The sermon by David Green focuses on the significance of the covenant between Yahweh and Abraham, emphasizing that it was God alone who passed through the animal pieces, signifying an unconditional promise. The term 'cut a covenant' is derived from the Hebrew 'kareth, brith', illustrating the ancient Near Eastern practice where parties would cut animals in two and walk between them, indicating their commitment to the covenant. However, in this instance, Yahweh alone, represented by an oven and torch, passed through, while Abraham was in a deep sleep, highlighting that it was a unilateral covenant maintained by God's grace, with no obligations on Abraham's part.

I cannot stress enough that it was God alone who passed through, not Abraham, denoting an unconditional promise on God's part. On that day, Yahweh cut a covenant. I love that translation here, that he cut a covenant. The Hebrew is kareth, brith, and while most translations will say things like made a covenant, which is accurate enough, but the phrase cut a covenant is a more literal rendering. This is what the translators of the LSB have to say about it.

They wrote, in the ancient Near East, covenants were ratified by the two respective parties cutting animals in two and then together walking between the bloody severed halves. The significance of this practice is that each party is essentially saying that they may likewise be cut in two if they break their side of the covenant. The difference here is that Yahweh, presumably pictured in the oven and torch, passed between the animal pieces alone while Abram was in a deep sleep. This established a unilateral covenant which Yahweh alone was responsible to keep. By God's grace there was nothing Abram needed to do to keep the covenant in effect, nor was there anything he could do to jeopardize it." you