to be given a command is an indication that they were sinners who needed their eyes to be opened to their sin by their failure to obey an easy command.

.
● Gen 15:7a . .Then He said to him: I am The Lord who brought you out from Ur of the Chaldeans

God here identifies Himself as Yhvh. That may seem unimportant but there are those who claim Abram was unaware of that name because of Ex 6:3. But it just goes to show you that sometimes the Bible is not all that easy to understand.

One thing we should never overlook about Abram is that, although he was a Hebrew, he was never a Jew. He and his wife Sarai were both Gentiles whom God selected to engender the people of Israel. There was nothing particularly special about Abram. In fact he came from a city, and a family, of idolaters. (Josh 24:2)

So God began by reminding Abram of his roots. Abram was a Babylonian; and it was God who took an interest in him, and the one who got him out of there and gave him a future. It wasn't Abram's idea to  re-invent himself; nor was it Abram's idea to pack up and leave his native country. Actually, if not for God's interference, Abram would've still been back at Ur, living like a pagan.

● Gen 15:7b . . to assign this land to you as a possession.

God gave this man a future. Abram was a nobody, going nowhere in Ur. Of His own sovereign volition, God moved into Abram's life and made a difference. He'll do the very same thing again later on with Jacob.

Some Gentile Christians are way too puffed up with religious pride. It wouldn't hurt a few of them to consider their own roots once in a while too because they have absolutely nothing to brag about.

"As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient. All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the cravings of our sinful nature and following its desires and thoughts. Like the rest, we were by nature objects of wrath.

. . .  But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions-- it is by grace you have been saved. And God raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus, in order that in the coming ages he might show the incomparable riches of his grace, expressed in his kindness to us in Christ Jesus." (Eph 2:1-7)

"Therefore, remember that formerly you who are Gentiles by birth and called "uncircumcised" by those who call themselves "the circumcision" (that done in the body by the hands of men)-- remember that at that time you were separate from Christ, excluded from citizenship in Israel and foreigners to the covenants of the promise, without hope and without God in the world. But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far away have been brought near through the blood of Christ." (Eph 2:11-13)

● Gen 15:8 . . And he said: O Lord God, how shall I know that I am to possess it?

When men struck deals in those days, they gave each other a token of their word. What Abram requested was sort of akin to a notarized signature. That's interesting because though Abram believed God's promise of a biological heir; he didn't really have all that much confidence in God's promise of the heir possessing Canaan. In other words: Abram wanted a token of God's good faith.

During this dialogue, Abram has been calling God by the title  'Adonay (ad-o noy') which means Lord, Sovereign, and/or Master (as a proper name for only God) This is, in point of fact, the very first instance in the Bible of somebody addressing God by that title. It is precisely what everyone should call God only when they are serious about living in compliance with His will.

So please don't ever address your maker as Lord, Sovereign, and/or Master unless you mean it. It is very insulting, and quite meaningless, to refer to someone as your commander when you have no intention of doing what they say or if you're going about it in a half-hearted manner.

"And why do you call me Lord and Master and do not what I say?" (Luke 6:46)

"A son honors his father, and a servant his lord. If I am a father, where is the honor due me? If I am a lord, where is the respect due me?-- protests the Lord of Hosts." (Mal 1:6)

● Gen 15:9-10 . . He answered: Bring Me a three-year-old heifer, a three-year-old she-goat, a three-year-old ram, a turtledove, and a young bird. He brought Him all these and cut them in two, placing each half opposite the other; but he did not divide the [young] bird.

A full grown "turtledove" is a towr (tore). Young birds are a gowzal (go-zawl'); a nestling, quite possibly still covered in chick down. Of all the animals that God specified, the gowzal is the only one that wasn't mature. How Abram knew to cut the mature ones in two pieces is not stated.

The ritual that is about to take place amounted to a notary public. Abram wanted God's name on the dotted line and this is the way God chose to do it. This ritual may look silly and barbarous to modern Man, but it was serious business and may very well have been a common custom for sealing pacts in the Canaan of that day.
_