Часть 2. Первоначальная история мира и Церкви после потопа

Origin of the Chosen People in Abraham “I thought about the first days and the everlasting years” (Ps. 77:6) “What was, also is, will be” (Eccl. 1:9) At the end of the flood, the world is renewed on the part of man by a solemn sacrifice, and on the part of God by the promise of preservation. 20. And Noah built an altar to the Lord; And he took of every clean animal, and of every clean bird, and offered burnt offerings on the altar. Coming out of the ark, Noah first of all proceeds to sacrifice. What should have prompted him to do this was not only gratitude for deliverance in danger, but also reverent fear of the revealed judgment of God and the consciousness of his guilt before God; for this righteous man, without a doubt, did not consider himself self-righteous (Ps. 129:3). And Noah built an altar. The name of the altar appears here for the first time in Holy Scripture; but the thing itself had to be not new at this time, for it is impossible to think that Noah would dare to introduce anything new in the rituals of sacrifices accepted from pious ancestors and established by God Himself. And he took from every clean animal, and from every clean bird. The sacrifice is universal, because the deliverance is universal. And he offered burnt offerings. The Hebrew עלה generally means ascension or elevation, and in the law of rituals - both a special kind of burnt offering (Lev.1:9), and in every kind of sacrifice the burnt part (Lev.3:5, 5:7). And therefore the burnt offering is an essential and universal sacrifice. From this the true nature of Noah’s sacrifice is revealed, as well as how little difficulty one can have in comparing it with the various sacrifices prescribed in the law of rites. 21. And the Lord smelled the fragrance of tranquility, and the Lord said in his heart: From now on I will no longer curse the earth for man, because the thought of man’s heart is evil from his youth; and I will no longer smite every living thing, as I did. 22. Henceforth, throughout all the days of the earth, sowing and harvest, cold and heat, summer and winter, days and nights will not be interrupted. The promise of the preservation of creatures after the flood is opposed to the previous definition of their destruction (Gen. 6:13) and corresponds to the propitiatory sacrifice of Noah. The laws of nature, first established by the Word of God, were then shaken by the Word of God, but by the Word of God they are again restored and confirmed. And just as Noah’s piety was the first visible motivation and means for delivering creatures from the flood, the action of this same piety becomes an opportunity to promise them further preservation. And the Lord smelled the fragrance of peace. This image is taken from a person smelling the smell of food, and signifies God’s favor towards the sacrifice, or better, about the one bringing it (Lev.26:31). It is worthy of note that the expression of the stench of tranquility in word production is related to the prophetic name Noah, which means the reposer. And the Lord said in His heart, that is, in His secret councils, He determined the immutable future safety of creatures. From now on, I will no longer curse the earth for man, because the thoughts of man’s heart have been evil since his youth. These words, at first glance, present a strange complexity of concepts, as if God does not want to curse the earth for the very reason for which he cursed it before (Gen. 6:5-7), and as if He shows himself propitiated only because he did not achieve his goal in punishment, which is unworthy of the Divine. The following statement is satisfactory both for the original and against bewilderment: from now on I will no longer curse the earth for man, that is, because the thought of the human heart is evil from his youth; and I will no longer smite every living thing, as I did. God does not promise complete impunity for evil, but only does not want to curse the earth and all living things and does not want to strike as he did in the flood; Consequently, he continues to provide himself with private punishments and punishments of a different kind. Thus, without violating the holiness of Providence, only the manner of its action changes. Previously, justice was revealed as universal, and mercy as a special agent; From now on, justice will appear in the particular, as, for example, over Sodom, over Pharaoh, etc., and mercy - in the universal. Henceforth, throughout all the days of the earth, sowing and harvest, cold and heat, summer and winter, days and nights will not be interrupted. The order of times is renewed not because it did not take place at all during the flood, but because its beneficial effects were little perceptible. However, the question presented here about the number of seasons among the ancients cannot be resolved satisfactorily. The Psalmist divides the year only into summer and winter (Ps. 73:17). The Jews do not have a name for spring. The Egyptians did not know autumn (Diod. L. I, p. 1). All the days of the earth. This shows that the depicted promise is not eternal, but has its limit. The days of earth must finally give way to the days of heaven (Ps. 89:30), and then not only there will be no seasons, but also no night (Rev. 21:25). Since God does not favor only external sacrifices and burnt offerings (Ps. 50:18; Heb. 10:4-10), it is necessary that Noah’s sacrifice have some hidden dignity that made it favorable. This dignity consisted in the fact that she, being a nation-wide and universal sacrifice from the whole world and for the whole world, was therefore the most perfect prototype of the nation-wide and universal sacrifice of Christ. The offering of the burnt offering on the altar signified the ascension of Jesus Christ from the earth, by which He draws everyone to Himself (John 12:32), and the aroma of tranquility that God smelled, so to speak, from afar, was the love of the Redeemer, with which He gave himself for us as an offering and sacrifice, as a fragrant aroma to God (Eph. 5:2). He was also represented by the altar, since He also lifts up our sacrifices to God (Heb. 13:10, 15). From this it is revealed that God renews and blesses the whole world in Christ. Having depicted the will of God renewing the world after the flood and bringing it to safety from such executions, St. the narrator presents two more revelations of similar content (Gen. 9:1–17). But since this fertility cannot be an excess, it must be concluded that the last two narratives have a purpose different from the first. The words of these revelations are addressed not to Noah alone, as before (Gen.6:13, 7:1, 8:15), lower to all living creatures, which, apparently, was required by the content of them (Gen.9:1, 5, 10, 11, 15, 16) and which is not unprecedented in Holy Scripture (Gen.50:22), but to Noah and his sons ( Gen.9:1, 8). This already makes it clear that the essential subject of these revelations concerns not the house of Noah alone, below all living creatures, but Noah and his descendants, that is, the human race. Indeed, the first revelation refers to man in a state of nature and community; and the second places him in the kingdom of Grace and faith. Updating the state of nature and the hostel 1. And God blessed Noah and his sons and said to them: Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth. 2. Let all the beasts of the earth and all the birds of the air fear and tremble at you; everything that moves on the earth and all the fish of the sea have been given (by Me) into your hands. 3. Let everything that moves and lives be food for you; I give you everything, like green herbs. 4. Only do not eat flesh with its soul, that is, with its blood. 5. I will also require your blood, in which is your life, I will require it from every beast, and I will also require the soul of a man from the hand of a man his brother. 6. Whoever sheds human blood, his own blood will be shed among men, for man was created in the image of God. 7. So you are fruitful, and multiply, and spread throughout the earth, and multiply in it. God renews the state of nature and society with his blessing (Gen.9:1), just as it was after the creation of man (Gen.1:28). This blessing of God includes the right to multiply one’s race and possess creatures. Their use is determined and provided by Revelation with some special laws (Gen.9:2-6). Let them fear and tremble you. This was not in the blessing given to Adam: he was the ruler of the creation, but not terrible. When a person’s inner dignity no longer subdues creatures, God curbs them with fear. This fear frees us from dangers from animals stronger than us and forces them to serve us; but, taking advantage of these advantages, we must remember how terrible sin is when the sinner is terrible in the very blessing of God. And if sometimes animals come out of this fear, we also should not turn this into condemnation of God’s blessing, but into condemnation of ourselves. Let everything that moves and lives be food for you. Animals are designated as food after the flood because, as some people think, the fruits of the earth would eventually be insufficient for many people; that the fruitful power of the earth had become impoverished and that the weakness of the human body required the strongest assistance for its preservation. Theodoret says that God, having foreseen the inclination of people towards idolatry and deification of animals, gave them the flesh of these animals for food, so that they would know how indecent it is to pay Divine respect to such creatures that can be killed and eaten. Jerome (Cont. Jou. L. I) thinks that God showed mercy in this case to hard-heartedness. However, although God gives everything that moves as food to man, one can think that the division of clean and unclean animals in relation to food even before the law arose from the knowledge of their nature and was established by custom. For such a division has been visible since ancient times among pagan peoples (Hieron. adver. L. II). Just do not eat the flesh with its soul, that is, its blood. Having given man power over animals, God sets limits to it by this law and reveals His power over man himself. This law is repeated between the laws given to Moses (Lev.17:10–14; Deut.12:23), and even in the New Testament (Acts 15:20). From consideration of these laws, which are repeated with the first, it is not difficult to see that the use of blood is prohibited in all its forms, since it can be separated. The same considerations reveal the reasons for the prohibition of blood. Natural: for the soul of the flesh is in the blood. (Lev.17:11), that is, the blood is the seat and the closest organ of action of the soul 15. By accepting the most vivid impressions of mental properties, it can more or less transfer them with itself and into other bodies, as was found in transfusion experiments. So, it is possible that frequent and large quantities of blood consumption in food would naturally be accompanied by harmful consequences in a person. Moral: since the habit of consuming blood and for this purpose killing animals with special painful images of death weakens a person’s natural aversion to killing. For this reason, in Revelation the law on the blood of animals is combined with the law on murder (Gen. 9:4–5). Ritual and at the same time educational: and I gave it (blood) to you on the altar to cleanse your souls, for blood cleanses the soul (Lev.17:11). Blood is sacred because in sacrifices it cleanses souls, or more precisely, since it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to blot out sins (Heb. 10:4); depicts the blood of Jesus Christ, cleansing from all sin (1 John 1:7). Therefore, by excluding blood from animals used for food, the law turns, in a way, every slaughter of an animal into a sacrifice. I will also seek your blood and so on. since the law on the blood of animals, apparently, could be opposed to the fact that they themselves do not spare human blood and all visible creatures live by the destruction of others, then the Lawgiver directly adds the law on murder from the beast; and to this, as if in passing, he attaches the law on murder between people. Thus, this last law, being the essential goal of the two previous ones, is in the form of an accidental addition to them; and this to the end, so that the law presupposes as little as possible an actual crime and it would seem all the more terrible and monstrous the less expected. Some also explain the mutual connection of these laws by ascending from the lesser to the greater. Seeking blood means finding and punishing the person responsible for the bloodshed (Gen. 42:22). In this sense, God is called the Seeker of Blood (Ps. 9:13). The blood of man is sought from the beast by the fowler and by the positive law (Ex. 21:28–29). God sets Himself up as a seeker of blood both in order to thereby give authority and importance to human justice, and so that no murderer would enjoy impunity, for, evading human judgment, he falls into the hands of God the Avenger, who punishes atrocities in life, in death and after death. Whoever sheds human blood, his own blood will be shed among men: באדם literally in man, some state, through man, but the first translation of this expression is more consistent with its use (Ex. 13:2; Gen. 9:10) and has the advantage of representing the law in its inherent completeness and universality. Who has the right to shed the blood of a murderer is not shown here, because the law is given not to family, not to citizenship, but to the human race, and consequently, the private restrictions of it do not belong here, and it would even be untimely to appoint judges for murder when the entire human race consisted of only one father with children and wives. For man was created in the image of God. This reason for the last law again reveals its union with the previous ones, according to which all three laws can be depicted in the following provisions: it is permissible to kill animals as creatures possessed by man; but only without cruelty should this be done and even with some pious feeling; and so that the habit of taking the life of animals does not pave the way to murder, we must remember that power over the ruler of earthly creatures belongs to God and that he who destroys the likeness and image of God insults His sovereignty and glory. So, you are fruitful and multiply. Revelation consists of the same blessing that began, and this shows that the laws set forth before this were given in addition to and ensuring God's blessing in its fulfillment. Renewal of the Kingdom of Grace 8. And God said to Noah and his sons with him: 9. Behold, I have established my covenant with you and with your descendants after you, 10. and with every living creature that is with you, both with the birds and with the cattle and with the beasts of the earth among you, with all that came out of the ark, with all the animals of the earth; 11. I establish my covenant with you, that all flesh shall not again be destroyed by the waters of a flood, and there shall no more be a flood to devastate the earth.12. At this God said: This is the sign of the covenant that I establish between Me, and between you, and between every living soul that is with you throughout all generations forever: 13. I have set My rainbow in the cloud, that it may be a sign of the covenant between Me and the earth. 14. Thus, when I bring a cloud over the earth, a rainbow will appear in the cloud; 15. And I will remember the covenant that is between Me and you, and between every living soul in all flesh; and the waters will no longer become a flood to destroy all flesh. 16. For there will be a rainbow in the cloud, and I will see it, and I will remember the everlasting covenant between God and every living soul and all flesh that is on the earth. 17. And God said to Noah: This is the sign of the covenant that I establish between Me and all flesh that is on the earth. God renews the kingdom of grace and faith with the covenant that he promised to Noah before the flood (Gen. 6:18) and now actually decrees. In this covenant, its space (Gen.9:8-10), its object (Gen.9:11) and its visible sign (Gen.9:12-17) are presented to attention. God's covenant includes man and all animals. But these are introduced into it not as those participating in the obligation of the covenant, for which reason and freedom are required, but as participants in the benefits it brings. God enters into a covenant with man, as with the king of the universe, and, as a sign of complete favor towards him, promises the integrity and security of his dominion. The subject of the covenant is the promise of preservation on the part of God, and on the part of man - belief in the promise and the sign associated with it. This, comprehended by faith alone, the pairing of an invisible thing with a visible sign constitutes the most distinctive feature of this covenant, without which it would only be a blessing or a promise in the kingdom of nature, but which gives it a mysterious and gracious property. The Word and the Sacrament are essential attributes of the Church. The arc in the cloud was chosen as the sign of the covenant. Usually accompanying rain, it was supposed to present people with the image of a beginning flood, but God wants it to assure them of safety from the flood. This pairing of the sign with the signified especially reflects the property of the covenant. Revealing a sign of safety in the very act of danger, God exalts grace as much as he tempts faith. However, it would be unfounded to conclude from this decree about the rainbow that it came into existence only after the flood. It could have been before the flood, just as water and washing were before baptism. The key to the inner mystery of the Noahic covenant and the rainbow can be found in the Prophets Isaiah (Isaiah 54:8–10) and Ezekiel (Ezekiel 1:28) and in the Revelation of John (Rev. 4:3). God's covenant with Noah and his sons signifies an everlasting covenant of peace between God and the Church. The arc, as the seal of this covenant, is an image of the beneficial action in the souls of the Sun of Truth (Mal.2). The three main colors of the rainbow: fiery, scarlet and emerald (green), depict the fire of God's justice, the blood of Christ, quenching Him, and the grace-filled renewal of life. The story of Noah and his sons after the flood In a few words, this story presents the beginnings of the human race after the flood (Gen.9:18-19), the way of life of Noah (Gen.9:20), his fall (Gen.9:21), the unequal properties of his sons (Gen.9:22-23), their fate (Gen.9:24-27), the chronology and death of Noah (Gen.9:28-29). The beginnings of the human race after the flood 18. The sons of Noah who came out of the ark were: Shem, Ham and Japheth. Ham was the father of Canaan. 19 These three were the sons of Noah. From these the whole earth was peopled. Shem, Ham and Japheth. This is not the first time that Moses has numbered the sons of Noah, but even here it is not in vain. Now he answers the questions: did the human race multiply while in the ark and did Noah have more sons after the flood? Ham was the father of Canaan. This was said either so that the Jews could see the origin and predestination of the Canaanites, whom the land was to occupy, or in order to prepare for the understanding of the curse, which is described below, that fell through Ham on Canaan. From these the whole earth was peopled. This is the resolution and purpose of this tale about the sons of Noah. The entire current human race descends from them. 20. Noah began to cultivate the land and planted a vineyard. Since nature after the flood could not suddenly become rich in both fruits and animals used for food, it is not surprising that Noah primarily turns to agriculture. In particular, he could have been prompted to plant a vineyard and drink wine by the waters, perhaps permanently damaged in the springs by sea waters, the imperfection of edible substances on the earth corrupted by the flood, and his own old age, which required a strengthening and encouraging drink. 21. One day he drank wine, became drunk, and lay naked in the middle of his tent. Got drunk. The Church Fathers: Chrysostom (Nom. XXIX. in Genes), Theodoret (Quaest. LVI. in Genes), Ambrose (De Noe et Arca, c. 29), Basil (De jejun. horn. I) excuse the Patriarch for this fall, believing that the power of wine was hitherto unknown to him. In fact, it has not been proven that wine belongs even to the luxury of the first world (Matthew 24:38). Naked. The sequence of the story shows that this happened in a dream. 22. Ham, the father of Canaan, saw his father's nakedness and spoke to his two brothers in the courtyard. 23. Shem and Japheth took the robe, and putting it both on their shoulders, went backwards and covered the nakedness of their father; and since their faces were averted, they did not see their father’s nakedness. In order to feel the obscenity of Ham's act, one must imagine that Noah's nakedness would have remained closed to Shem and Japheth if Ham had not told them about it. So he opened it again. This revealed in him pride, consoled by the fall of another, a lack of modesty characteristic of chastity, and disrespect for his parent. Shem and Japheth, who had not seen the nakedness of their father, showed these opposite qualities in themselves. 24. When Noah woke up from his wine and learned what his youngest son had done to him, 25. then he said, Cursed is Canaan; He will be a servant of servants to his brothers. 26. Again he said, Blessed be the Lord God of Shem; Canaan will be his slave. 27. May God spread Japheth, and he may dwell in the tents of Shem; Canaan will be his slave. After the fall of Noah, the invisible one, repentance had to be expected; but we see only his anger at his son, who reproached his fall. We will not, however, blame the righteous man for this, who, of course, recognized and made amends for his mistake a hundredfold, but we understand from this the intention of the narrator, who here wanted to reveal not so much the virtue of Noah, which was no longer subject to doubt after the Divine testimony about it, as his prophesied path and the fate of his descendants. Noah’s words, although addressed to his three sons, are divided into two parts, that is, curse and blessing. Their content and subsequent experience show that they contain not so much human judgment as God's; and not simple desires, but predictions endowed with the power of the Spirit of God. Cursed be Canaan; He will be a slave of slaves to his brothers. Wanting to explain how the curse fell on his son Canaan for the act of Ham, the Jews say that he was the first to see the nakedness of his grandfather and told his father about it (Bereschith rabba, 37); others add that Noah spared Ham, respecting the blessing of God in which he participated after leaving the ark, or wanted to reduce the curse to one branch of the family instead of a whole offspring. The matter will be explained completely if we combine with the condemnation of present sin the foreknowledge of future things in Noah. Ham is punished in that son, or in that tribe, to whom he leaves his sins as a legacy: the punishment is the most sensitive for the ancestor, but no less righteous in relation to the offspring; the punishment is even merciful, because a double crime, the ancestor and the family, is marked once. When Canaan is called a slave of slaves, that is, a most despicable slave, this shows that slaves will come from other tribes, but the slavery of the Canaanite tribe will be the most painful and shameful. Such was the slavery of the Canaanites, first sinful and then civil (Gen. 15:16, 18-21). Blessed be the God of Simov. This blessing is very important, because instead of Shem, God is blessed, as if Noah was expressing not his good will to Shem, but his gratitude to God (Gen. 14:19-20), and that even God - an apparently daring thought - is assimilated to Shem. The more unexpected such expressions are in this place, the less permissible it is to weaken their significance. Blessed be God. It is not Shem who receives the blessing, but his blessing is written down to God. So this is not a blessing of nature or merit, but of Grace. Blessed be the God of Simov. Of the three tribes of Noah, God will bless the tribe of Shem, that is, it will preserve the true knowledge of God and worship. God Simov. God will not only be known and revered in the tribe of Shem, but will also belong to them through incarnation from him. Canaan will be his slave. This was fulfilled among the Canaanites, who were partly destroyed and partly conquered by the Israelites, the descendants of Shem, from the time of Joshua to Solomon. May God extend Japheth. Indeed, the descendants of Japheth occupied Europe, Asia Minor and the entire north, which later was, in the words of Iornand, a nest and nursery of nations. And may he dwell in the tents of Shem. Some understand this about God and refer to His dwelling in the tabernacle of testimony and the temple of Solomon (Ps. 132:13-14). But the union of these words with the previous and subsequent ones requires that they be applied to Japheth. The content of this prophecy was repeated by Balaam (Num. 24:24), and the Greeks and Romans showed its event when they entered the countries of Shem’s descendants with weapons. In addition, the tents of Shem, the dwellings of strangers and strangers of the earth, instead of the dwelling of God, blessed by Shem, the God of Shem, can mean the Church, preserved in the descendants of Shem and, finally, taking under its roof and taking part in its heritage (Col. 1:12) and the pagans, the descendants of Japheth. Canaan will be his slave. This happened when the Macedonians and Romans conquered Syria and Palestine, Tire and Sidon with their settlements in other countries. 28. And Noah lived after the flood three hundred and fifty years. 29 And all the days of Noah were nine hundred and fifty years; and he died. Following the Jewish calendar of the Patriarchs, some are surprised at the numerous vicissitudes that Noah saw during the course of his life, since, according to this reckoning, he lived for several more years with Abraham. Noah, drunk, naked, subject to reproach, covered, cursing, blessing, not without decency, is revered as a prototype of Jesus Christ, who drank the whole cup of God’s wrath, or more than his own love for man; naked on the cross, subject both in himself and in his members to the reproach of carnal men, but for that leaving them under the curse and in the slavery of sin; with reverence embraced under the cover of faith by the true children of God from Jews and pagans and blessing them, spreading them, dedicating them, enthroning them. Only this image is not clearly indicated by the word of God, but was found through the contemplation of the Fathers of the Church, such as Jerome (Contra Lucifer), Augustine (De civ. Dei. L. XVI, p. 2), Cyprian (Epist. LXI). A brief calculation of the first descendants of Noah according to his three tribes in connection with the narrative of Moses has the benefit that it paves the way for the understanding of Noah’s prophecy, in view of its event, and gradually introduces the narrator into the history of the people of God. This is why the genealogy begins with Japheth and ends with Shem. It is not surprising that the parts of this genealogy do not represent the same completeness or strict order of time. The narrator names only those who left their names to the countries and peoples that existed in his time and are worthy of special attention due to their fate, past or future. The search for the whereabouts of the descendants of Noah and the origin of the peoples from them cannot be done in such a way that it satisfies curiosity with clarity and accuracy, however, it can be done with benefit for the sacred antiquities and antiquities of the world. Moses arranges the genealogy of the sons of Noah (Gen. 10:1) into three parts according to the number of ancestors, who are: Japheth (Gen. 10:2–5), Ham (Gen. 10:6–20), and Shem (Gen. 10:21–32). X. 1. This is the genealogy of the sons of Noah: Shem, Ham, and Japheth. After the flood, their children were born. 2. The sons of Japheth: Gomer, Magog, Madai, Javan, Tubal, Meshech and Tiras. 3. Sons of Gomer: Askenaz, Riphat and Togarmah. 4. The sons of Javan: Elisha, Tarshish, Kittim and Dodanim. 5. From these came the settlements of pagan peoples, divided in their lands according to their languages, according to their tribes, among their nations. Sons. This word, according to the property of the Hebrew language, does not always mean the sons themselves, but also indefinitely the descendants of one ancestor (Gen. 10:20-21). The writer expresses himself more precisely and thoroughly when he speaks about his son (Gen. 10:8, 15). Homer. The people of this name, Ezekiel, are located north of Judea or Chaldea (Ezek.38:6). Flavius ​​finds the descendants of Homer in the Gomarians, the ancient inhabitants of Galatia, Bochart - in the Phrygians, Michaelis - in the Cimbri or Celta (Bochare. Phal. et Can. Michael, spicil. Geogr. ext. Hebr. ejusd. suppl. Ad Lex. Hebr). Magog. And this must be sought in the north, according to the instructions of Ezekiel (Ezekiel 38:2, 39:1–2). Joseph, Theodoret, Jerome derive from him the Scythians, under whose name the ancient Greeks included all the peoples of the north (Serab. L. XI). Bohart finds the name Gog or Magog in the name of the Caucasus, which the Colchians and Armenians called Goghasan, Gog's fortress. Madai. In the books of Daniel (Dan.5:28) and Esther (Esth.1:3) this name unquestionably means Medes. Flavius ​​also produces them from Madai; and everyone agrees on that. Iavan. This name can be abbreviated as Ion, and from this the name Ionian is derived, which was once the name for most of the Greek tribes, mainly those of Asia Minor. Homer calls the inhabitants of Delos Iaon (Himn. Apol.) King Javan in Daniel (8:21) means Alexander the Great. Tuvalu. According to the pronunciation of seventy interpreters: Fauvel. From this the Tibarians probably originated. Flavius ​​says that these are Iberians, formerly called Fovels. Meshech, or Mosoch. From this Mosch, according to Josephus, Cappadocians. Fovel and Mosoch are repeatedly united in Ezekiel (Ezek. 27:13, 38:2, 39:1). With this, according to Strabo, Iverov also believes in the land of Moschov (L. XI). Firas. Everyone agrees that this is Father Thracian. Askenaz. Traces of this name are found in Bithynia and lesser Phrygia in the names of the lake, bay, Ascanian islands, as well as the city and region of Ascania. Bochart thinks that among the Greeks Pontus Axenos also means Pontus Aksenazov, for the sign of inhospitability contradicts the property of the Pontic peoples. In the prophecy of Jeremiah (Jer. 51:27), Ararat, Minni and Askenaz are called to Babylon; Bochart, applying this to the present research, proves from Xenophon (Sutor. L. VII) that Cyrus, having conquered Phrygia, brought out a strong army from it. Rifat. According to the book of Chronicles, however, not in all of its lists (1 Chronicles 1:6). Rifat. Flavius ​​and after him Bochart give him Paphlagonia, whose inhabitants were once called Riphates (Pomp. Mel. L. I). Others from this derive the name of the Riphean mountains, which Mela (L. I) believes on the eastern side of the Don, and the people of Arimphaeus, meek by the name of ריף and according to the description of Herodotus 16. Togarmah. The house of Togarm in Ezekiel appears to be replete with horses and horsemen (Ezek. 38:4). On this basis, Bohart finds it in Cappadocia. But this sign, according to the testimony of Xenophon (Exped. Cyr. L. IV.) and Strabo (Georg. L. XI), also befits Armenia. The Armenians have legends about their origin that agree with this last guess. Elisha. His home, according to his father, should be sought in Greece. It is, according to the Chaldean interpreter, Ellas or Hellas אלס; according to Josephus, Aeolia; according to Bohart, Elis and the Peloponnese in general. The scarlet from the islands of Elisha, mentioned in Ezekiel (Ezekiel 27:7), is a product of Laconia and the surrounding countries. Tarshish. The signs of the land of Tarshish are: a position remote from Palestine, in the west (Ps. 71:10), coastal (Ps. 47:8), trade with Tire and an abundance of metals (Ezek. 27:12). They probably think that this is Spain, where there is a pier and the island of Tartessus and the city of Tarsius (Polib. L. Ш) and where the abundance of metals in ancient times was extraordinary (Serab. L. III. Diod. L. V. Plin. 3. H. L. III, p. 3). Kittim. Bochart derives from this Italy, attributing the prophecies of Balaam (Num. 24:24) and Daniel (Dan. 11:29–30) about the ships of Kittim to the Romans and thinking that the name Latium is a translation of the Arabic Ketam, which means hidden. They believe with greater certainty that Kittim is Macedonia, for in this sign the writer of the first book of Maccabees uses this name (1 Macc. 1:1, 8:5), with this sign all the prophecies about the land and islands of Kittim agree with the event (Isa. 23: 1; Ezek. 27: 6), and the ancient name of Macedonia, Macketta, or Maketiah, is very close to the name Kittim. Let's add. According to some copies of the book of Chronicles (1 Chronicles 1:7), Rodanim. Those who follow this last reading look for the Rodanim tribe either on the island of Rhodes, as seventy interpreters and Jerome do, or near the mouth of the Rodan River (Rhone) and the city of Rodanusia, as Bochart does. If we prefer the first reading, then the village of Dodanim can be believed to be in Epirus, where the oracle, the river and the city have the same name: Dodona. The antiquity of the Dodonian oracle, attested by Herodotus (L. II, p. 52), and the surviving legends about it confirm this guess. The prophecies were given, according to the legends of the Egyptians, by a priestess, and according to the fables of the Dodonian priests, by a dove: this discrepancy is explained by the Phoenician or Hebrew name יונית Yavanith, or Jonith, which can mean both a woman from the tribe of Javan and a dove. Settlements. This meaning of the word אי, drawn from the Arabic language, apparently is the root meaning of it. The meaning of the island that seventy interpreters give it here, however, is ordinary, does not befit this place. That the Jews used the same name to mean lands lying on the sea, beyond the sea, and generally remote and little-known, this is in accordance with the state of land description in ancient times and with the position of their own land. And other Asian peoples considered only Asia to be solid land (Herod. L. II, p. 103). The writer of everyday life, pointing to the settlements of pagan peoples, seems to have wanted to draw the attention of his compatriots especially to the little-known tribes of Europe that were still emerging at that time. 6. The sons of Ham: Cush, Mizraim, Puth and Canaan. 7. The sons of Kush: Seva, Havilah, Savta, Raama, Savtekha. Sons of Raam: Sheba and Dedan. 8. Cush also gave birth to Nimrod: he began to be strong on earth. 9. He was strong in hunting before God, which is why it is said: just as Nimrod is strong in hunting before God. 10. His kingdom at first consisted of Babylon, Erech, Akkad and Chalne in the land of Shinar. 11. From this land came Asshur and built Nineveh, Rehoboth-ir, Kalah 12. and Resen, between Nineveh and Kalah, a great city. 13. From Mizraim came Ludim, Anamim, Legavim, Naftuhim, 14. Patrusim, Kasluchim (from where the Philistines came) and Caphtorim. 15. From Canaan were born Sidon his firstborn, Heth, 16. Jebusi, Emori, Girgash, 17. Hivvi, Arki, Sini, 18. Arvadi, Tsemari and Hamathi. Subsequently, the Canaanite tribes scattered. 19. And the border of the Canaanites went from Sidon to Gerar, to Gaza, from there to Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah and Zeboim to Lasha. 20. These are the sons of Ham, according to their families, according to their languages, in their lands, among their nations. Kush. Cush is Ethiopia, both the original Arabian and the African derived from it. The first is proven by the confusion of the names Cush and Midian in the history of Moses (Ex. 3:1; Num. 12:1), the contiguity of the land of Cush with Arabia (2 Chronicles 21:16) and the wars of the people of Cush in Asia (2 Kings 19:2; 2 Chronicles 14:8). The latter is also undoubted, according to the testimony of Josephus (Antiq. L. I, p. 6), according to the Syriac and Arabic translations of the New Testament, according to which Ethiopia, Cush and Abyssinia are one (Acts 8:27), and according to the natural attribute of the Ethiopians in Jeremiah (Jeremiah 13:23). Mizraim. This name in Holy Scripture constantly signifies Egypt. ft. This name can often be seen among the Prophets among African nations (Jer.46:9; Ezek.30:4-5; Nahum.3:9). Flavius ​​says that this is Libya, and also finds among the Greek writers the region and the river Futus, which Pliny also mentions (L. V. p. 1). Canaan. This gave the inhabitants and name to the land of Canaan, which included Judea, Phenicia and Syria. Seva. His descendants are mentioned in the prophecy of Isaiah (Is. 15:14), where God gives Cyrus the trade of Cush and Sabeans. Josephus shows the city of Sava in African Ethiopia. Havilah. This name is also found among the sons of Jektan (Gen. 10:29). From Havilah, the son of Husov, comes Hawlan, otherwise Yemen, in Arabia. Savta. Dark traces of the settlement and migration of his descendants are found in the names: Saffa (the city of happy Arabia by Ptolemy), Saffa (an island or peninsula of the Persian Gulf by the same writer), Messawata (which Pliny believes to be within Persia). Raama. According to the pronunciation of seventy interpreters of Regma. The signs of this tribe in Ezekiel (Ezekiel 27:22) most likely show a country in Arabia near the Persian Gulf, where the city of Regma is, according to Ptolemy. Savtekha. A name that no longer appears in the sacred books and which is useless to pursue with guesses. Sheva. The same name appears again in this genealogy (Gen. 10:28) and also in the genealogy of Abraham (Gen. 25:3). To the ancestor mentioned here, Bochart refers to those passages of Holy Scripture where the name Sheba is combined with the names of Cush or his descendants (Ps. 71:10; Ezek. 27:23, 38:13), and believes his descendants are near the Persian Gulf, where the people of Asaba, according to Ptolemy, and Mount Sabo by Arrian. Dedan. One tribe of this name lived in the neighborhood of the Edomites (Jer. 25:23, 49:8), and came from Dedan, the grandson of Abraham (Gen. 24:3). The other, according to the description of Ezekiel (Ezekiel 27:15, 38:13), should be located by the sea in the neighborhood of Sheba. From here may be the city of Daden on the Persian Gulf. Cush also begat Nimrod. The glory of this man became the reason that Moses spoke about him separately from his brothers. Nimrod's name means rebel or proud person. This one began to be strong on earth. This signifies power and wealth (Ps. 111:2–3), and sometimes dominance (Ps. 51:3). He was strong in hunting before God. These words can mean both that Nimrod was skilled in hunting, and that with this skill he achieved power over people. A strong man before God is the same as a strong man without an example among men. Such expressions in the sacred language are reflections of the pious feeling of those who formed and used it (Ps. 79:11; Jon. 3:3; Acts 7:20). That is why it is said: how Nimrod is strong in hunting before God. To show that the memory of Nimrod still existed in popular tradition, Moses used here either a proverb or a fragment of some folk poem. The meaning of this saying is that the courageous ascetic or cunning oppressor was compared with Nimrod. Babylon. This city began before the division of nations and was designated to be the capital of the world (Gen. 11:4), but Nimrod, who probably had a great part in the plan for the pandemonium, took advantage of the confusion of languages, the labors of the entire human race, as the strongest. Erech. According to the explanation of the Targum, Ephraim the Syrian and Jerome, this is Edessa. Akkad. According to Ephraim - Nisibis. Halne. Bohar thinks that Khalne is the main city of Chilonitida in Assyria, later known under the name of Ktisiphon. Shinar. It is known that this name signifies Babylonia, but the space of its signification is not defined. From this land came Assur. This is how the ancients usually translated this place. The newest ones, taking אשור instead of אשורה, for which there are examples (1 Kings 3:15; 2 Kings 6:10), for the most part translate this: from this land he, that is, Nimrod, came out to Assyria. And he built Nineveh. Nineveh Bohart finds one near the Euphrates, and the other beyond the Tigris; here, apparently, the latter should be understood. Rehoboth-ir, or Rehoboth-city, was so called, perhaps to distinguish it from another city, Rehoboth-gannagar (Gen. 36:37). According to Ephraim, this is Adiabene. Kalah. According to Ephraim, Hetro, or Gartha. Resen. Instead of the great city of this name, Ephraim found only a place. Let's cheat. The name is, without a doubt, not a person, but a tribe. The distinctive sign of this people in Isaiah (Isaiah 66:19) and Jeremiah (Jeremiah 46:9) is the art of archery. Home is in Africa. Anamim. Bochart thinks that these are the people of Gammana or Garamanta, who wandered around the church of Jupiter Ammon. Legavim. Bochart applies this name to the Livio-Egyptians, who lived to the west of Thebaid, in a sandy and hot country. להבה cop means flame and heat (Joel 1:19). Naftukhim. Neffis, according to Plutarch (Lib. De Iside), among the Egyptians means the seaside edge of the earth. Therefore, some are looking for the dwellings of the Naftuhim people near the Mediterranean Sea, where the pier of Fthia at Ptolemy. Patrusim. From Jeremiah (Jer.44:15) and Ezekiel (Ezek.29:14) it is known that the land of Patros belonged to Egypt. But in Isaiah (Is. 11:11) it is separated from him. Bochart interprets this about Thebaid, finding the position of the country of Pathros indicated in the calculation of the parts of Egypt by Jeremiah (Jer. 44: 1), where they are named in order, starting from the side of Palestine, Magdol (near the Black Sea), Takhpanhes by Herodotus, Nof (otherwise Moth, that is, Memphis) and Patros Thebaid, where the region is Pafurit, according to Pliny. Kasluhim. Bohart means by this the names of the Colchians, immigrants from Egypt, but this settlement is not so ancient. Others place this tribe between Gaza and Pelusium. The Philistines are produced here from Kasluhim, and in other places, as in Jeremiah (Jer.47:4) and Amos (Am.9:7), from Caphtor. Perhaps the Philistines migrated repeatedly, just like the Jews. Kaftorim. The ancients, starting from seventy interpreters, call them Cappadocians (Jer.17:4; Am.9:7). Michaelis thinks that Kafthor is Cyprus. Sidon. Hence Sidon is the main city of Phenicia before Tire. Het. His tribe lived in the southern region of Judah near Hebron (Gen. 23:2-3). Jebusite. This descendants lived in Jerusalem until the time of David (Josh. 15:63; 2 Sam. 4:6–9). Emory. This tribe was strong beyond the Jordan (Numbers 21:26). Girgashi. This tribe fought with the Jews to the west of the Jordan (Joshua 24:11). Therefore, it is difficult to consider it one with the Gergesians (Matthew 8:28). Hivvy. This tribe lived in Lebanon (Judges 3:3), and before the war with the Jews in other places in Palestine (Joshua 11:19). Arches. From this Bochart produces the city of Arku at the foot of Lebanon, mentioned by Joseph and Ptolemy. Sini. Jerome (Quaest. Heb. In Genes) writes that Sini was located not far from the Arch. Strabo (L. XVI) mentions a fortified place in Lebanon called Sinna. Arwady. From this, it seems, the inhabitants of Arad, an island opposite the mouth of the Eleuthera River. Tsemari. From this, perhaps, the city of Simira near Eleuthera originated. Hamafi. According to the book of Numbers (Num. 13:22, 34:7–8). Hamath is the northern limit of the land of Israel. Chaldean interpreters take it for Antioch, but Joseph says that it was a city among the Greeks, called Epiphania. For the Jews, who were soon to occupy the land of the Canaanite tribes, Moses describes it and its borders in general (Gen. 10:19). He goes around it, starting from the north, to the west, south and east and points to the most famous cities. The least known Lasha, according to Jerome, is the Fox, otherwise Callirrhoe. These are the sons of Ham, according to their tribes, according to their languages, and so on. With this conclusion of the genealogical list, the writer explains that this is not a complete census of the immediate descendants of the Khamovs, but that only those of them whose names became the names of tribes, languages, lands and peoples are named here. 21. Shem, the father of all the sons of Eber, the elder brother of Japheth, also had children. 22. The sons of Shem: Elam, Assur, Arphaxad, Lud and Aram. 23. The sons of Aram: Uz, Hul, Gepher and Mash. 24. Arphaxad begat (Cainan, Cainan begat) Salah, Salah begat Eber. 25. To Eber two sons were born; the name of one is Peleg, because in his days the earth was divided; His brother's name was Joktan. 26. From Joktan were born Almodad, Shaleph, Hatzarmaveth, Jerah, 27. Hadoram, Uzal, Dicla, 28. Oval, Abimael, Sheba, 29. Ophir, Havilah and Jobab. All cuu were children of Joktan. 30. Their settlements extend from Mesha to Sephar, the eastern mountain, 31. These are the sons of Shem, according to their families, according to their languages, in their lands, according to their peoples. 32. These are the tribes of the sons of Noah, in the order of their genealogy, in their nations. From these nations spread across the earth after the flood. Father of all the sons of Eber. Some newer ones translate from Hebrew: to the father of all the sons of that side, that is, those living beyond the Euphrates. But the first translation, common among the ancients, is justified by the fact that the expression עבר בני is not so complete that it could replace the following: אנשי מעבר הנהר (1 Ezra 4:10–11; 2 Sam. 10:16), and that the name Eber is a well-known name of a person in this very genealogy ( Gen.10:25), which later became popular (Gen.14:13, 40:15; Num.24:24), and therefore there is no need to look for another origin and meaning. That Moses, at the beginning of the general genealogy of Simov, often calls him the father of the sons of Eber, this reason is that the writer gradually enters from the general into the private history of the sons of Eber, or, in a word, the Jews. Japheth's older brother. It can also be translated from Hebrew: brother of Japheth the elder. Only in the latter case, by the nature of the language, it would be necessary to say more fully, for example: the eldest son of Noah. That Japheth was the firstborn can be inferred from a comparison of the chronology of Noah's life with the chronology of Shem's life (Gen. 5:32, 7:11, 11:10). But it could happen that in the first of these places a round number was put instead of a non-round one, just as the three sons were mentioned without distinguishing the times of their birth; The strictness of chronology is left to the other two places. On the contrary, the fact that Shem was the firstborn is noticeable from the fact that in the number of brothers he is usually placed first (Gen. 5:32, 6:10, 7:13, 9:18, 23, 10:1) - Having departed here from this order and placing the genealogy of Shem after the genealogies of his brothers, the writer had reason to remind the reader that Shem is the elder brother of Japheth, whom the genealogy is placed ahead of the others, without deigning to name with them a third brother, already separated from them by both morals and curse. Yelam. From this originates Elymaida, the country between Susiana and Media, with which in the Holy Scriptures it is often connected (Is. 21:2; Jer. 25:25; Acts 2:9; 1 Ezra 4:9), and is even sometimes mixed with the first (Dan. 8:2). Assur. This name means happy. It signifies Assyria, and it is worthy of this name (1 Samuel 18:32). Arfaksad. A weak trace of this name is found by Bochart in Ptolemy in the name of Arrapahitida, which was part of Assyria. In the Holy Scriptures, no nation, lower country, is called by the name of Arphaxad. Of the sons of Shem, he was given the best glory - to be among the Patriarchs of the chosen people. Lud. Joseph, Jerome, Eusebius, and Isidore consider Lidians to be descendants of Lud. Aram. The grandson of Nahor from Kamuel was also called by this name (Gen. 22:21), and there were many countries: Aram-Nagaraim (Aram interfluve, that is, Mesopotamia) (Gen. 24:10), Padan-Aram or Sede-Aram (Aram Polish) (Gen. 28:7; Hos. 12:13), Aram Bethrekhov, Aram Tzova ( 2 Kings 10:6, 8 ), Aram Dammesek (Damascus) ( 2 Kings 8:5 ). Even the fatherland of Nahor and the fatherland of Jacob is called Aram (Gen.25:20; Deut.26:5). In the prophecy of Amos (Amos 9:7) God says that He brought the Aramites out of Cyrus, which some countries are looking for near the Cyrus River in Persia or near Kur in Iberia. Of so many Aramian countries there is no way to recognize the one that was the first fatherland of the Aramians. And the Greeks used the name Arameans or Arimov, and then began to call them Syrians (Strab. L. XVI). Uts. The firstborn of Nahor (Gen. 22:21) and one of the descendants of Esau (Gen. 31:28) are also called by this name. The firstborn of Aram, mentioned here, according to the legend of the ancients, created Damascus and gave his name to the Damascus plain, which the Jews call Uz, and the Arabs call Gaut. Hul. Bohart from him produces Holobotene (בית חול house of Hula), part of Armenia, Michaelis - Tsele-Syria. Gepher. A trace of this name is found in the name of the river Keitripa. Mash, according to the book of Chronicles, Meshech (1 Chronicles 1:17). From these names Bohart derives the name of Mount Masia. Kainan. This name is not in the Hebrew text among the descendants of Shem. But it is found in the oldest and best Greek manuscripts of the Old Testament and the Gospel of St. Luke (Luke 3:36) and in the antiquities of Josephus. Yoktan. The Arabs call him Qahtan and consider him the father of many tribes of happy Arabia and the Arabic language itself. Traces of his name are shown by the people of Catanite under Ptolemy and the city of Waisaf-Iektan in the vicinity of Mecca. Moses, describing the descendants of Joktan, puts their boundaries in the west of Mesha, which is probably Muse, the trading port of the Red Sea in Arabia in the east of Sefar, a city and a chain of mountains, which the Greeks called Klimax, that is, the ladder. According to this instruction, the sons of Joktan should be sought in Arabia. Almodad. From this, according to Boharg, Allumeota is in the middle of happy Arabia. Shalef. This is why Salapen. Hatzarmavef. The Arabic pronunciation is Hadhramaut. From this word, due to the difficulty of its pronunciation, the Greeks gave birth to the names: Adramita, Hatramis, Hatramitis. The country they signify is rich in myrrh and incense, but not healthy; and this last property corresponds to the name חצרמות Land of Death. Merah. This name means Moon. Bohart compares it with the name of the people Αλιλαιοι among the ancients, now בני הלאל Bne-gilal, children of the moon. Gadoram. From this, according to Bohart, the Drimats are the inhabitants of Cape Khodor on the Persian Gulf. Uzal. The city of Tsanaa is still called by this name among the Arabian Jews, and by the ancients Auzar, from the birth of the myrrh of Auzar. Dikla. This name from Syriac means palm tree or palm forest. Bohart finds such a place, and for this reason the descendants of Dikla, in southern Arabia. Oval. Bokhart assigns this tribe a place in Africa opposite Arabia, where the Avalit pier was located. Avimail. According to Bochart, there is the father of the Malites, whom Theophrastus believes to be among the four nations of happy Arabia, famous for their incense. Sheva. This tribe Bochart lies between the Menaians and Catavans at the Red Sea. Ophir. Among the Arabians this name means rich. Bohart finds a translation of it in the name Cassanites, which comes from the word חסן hasan, to hide treasure. Havilah. Henceforth the country of Khavlan, near the land of Saveev. Jobab. Ieva, from Arabic, desert. Such was the land of the Jobarites (maybe the Jobavites), according to Ptolemy. 1. While the whole earth spoke one language and one dialect, 2. it happened that people, moving from the East, found a plain in the land of Shinar and settled there. 3. And they said to each other: Let us make bricks and burn them with fire. Thus, they had bricks instead of stones, and earthen resin instead of lime.4. Then they said: Let us build ourselves a city and a tower, its height reaching to heaven, and let us make a name for ourselves, so that we are not scattered over the face of the whole earth. 5. But the Lord came down to see the city and the tower which the sons of men were building. 6. And the Lord said: Here is one people, and they all have one language, and this is what they began to do, and they will not stop in anything that they decided to do, 7. Let us go and confuse their language there, so that one does not understand the language of the other. 8. Then the Lord scattered them from there throughout all the earth; and they stopped building the city. 9. Therefore the name was given to it: Babylon; for there the Lord confused the language of all the earth, and from there the Lord scattered them throughout all the earth. Having spoken about the spread of the human race through the flood, in the first or most noble tribes, Moses explains how various peoples arose from the one great family of the human race. According to the most natural order, it shows first the state of the human race in its unity (Gen. 11:1), then the event of division on the part of people themselves (Gen. 11:2-4), then the judgment and determination of God about this division and, finally, the very action of division (Gen. 11: 8-9). The whole earth spoke one language and one dialect. Literally from Hebrew: the whole earth had one mouth and one word. Similar expressions in the Hebrew language often signify unanimity or unanimity (Joshua 9:2; 1 Kings 22:13; Exodus 24:3), but what is used here definitely means one common language (Joshua 19:18). So, Moses depicts the unity of human society in a universal language, and not the general agreement of people in the intention of pandemonium 17. They ask, what was this first and universal language of the human race? Some who have studied this question argue that although traces of it are more or less visible in the ancient eastern languages, none of them is more original, just as in our times neither French, nor Italian, nor Spanish is ancient Latin. Others give primacy to the Jewish, without denying, however, that it too has undergone changes over time. This opinion is justified: History. With the help of the long life of the Patriarchs and their constancy in opinions and customs, the language of Adam should have been preserved without great damage until Noah, the language of Noah - until Abraham, and the language of Abraham is Jewish. Sacred history gives us no reason to confuse the blessed tribe with the sons of men (Gen. 11:5) either in the crime of pandemonium or in the punishment of confusion of tongues. Some believe that the natural language of the tribe of Abraham is Chaldean, because they find it in the native country of this tribe and even in the mouth of Laban (יגר־שהדותא yegar sagadufa, the hill of testimony. Gen. 31:47), but is it not more likely that the tribe of Nahor, left in the midst of a confusion of languages and peoples, little by little changed the language of their ancestors into the language of his neighbors, rather than what Abraham did, separated by God from all nations and not wanting to have close communication with anyone except his ancient family? A property of the Hebrew language itself. It still mainly preserves the dignity of the original language, that in its names the properties of things are visible. In the Holy Scriptures, he explains from himself the most ancient names of places and persons, except for very few, whose roots have been lost or have been preserved only in other languages ​​closest to him. That this advantage cannot be attributed to the art of the writer of the Holy Books, this is proved by the names whose education was not in his power and which should have received their beginning along with the language, such as, for example, אדם from אדמה, אישה from איש, and so on. Comparing it with other ancient languages. More than anyone else, he has purity, simplicity and correctness in his education. The most ancient names of peoples, countries, pagan deities and many other words, the origins of which are invisible in other languages, are explained from Hebrew. In general, in it the antiquities of languages ​​come together, like streams at a source. The occasion for the division of nations was pandemonium, of which Moses notes the place, image and intention. Having moved from the East, they found a plain in the land of Shinar. From Armenia, where the first dwelling of the human race was after the flood, the path to the land of Shinar lies to the south. So, here either the first migration is not already being spoken about, or the name of the east is used in a very vague sign (Is. 9:12). The use of bricks instead of stones and earthen resin instead of lime in the structure of Babylon is explained by the properties of the land of Shinar. The words city and tower mean either a fortified city together, or separately a city with one tower for strength and splendor (Judges 9:51). Height to heaven. This is an intense expression of enormity, not unprecedented among the Jews (Deut. 1:28, 9:1) and not alien to the true narrative, although, however, from it, in all likelihood, the pagan fable about giants who wanted to conquer heaven was born. Let us make a name for ourselves, so that we are not scattered across the face of the whole earth. To create a name, in the language of Holy Scripture, means to gain glory (2 Samuel 7:13; Isaiah 63:12; Jeremiah 32:20). So, one of the motivating reasons for the pandemonium was the love of fame; another reason (if we follow the simple presentation of the Hebrew text) was the desire to prevent the dispersion and division of the human race, which could previously have been feared according to the meaning of Noah’s prophecy. It is likely that the tribe of Ham, which was most threatened by this prophecy, before other tribes, received the idea, if possible, to keep them all in a state of unification by decreeing one universal center and capital of the world; in order to escape the curse of slavery announced to him, he hastened to universal dominion. It is not difficult to judge whether an enterprise that was so contrary to the known will of God was worthy of punishment, and whether the Wise One rightly calls it the like-mindedness of wickedness (Wis. 10:5). The Lord came down to see. God descends, Augustine explains, when he creates something on earth that, having been created miraculously against the ordinary course of nature, reveals His presence in some special way. In the likeness of men, a twofold procession is here attributed to God: the first is the descent, as if not so close to vision; the second is the closest coming for action: let us go and confuse their language there. By the name of the sons of men, on whom God turns his angry gaze here, some do not mean the entire human race, but with the exception of the sons of God, that is, pious people, which division was used in this mind by Moses in the history of the first world (Gen. 6:2). Others consider all people, without exception, to be the creators of the pillar, because they are called the whole earth; because the great enterprise of pandemonium required the participation of all people, not yet very numerous after the flood; because it was not so criminal as to frighten the pious, and, finally, because it is incredible that the separation of the faithful from the infidel so soon after the flood. But this reasoning can be countered by the fact that the expression “all the earth” in Moses refers not to the action of pandemonium, but to the universal original language; that the tribe of Eber means nothing to the number of the building pillars of Babylon; that the prophecy of Noah, which mentions the spread of men over the earth and the division of villages, and which, no doubt, was known and respected in the tribe of Eber, sufficiently showed the absurdity of the intention to create the capital of the world, and that the division of faithful from infidel, already existing between the three sons of Noah, is not at all surprising in their posterity. Let us go, and let us confuse their language there. Some think that God is introduced to those who say this imitatively, in response and as a reproach to the words of men: let us build ourselves a city; Augustine refers the words of the Lord to the Angels in whom he lives (De civ. Dei. L. XVI, p. 5). Others imagine here an interview of the three hypostases of the Holy Trinity. The confusion of languages ​​is explained by some - by the instantaneous or gradual, but miraculous formation of several new languages ​​in different tribes; others - the disagreement that arose between the builders of Babylon, since this can also be called not only confusion, but also division of languages, as in the Psalmist (Ps. 54:10); others, finally, by the disorder into which for some time the actions of memory and imagination were brought in people, so that memory did not produce the words that mental images required, as naturally happens in some illnesses. By the force of the first explanation, Origen says that the Angels, the guardians of the nations, gave each of them their own language, except for the Jews, who, being the lot of God himself, preserved the language given by God to Adam. Many ancients determine the number of languages ​​born during the pandemonium by the number of seventy or, according to the Greek text, seventy-two descendants of Noah, called Moses (Gen. 10:5, 32) and by the number of the sons of Israel (Deut. 32:8), who entered Egypt (Gen. 46:27, according to the Hebrew text); but these guesses cannot be considered important. since among the descendants of Noah numbered by Moses in the tenth chapter of the book of Genesis there are those who, even after the pandemonium, undoubtedly spoke in one common language, like the descendants of Canaan; there are those who did not participate in the pandemonium, like Arphaxad, Shelah, Eber; and there are those who were born after the pandemonium, like the sons of Joktan. Also, when Moses says that God set the boundaries of the nations according to the number of the sons of Israel, not even the number of the sons of Israel is shown here (12 or 70?), and even less the number of different languages. Those who prefer the second explanation of the confusion of languages, presenting this event as completely natural, reduce its importance and make the solemn depiction of the judgment of God in the narrative of Moses unnecessary. The third explanation, as much as it is consistent with the spirit of the sacred narrative, allowing the direct action of the Divine in the confusion of languages, so much favors the natural and experimentally proven origin of languages, connecting with their mixing the existence of one original one, which, after the end of the miracle of mixing, could still remain common until the passage of time changed and was fragmented into many in different places and tribes. Therefore, the ancient languages: Chaldean, Syrian, Canaanite, Phoenician, Arabic, Armenian, Ethiopian, Persian - have the appearance of branches of one root, which is the Hebrew language. It should be thought that the languages: Greek, Latin, Slavic, Teutonic (ancient German), Tatar, Chinese, revered by the indigenous people, are such only by their distance from the first and common root. In the punishment of the confusion of languages ​​and the dispersion of peoples, the beneficial intentions of God are also revealed: to protect human societies from extreme oppression; for if the entire human race were united under one ruler, as Nimrod was, then power would take an excessive preponderance over freedom, and innocence, oppressed by force, could not find security; to prevent the corruption of morals, which in one universal kingdom was supposed to become universal for the human race; but which, after the division of peoples, destroying one of them, leaves the other in the distance and obscurity to arise and strengthen with the help of simplicity and purity of morals; to prevent strife that would be endless if the human race were confined to one center with its villages. Then the Lord scattered them from there throughout the whole earth. Moses, as usual, briefly notes the fulfillment of God's decree. However, there is no doubt that the dispersion of peoples across the face of the entire earth did not happen suddenly, but gradually. Babylon. The origin of this word is not as clear in the Hebrew language - בבל Babel from בלל balal, as in the Chaldean - בבל Babel from בלבל bilbel; however, in both forms there is one root and a sign of confusion. The name of Babylon is mysterious and transformative (Rev. 17:5). In the Revelation of John, Babylon is contrasted with Jerusalem, and just as the latter is shown as the bride of the Lamb, so, on the contrary, the former is shown as the mother of fornicators and abominations of the earth (Rev. 21:9–10, 17:5). From this it is clear that Babylon signifies the Church of the Antichrist, just as Jerusalem signifies the Church of Christ. When Babylon is called great and mother, this signifies the Church of the Antichrist in all its space and continuation. This spiritual Babylon is finally revealed sensually in a certain visible society or city, described with living features by John (Rev. 17–18). The desire to create for oneself a name more than human, in order to put it in the place of the name of God; the desire for universal dominion through universal fornication with human passions, vices, superstition, and unbelief are signs of the builders and building, which will end in extreme confusion and executions from God. Genealogy and chronology of Simov's descendants 10. Here is the genealogy of Shem. Shem was a hundred years old when he gave birth to Arphaxad, two years after the flood. 11. After the birth of Arphaxad, Shem lived five hundred years and begat sons and daughters (and died). 12. Arphaxad lived thirty-five years (135) and begat Cainan. After the birth of Cainan, Arphaxad lived 330 years and begat sons and daughters, and died. Cainan lived 130 years and gave birth to Salah. 13. After the birth of Sala, Arphaxad (Kainan) lived four hundred and three (330) years and begat sons and daughters (and died). 14. Salah lived thirty (130) years and begat Eber. 15. After the birth of Eber, Salah lived four hundred and three (330) years and begat sons and daughters (and died). 16. Eber lived thirty-four (134) years and begat Peleg. 17. After the birth of Peleg, Eber lived four hundred and thirty (370) years and begat sons and daughters (and died). 18. Peleg lived thirty (130) years and begat Raghav. 19. After the birth of Raghav, Peleg lived two hundred and nine years and begat sons and daughters (and died). 20. Raghav lived thirty-two (132) years and gave birth to Serug. 21. After the birth of Serug, Raghav lived two hundred and seven years and begat sons and daughters (and died). 22. Serug lived thirty (130) years and begat Nahor. 23. After the birth of Nahor, Serug lived two hundred years and begat sons and daughters (and died). 24. Nahor lived twenty-nine (79) years and begat Terah 25. After the birth of Terah, Nahor lived one hundred and nineteen (129) years and begat sons and daughters (and died). 26 Terah lived seventy years and begat Abram, Nahor, and Arran. Moses gave the history of the first world the completeness and continuity possible in brevity through the genealogy and chronology of the seed of the woman; He does the same with the history of the world after the flood, before entering into the private history of the chosen people. The same difference that exists between the Greek and Hebrew chronology of the Patriarchs who lived before the flood is noted here, but the Samaritan text almost agrees with the Greek. The difference in chronology from the flood to Abram can extend from 700 to 900 years, according to different methods of reckoning. A particular difficulty appears in the chronology of Abram, and precisely in finding the time of his birth. Terah lived seventy years and begat Abram, Nahor and Haran. According to these words, it seems that Abram was the firstborn. But being such, at the death of his father, whose entire life lasted 205 years (Gen. 11:32), he should have been 135 years old from birth. On the contrary, at that time he was seventy-five years old (Gen. 12:4); So, it must be assumed that Abram was born after 130 years of the life of Terah; He was placed first among his brothers not by order of birth, but by his personal superiority. The above words of the narrative of Moses without compulsion allow this explanation and can be resolved as follows: “When Terah was 70 years old, he began to bear children, among whom the most famous was Abram, the eldest before him was Nahor, and the first of all was Haran” (for the daughter of this latter was the wife of the second (Gen. 11:29)). 27. These are the race of Terah. Terah fathered Abram, Nahor, and Haran. Haran gave birth to Lot. 28. And Haran died before the presence of Terah his father in the land of his birth, in Ur, a city of the Chaldeans. 29. Abram and Nahor took wives: the name of Abram's wife was Sarai; the name of Nakhorova's wife is Milka, daughter of Aran, father of Milka and father of Iska. 30. Sarah was barren and childless. 31. And Terah took his son Abram, and Lot the son of Haran, his grandson, and Sarah his daughter-in-law, the wife of his son Abram, and went out with them from Ur of the Chaldeans to go to the land of Canaan; but when they reached Harran, they stopped there. 32 And the days of Terah's life were two hundred and five years, and Terah died in Haran. Haran died in the presence of Terah his father. That is, the son died while his father was still alive. They tell a lot about this death, but everything that is not confirmed by Holy Scripture. Some rabbis say that Aran was burned because he did not want to worship the fire; others - that he died saving idols from his father’s house, which was set on fire by Abram; others - that, seeing Abram thrown into the fire for not worshiping fire, but miraculously saved, Aran unsuccessfully subjected himself to the same experience (see Hieron. Quaest. Heb. In Gen.). Epiphanius (de Haeres L. I) thinks that the death of a son before his father, rare in ancient times, was Terah’s punishment for idolatry. In Ur of the Chaldeans. The name Ur, which means fire, gave the Jews the opportunity for fabulous tales about Aran and Abram. But in the present narrative it is the name of the city that should be sought on the eastern side of the Euphrates (Joshua 24:2). Of the many cities of this name, according to the guesses of Bochart and Greece, this is the Ur that Ammianus Marcellinus (LXXV, p. 26) indicates between the Tigris and Nisibis, from which the path to the land of Canaan must definitely be through Harran. The name of the Chaldeans is used here not as it existed in the time of Terah or Abram, but as it was better known in the time of Moses, for it comes from Khazad, the nephew of Abram (Gen. 22:22). At St. writers sometimes confuse it with the name of Mesopotamia (Acts 7:2, 4). And Terah took Abram his son, etc. The reason for Terah's journey must be based on the command of God, which Moses shows below in the story of Abram (Gen. 12:1). That this command of God was given back in Ur can be seen from the very expressions that compose it. Stephen retells it in exactly the same force in the book of the Acts of the Apostles (Acts 7:1–4). And God himself tells Abram that he brought him out not from Haran, but from Ur of the Chaldeans (Gen. 15:7). To Harran. Harran, the place of temporary residence and death of Terah, is a city in Mesopotamia between Haborr and Euphrates, according to the pronunciation of the Greeks and Romans - Carra, famous for the defeat of Crassus. We stopped there. The reason for this was not noticed by Moses. Perhaps it was the illness of Elder Terah or the need to put things in order that had been disturbed by the journey (Gen. 12:5). From Terah begins the story of the wanderings of the Patriarchs, called by God from the confusion of nations. The moral goal of this wandering and, so to speak, expulsion from the whole world of the chosen tribe should be that it is thus preserved from the superstitions and errors of its time, in which, through close communication and mixing with other tribes, it could completely become mired. The house of Terah was no longer far from this destruction, when God extended the word of grace and salvation to Abram (Joshua 24:2). The Apostle Paul gives the history of the wandering Patriarchs a higher view and reason when he says that this wandering was a walk by faith, waiting for the foundation of a city, whose architect and founder is God, seeking the heavenly fatherland (Heb. 11: 8-16). This means that the external and visible adventures of the Patriarchs expressed the spiritual and internal path. Jesus Christ in the gradual action of his intercession between God and men is the way and the truth and the life (John 14:6). In the patriarchal and Old Testament churches, He appeared as one Path among numerous crossroads, leading through promises, transformations, and purification to Divine truth; in the New Testament He is revealed primarily as the universal Truth of all times and all peoples, the materiality of images and canopies, the enlightenment of those sitting in the darkness of paganism; in His second coming, finally, He will be glorified as the one universal eternal Life, and even death itself will be sacrificed in His victory. The last two epochs are contained in the first as flower and fruit - in the seed or new planting. And if flower and fruit are foreshadowed by the nature and image of the new planting, is it surprising that the days of its renewal and glory are prefigured by the ancient days of the Church? But just as in the universal Church every person who turns to God is, as it were, His private church, it should not seem like a confusion of concepts if the path of Providence and faith in the visible church is accepted as an indication of man’s inner path to union with God. So, in the person of Abram we can imagine the spirit of faith, led by God, leading man. Sarah, barren in her homeland and in the strength of her age, but who will become blessed in the land of coming in the days of old age, is the image of a soul that until then cannot bear spiritual fruits while it is within itself and trusts in natural powers, but which, under the guidance of faith, proceeding into the meeting of Grace, will finally see the power of God made perfect in its weaknesses. Terah, not called by God, accompanies Abram with commendable, however, zeal, but dies before reaching the land of promise; Thus, it is in vain that the old, carnal, unregenerate man thinks to follow the spiritual path, and nature strives to imitate Grace; the old Adam must die on the path to perfection. Abram's migration to the promised land The Holy narrator, in the natural order, sets out the reason (Gen. 12:1–3), the circumstances (Gen. 12:4–6) and the immediate consequences of this relocation (Gen. 12:7–9). XII. 1. Meanwhile the Lord said to Abram: Get thee out of thy country, from thy birthplace, from thy father's house, unto the land that I will show thee. 2. And I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you, and make great your name; and may you be blessed. 3. I will bless those who bless you, and I will curse those who curse you; and in you all the families of the earth will be blessed. The reason for Abram's resettlement lies in the revelation of God's will given to him, which consisted of a command and a promise. The decree specifies two limits for resettlement: from where and where. According to ordinary reasoning, it seems that the last limit should be shown in a greater light than the first, so that the person being resettled could undertake the journey with less regret and with more hope. But the command of God has a completely opposite form to this. The beginning of the commanded journey is presented in a very lively, but sad image: go from your land, from your homeland, from your father’s house, and the end is closed for the time being: to the land that I will show you. For although in the previous legend about Terah the land of Canaan is named as the known limit of his and Abram’s journey (Gen. 11:31), this fame should be attributed to the narrator; Abram learned the final limit of his journey not before reaching it (Gen. 12:7). So, the spirit of God’s command was that Abram should leave his own, known, close, dear, in order to strive for the distant and unknown, which was in the hands of God. Therefore, it must be judged, as the Apostle’s remark indicates, that by faith Abram obeyed the calling to go to the place that was to be his inheritance, and he went, not knowing where he was going (Heb. 11:8). However, in such a difficult temptation of faith, the Patriarch was supported by a promise. I will make you into a great nation. Many nations descend from Abram, such as: Ishmaelites, Edomites, Amalekites, Israelites (Gen. 25); here, since one thing is said, the Israelites should be primarily understood. And I will bless you. In these words, apparently, the previous thought is only repeated, since blessing in relation to people in the Old Testament often marks many children. But since the blessing of God in particular means not simple and natural, but directly produced by the will and power of God, many children (Gen. 1:28, 9:1), then this part of the promise given to Abram resolves great bewilderment for him. God assures him that Sarah's barrenness will not hinder the continuation and spread of his family and that the infirmity of nature will be overcome by a wonderful blessing. And I will magnify your name. A person’s name perishes or is restored through childlessness or posterity (Deut. 25:6–7). The name of the ancestor is exalted when it is respectfully preserved in his offspring and when this very offspring acquires glory. And may you be a blessing. Abram is not only blessed himself, but also becomes a blessing to others as a source and as an example of blessing (Gen. 28:4). And I will bless those who bless you, and those who curse you I will curse. The usual image of an oath between the mighty of the earth entering into a close alliance is a promise to have the same friends and enemies. This is the promise God makes to Abram here. He wants to be for him not only a merciful ruler, but also an unfailing ally. However, this preferential favor towards Abram conveniently agrees with the truth of God in relation to all people. Those who bless Abram are those who believe in the blessing of God that rested on him; and therefore their faith is counted unto them, as it was counted unto him, for righteousness (Gen. 15:6). Those who do not bless or curse Abram are unbelievers: consequently, those who alienate themselves from the blessing offered to faith, and thus remain of necessity under a curse (Gal. 3:9). And in you all the families of the earth will be blessed. By the nature of the sacred language, these words can mean both that Abram will be an example of blessing (Gen. 48:20), and that he will be the source and wine of blessing for all nations (Deut. 10:8; Is. 65:16). That the blessing in Abram is the blessing in his seed, this was later explained to him by God himself (Gen. 22:18); and the Apostle, combining both blessings, sets forth about Christ and the promise of the Spirit acceptable by faith (Gal. 3:14, 16). Thus, Abram's universal blessing is opposed to Adam's universal curse (Gen. 3:17). Two circumstances should be noted with reverence in general in the promise given to Abram: the incomprehensible greatness of the vow and the visible lack of natural means for its fulfillment. Both of these turn into praise of Abram’s faith, together proclaiming the glory of the power and goodness of God. Circumstances of relocation 4 And Abram went as the Lord had told him, and Lot went with him. Abram was seventy-five years old when he left Haran. 5. Abram took with him his wife Sarah, his nephew Lot, all the property they had acquired, and all the people they had in Haran; and they went to the land of Canaan, and came to the land of Canaan. 6. Abram walked through this land to the place of Shechem, to the oak grove of Moreh. The Canaanites lived in this land at that time. This journey was supposed to begin from Ur, as the native land of Abram, and therefore, during the life of Terah, but Moses, having already mentioned this in the history of this latter, is now content to show that after his death, Abram and Lot resumed and continued this journey. And all the people they had in Haran. Chaldean interpreters, in explaining these words, believe that Abram brought some people out of Harran, whom he converted from error to the true faith, but it is easier to understand this about the slaves acquired by Abram in Harran. For the first time in Sacred history we find slaves here, and moreover in a pious house. However, no matter what the beginning of slavery, war or poverty, the right of the master is unshakable since it was once confirmed by the consent of the one who ceded freedom for the preservation of life. Let's go to the land of Canaan. since God hid the intention of giving this land to Abram from him before entering it, it is necessary that he first have at least some signs by which he could give direction to his path. What they were is unknown. To the place of Shechem. That is, to the place where the city of Shechem was later built, called by this name, probably on behalf of Shechem, the son of Hamor (Gen. 33:18–19). To the oak grove More. The place, it seems, is the same place where Jacob hid the idols (Gen. 35:4). The Canaanites lived in this land at that time. After Moses has already given the concept of the land of Canaan and its inhabitants above (Gen. 10:18-19), the present note about the Canaanites may seem strange and inappropriate. So, some believe that the words: the Canaanites then lived in this land were included in the text of the book of Moses by someone after the expulsion of the Canaanites by the Israelites; others - that these words belong to Moses and their origin should be explained by the simplicity and abundance of the ancient style, of which there are plenty of examples in Holy Scripture (Deut. 11:30; Joshua 21:2); others - that the Canaanites in this place, like in some others, are not called all the descendants of Canaan, but some private tribe (Gen. 13: 7, 15: 21; Ex. 3: 8, 17; Ex. 33: 2, etc.) and that Moses had a reason to notice here the place of their stay during the time of Abram, since in the time of Moses himself they no longer lived at Shechem, but at sea and along the banks of the Jordan (Num. 13:30). Others, finally, give the following reason to the words of Moses: Abram did not come to the promised land as to a calm and ready dwelling, but found it already occupied by a people who were dangerous to him both with their strength and their vices. This explanation corresponds to the spirit of the entire story of Moses about Abram, which has as its main subject his firm faith and obedience to God. Immediate consequences of resettlement 7. And the Lord appeared to Abram and said: To your descendants will I give this land: and then he built an altar to God, who appeared to him. 8. From there he moved to the mountain that lies on the east of Bethel, and pitched his tent so that Bethel was from the sea, and Ai from the east. He created an altar to God here and called on the name of the Lord. 9. Then Abram got up and continued walking towards noon. Abram's migration was followed by a new revelation on the part of God, and on the part of Abram himself - a matter of piety in the midst of ongoing wandering. And the Lord appeared to Abram. In order to form some idea about the Epiphanies, which are often found in the history of the Patriarchs, it is not useful to put together at one glance some especially clear examples of them, scattered in Holy Scripture. Miraculous manifestations of God sometimes occur in a dream, sometimes in a certain intermediate state between sleep and wakefulness, sometimes in a state of vigil. In a night vision, God appeared to Abram (Gen.15:1, 12), Abimelech (Gen.20:3), Jacob on the way to Harran (Gen.28:12-13), and Laban (Gen.31:24). He talked with them, and Jacob, moreover, saw the ladder, the Angels and the Lord himself in some image different from them. Between sleep and wakefulness, the youth Samuel heard the voice of God, and this voice was like the voice of Elijah the High Priest (1 Samuel 3:4-10). In the same state, it seems, Balaam had some revelations (Num. 22:8–9, 24:3–4). The images in which God gave people in a state of vigil to recognize His presence are many different, such as: an Angel, outwardly appearing in the form of a man, but known from conversation or inspired by the gaze of his awe and miraculous actions. Such were the appearances to Hagar (Gen. 16:7-13), to Abram at the oak grove of Mamre (Gen. 13), to Gideon (Judges 6:11, 16, 21), to Manoah (Judges 13:3, 6, 20). An angel descending from heaven and speaking either as a messenger of God or in the person of God himself. This was the second appearance to Hagar (Gen. 21:17–18) and to Abram at the sacrifice of Isaac (Gen. 22:11, 12, 15, 16). The man in which the Lord fought with Jacob (Gen. 32:24). A voice from a burning bush, as God appeared to Moses for the first time (Exodus 3:2, 4). A voice in the midst of smoke and fire, as God appeared to all Israel on Mount Horeb (Ex. 20:18; Deut. 4:15). The voice from the cloud that appeared in the glorious appearance to Moses on Mount Sinai (Exodus 34:5–7). The voice of gentle breathing after storm, earthquake and flame. This is how God revealed himself to Elijah (1 Kings 19:11–13). A felt, but not comprehended, overshadowing of the Spirit or the power of God, inspiring a person with the will of God. In this state, Jaziel prophesied (2 Chronicles 20:14–15) and many other Prophets. Sometimes they used some external aids to prepare themselves for this state, as, for example, Elisha used music (2 Kings 3:15). An angel speaking internally to man, as an instrument of the Lord, who is at the same time present and felt without any images. These were, apparently, the revelations of Zechariah (Zechariah 1:9) (see Hier. In Gal. III. 19). Although some miraculous visions are also comprehended by external senses, the Epiphanies themselves occur in the spirit, so that at this time the external man, depending on his preliminary purification and refinement, sometimes becomes elevated and enlightened, and sometimes, on the contrary, becomes exhausted. This is evident from the examples of Jacob (Gen.32:25), Moses (Exod.35:29), Daniel (Dan.10:7–9), the Apostles on Tabor (Matt.17:6; Luke9:32), Saul (Acts9:3–8), John (Rev.1:10, 17). The union of the appearing God with the Angel, the instrument of the manifestation, is sometimes so deep that the same effect of revelation is attributed without distinction to both (Ex. 20:1; Acts 7:38, 53; Gal. 3:19; Heb. 2:2) and that the one who sees it cannot distinguish the efficient cause from the instrument, as happened with John (Rev. 22: 6–9). The common basis of the Epiphanies of the Old and New Testaments, especially in human form, is the incarnation of the Son of God; for the root and beginning of His holy humanity was in men from the very first ancestors, and the Son of God was on earth even before His fleshly birth, just as the Son of man was in heaven even before His ascension (John 3:13). The special images and degrees of revelations, as can be seen from the examples, corresponded to the circumstances and abilities of those receiving them. The distinctive signs of a truly Divine phenomenon should be sought in its purity and greatness, in its effects on man, which are the increase of faith, love, humility, and in its direct and undoubted direction towards the glory of God. However, the essential property of such phenomena is no more understandable to a natural person than the property of flowers is to a blind man. God opens the eyes of those who surrender themselves to His will, and gives them the insight to recognize Satan even through the mask of a bright Angel. What belongs especially to the revelations of Abram, since the first of them is depicted by the word said, and the second by the word appeared, it is likely that in the first case he heard only the voice of the Lord, and in the second he saw Him in the form of a man, through which God showed Himself, as it were, in greater proximity to the righteous man and thanked him for his faith in the first, not so clear revelation. I will give this land to your descendants. With this discovery, God, on the one hand, rewards Abram for his obedience, on the other, demands from him a new experience of trust in his providence, promising to give one childless man a land filled with many strong inhabitants. Thus the believer is led from temptation to temptation, so that he may be cleansed by the sevenfold. The selection of the land of Canaan as a dwelling place for the blessed descendants of Abram is the work of God's justice, predetermining the punishment of the Canaanite tribes through the Jews (Gen. 15:16); a matter of goodness, despite any obstacles, delivering to its beloved a land boiling with honey and milk; finally, it is a matter of all-encompassing wisdom, choosing as the repository of Divine promises and the spectacle of great revelations the earth most capable of communicating with all parts of the world, so that the whole earth could more easily see the salvation being accomplished in the midst of the earth, and would sooner take part in it. And then he created an altar. This is an action worthy of the father of believers - that the first to seal property on the land given by God is Abram laying an altar, instead of the son of this age creating a house or laying down a city. He created the altar as soon as the land was given: Abram had barely received the gift of God before he hurries to sacrifice it to God. The name of Bethel does not belong to the time of Abram (Gen. 28:19). Moses uses it primarily before the ancients as sacred and appropriate to the events of the place. The Jews call the west the sea, because the western limit of their land is the Mediterranean Sea (Gen. 28:14). Called on the name of the Lord. Without a doubt, the concept of prayer should here be combined with the idea of ​​sacrifice, which leads to the creation of an altar. Continued walking towards noon. This means that Abram continued to change his location from time to time, passing along the land of Canaan. This ongoing migration does not need to be explained otherwise than as a characteristic of nomadic life. Abram's path from the land of birth to the land of promise is an image of the path of self-sacrifice by which a person must move from a state of damaged nature to a state of Grace. Every believer has the same command from God as the father of believers - to leave everything and deny himself. He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me, says the Lord (Matthew 10:37). Every believer is promised the blessing of Abram in Jesus Christ (Gal.3:14). There is no one who has left house, or brothers, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for My sake and the Gospel, and will not now, in this time and during persecutions, receive a hundred times more houses and brothers and sisters, (and fathers), and mothers and children, and lands, and in the age to come, eternal life (Mark 10:29-30). The believer, leaving his own, does God's will with the same unlimited obedience with which Abram went, as the Lord told him. God speaks to us in nature, in Holy Scripture, in conscience, in the adventures of life governed by His providence. To go as the Lord says is the rule that comprises the entire path of those seeking the coming heavenly city. Like Abram, the Catholic believer approaches God as he leaves himself and, like Abram, thanks Him for the gifts of grace. He accepts them only in order to faithfully return them to their beginning, and there and then, where and when he accepts them, he sacrifices them to God. Abram's Journey to Egypt 10. And there was a famine in the land. And Abram went down to Egypt to sojourn there; because the famine increased in that land. 11. When he came close to Egypt, he said to Sarah his wife: Behold, I know that you are a woman of beautiful appearance, 12. Perhaps the Egyptians, when they see you, will say: this is his wife; and they will kill me, but leave you alive; 13. So say that you are my sister; so that it would be good for me for your sake, and so that my life might be preserved through you, 14. And so it happened that when Abram came to Egypt, the Egyptians saw that (his) wife was very beautiful; 15 Pharaoh’s officials also saw her and praised her to Pharaoh; why was she taken into the house of Pharaoh 16. And it was good for Abram for her sake; and he had flocks and herds, and donkeys, and male and female servants, and mules and camels. 17 But the Lord struck Pharaoh and his house with heavy blows because of Sarai Abram's wife. 18 Therefore Pharaoh called Abram and said, Why have you done this to me? Why didn’t you tell me that this was your wife? 19. Why did you say: this is my sister? and I took her as my wife. So now here is your wife, take it and go. 20. And Pharaoh commanded certain men to bring him, and his wife, and all that he had. And Abram went down to Egypt. From the famine that had spread in Palestine, Abram chose Egypt as a refuge, because this country, being lower than others in its position and being irrigated by a river, does not share with others the disadvantages of lack of rain. It is possible that he preferred Egypt to the eastern countries in order not to expose his home to the temptation of returning to his former fatherland. I know that you are a woman with a beautiful appearance. Since the difference between the ages of Abram and Sarah is 10 years (Gen. 17:17), and therefore, when entering the Promised Land, she should have been at least 65 years old from birth (Gen. 12:4), then the anxiety and fear into which Abram is led by her beauty may seem strange. Against this bewilderment, it should be noted that Sarah did not give birth to children and was all the more able to retain the color of her age; that in this time the ordinary course of human life was not measured in the same way as it is now; and if Abram at 100, and Sarah at 90 were old and advanced in years (Gen. 18:11), then this should not refer to the strength of health and continuation of life, but to the birth of only children, whose time seemed to have already passed for them. It would not be useless for the daughters of this age to peer into the mirror of the modesty of Abram’s wife, to whom her husband speaks of her beauty as something unheard of for her and requiring special identification: I know. So say that you are my sister and so on. There are so many expressions here, so many reveal the vices in Abram: lie - say that you are my sister; greed - so that it would be good for me for your sake; sacrificing the chastity of your wife for the preservation of your life - so that my life may be preserved through you. But all these suspicions turn out to be unfounded if we delve into the essence of the matter and do not arbitrarily attribute to Abram intentions that are incompatible with his known rightness and with God’s favor towards him. Without any lies, he calls Sarah his sister; for she really was such by her father, and not by her mother (Gen. 20:12). True, he conceals part of the truth, not wanting to call his sister and his wife, but this pretense or cunning is justified by the purity of his intention to protect himself from danger, and the Egyptians from crime. In Holy Scripture there are many examples of such cunning, which is beyond any condemnation or dispute (Gen. 19:2, 22:5, 42:9; Exod. 1:19–20, 3:18; 1 Sam. 21:2; 2 Sam. 15:31, 17:20; 2 Kings 6:19; Jer. 38:25–27). Excluded from this is the truth of God, with which the glory of God is inseparably united and which, therefore, to suppress through untruth or turn into a lie (Rom. 1:18, 25) would be an insult to God’s majesty. The words of Abram: so that it may be well for me, are expressed in the following words: so that my life may be preserved. He does not sacrifice his wife for the sake of self-interest, but wants to use her as an instrument to preserve his life. When Abram hopes to save his life through Sarah, it cannot be concluded from this that he has an intention contrary to her chastity. He could have thought that by calling her his wife, he would expose himself and her to the treachery or even violence of the Egyptians and that, on the contrary, considering her only as his sister, they would have no reason to resort to such extremes, but would openly seek her marriage and thereby give him a way to prolong the time and leave. The fact that she was later taken to the house of the Pharaohs could have happened accidentally and unforeseen for Abram. One thing, apparently, is reprehensible for him, that he did not simply betray his fate into the hands of God, but wanted to bring himself to safety with his own art and cunning. But let’s imagine that he was confident in the need to preserve his life, since he was confident in the truth of God’s promise about his offspring; that meanwhile he did not have in mind the usual way to preserve it and did not want to tempt God with a request for revelation, then his own cunning would appear to be a consequence of the desire to fulfill the will of God. The nobles of the Pharaohs. Probably, these were the rulers of the cities and regions bordering Palestine, who were entrusted with monitoring those coming to Egypt from this side, from which alone Egypt was open to dangerous invasions of foreign peoples. The name of Pharaoh in Holy Scripture is common to the kings of Egypt, until the time of Ezekiel (Ezekiel 32:2). The name of the Pharaohs, according to Kircher (Aegyp. Edip. L. I p. 76.) means free; and according to Bochart (Hieroz, p. II. LV, p. 181) a crocodile, to which Ezekiel apparently adapts his description of Pharaoh. Josephus (Antiq. L. VIII, p. 21), during whose time there was already a question about the origin of this name, says that it means king. Clerk (in Comm. in Gen.), without contradicting Josephus, believes that it means exalted (פרעה summum tenuit). He struck with heavy blows. Moses does not speak about the type of these plagues, nor about how Pharaoh learned the guilt of his disasters. In such a case, the house of Abimelech was punished by non-birth, and Abimelech had a revelation about this in a dream (Gen. 20:3, 18). Josephus (Antiq. L. I, p. 8) writes that Pharaoh was enlightened by illness and indignation, the reason for which the priests explained to him. Couldn't he have gotten this interpretation closer from Sarah herself? As for Pharaoh's crime, it consisted in the predominance of sensuality, which is the more worthy of punishment in the king, the stronger his example among the people. The House of Pharaohs, of course, also suffered not innocently. It is not difficult to judge what the court must have been like, to which the nobles assigned the duty of serving the base passions of their ruler. However, without a doubt, it must be assumed that Pharaoh suffered not for what he had done, but for an intended crime; and that God forestalled his misfortunes and averted Sarah’s misfortune. This is clearly stated by the Psalmist (Ps. 105:13–15). Why did you do this to me? and so on. To this apparently fair reproach in the legend of Moses there is no answer from Avramov. But Abram is innocent in this case, if we assume that Sarah was taken into the court only for honor and for preparation for marriage, which could last several months, just as was later the custom at the Persian court (Esther 2:12); that Abram, having entrusted his wife or decided to reveal his secret himself in case of extreme danger, meanwhile awaited the will of God for his salvation, which was soon actually revealed through the executions of Pharaoh. And Pharaoh ordered some people to accompany him. The fear of executions had such an effect on Pharaoh that he not only released Abram in safety, but also saw him off as untouchable. Abram's journey to Egypt is a continuation of his purifying temptations. After living in the fruitful land of the Chaldeans and in Haran, where he increased his property, he barely entered the land of promise when he was driven out of it by famine. In what darkness at this time the promises of God must have appeared, and how difficult it would have been for the firmest faith to keep from stumbling! Leaving for a time the earth, struck by the hand of the highest, Abram falls into the hands of men. Its danger becomes more visible hour by hour, and deliverance seems less convenient hour by hour. He already sees his wife, from whom he should have hoped for a blessed fruit, as a foreigner in shameful captivity. It seemed that the hand of the Lord, which had led and covered Abram, had completely retreated from him, when suddenly it appeared in Pharaoh himself and, striking him, made him its instrument for the safety of the righteous. Something similar happens to a person on the inner path of faith. After completing part of this journey, he already receives from God some grace-filled gifts and begins to taste that the Lord is good; after grace, as if with a finger, shows him the land of promise - the inner kingdom of God, it hides again, and he remains dry and barren, greedy and thirsty. A dangerous state for him is when he desires and thinks to find food for himself in Egypt - in the exercises of the world; the soul insensitively becomes a captive of his vanity and is weakened by corruption from his charms. In these circumstances, merciful Providence, often with unexpected and, however, sometimes heavy blows, breaks the bonds that tie a person to the world, and returns him to his path with new zeal and in new security. 1. So Abram went out of Egypt, himself, and his wife, and all that he had, and Lot with him, into the midday region. 2. And Abram was very rich in cattle, and in silver, and in gold. 3. And he continued his marches from the midday region to Bethel, to the place where his tent had formerly been between Bethel and between Ai, 4. to the place of the altar, which he built there at the beginning; and there Abram called on the name of the Lord. 5 And Lot, who accompanied Abram, had flocks and herds and tents. 6. And the earth did not allow them to live together: because their wealth was so great that they could not live together. 7. There was a disagreement between the shepherds of Abram's cattle and between the shepherds of Lot's cattle; moreover, the Canaanites and Perizzites lived then in this land. 8. And therefore Abram said to Lot: Let there be no strife between me and you, and between my shepherds and yours; for we are relatives. 9. Is not the whole earth before you? Perhaps, separate from me. If you are to the left, then I am to the right, and if you are to the right, then I am to the left. 10. Lot lifted up his eyes and saw the plain of Jordan, which, before the Lord destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, was all like the garden of the Lord, like the land of Egypt, watered with water, even to Zoar. 11. And Lot chose for himself the whole plain of Jordan; and Lot moved towards the east. So they were separated from each other. Abram began to live in the land of Canaan. 12. And Lot began to live in the cities of the plain and went with tents to Sodom. 13. The inhabitants of Sodom were evil and very sinful before God. 14. Meanwhile, to Abram, after Lot had separated from him, the Lord said: Lift up your eyes and from the place where you are now, look to the north, and to the south, and to the east, and to the west. 15. For all the land that you see I will give to you and to your descendants forever. 16. I will give you descendants like the dust of the earth; If it is possible for someone to count the dust of the earth, then your descendants will also be counted. 17. Arise, walk through this land into the length and breadth of it: for I will give it to you. 18 And so Abram pitched his tent, and went and dwelt by the oak grove of Mamre, which is in Hebron, and there built an altar to God. This legend about the division of the house of Abram from the house of Lot sets out the following details: the circumstances preceding this division (Gen. 13:1-4), the reasons for the division (Gen. 13:5-7), the image of the division (Gen. 13:8-10), the location of the division (Gen. 13:11-13), the consequence of this separation for Abram (Gen. 13:14-18). In the midday region. This Hebrew means the southern edge of Palestine (Abd.1:19–20). There Abram called on the name of the Lord. As far as one can guess from the order of events, this was a service of thanksgiving for God’s help provided to him in Egypt. The place of worship was kept the same as a sign that, despite his wandering life, he was constantly tied to one place by faith in the promise. The earth did not allow them to live together. Since the wealth of Abram and Lot primarily consisted of numerous herds, their combined stay, especially in a country already populated and not rich in water, presented the following difficulties that were supposed to increase along with their acquisitions: lack of pastures, confusion of property and the inconvenience of using the waters necessary for the herds. The Canaanites and Perizzites then lived in this land. The name Canaanites probably does not mean all the descendants of Canaan, but some particular tribe from it, for otherwise why would we add the name Perizzites, who also belong to the descendants of Canaan? The name of the Perizzites means villagers, and in fact, they lived in the mountains (Joshua 11:3). But why, after speaking about the discord in the house of Abram, does Moses mention the Canaanites and Perizzites? In order, some answer, to show the greatness of the disagreement that separated two surnames, which should have been united by the very existence between foreign peoples. For this, others guess, in order to show the need for a quick and decisive end to the feud, in which strangers could intervene to the detriment and destruction of both families. In order, it is more likely that what was said above, that the land did not allow them to live together, can be explained by the fact that it had many inhabitants besides them. And he saw the whole plain of Jordan, which was all watered with water, before the Lord destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, like the garden of the Lord, like the land of Egypt, even to Zoar. Reading these words in the order in which they are placed in the Hebrew test, you will think that Zoarah should be looked for in Egypt, but this city was located in the vicinity of Sodom and received this name from Lot (Gen. 19:22). This difficulty is resolved by some through the Syriac translation, where instead of צער Tzoar it is read צען Tzoan, which is Tanis. But according to the reading of the Hebrew text, which is confirmed by the agreement of the Samaritan and Greek, it is not difficult to resolve it through the combination of words even to Zohar with the name of the Jordanian plain. This arrangement of words is not contrary to the nature of the Hebrew language (Joshua 24:20). And Lot moved towards the east. This translation is based on consideration of the location of the country of Jordan, which Lot chose for himself, with the position of Bethel, near which the division took place. The particle of the Hebrew language מן allows this transformation (2 Samuel 6:2; Par.12:6). The inhabitants of Sodom were evil and very sinful before God. By saying this, Moses condemns Lot's choice of location. In fact, Lot would have acted more prudently when, despite Abram’s modest and disinterested proposal to choose a country for himself, he allowed him, as the eldest, to appoint it; and whenever, when choosing a home, I had in mind not only external benefits, but more importantly the preservation of the internal treasure of faith and piety. But attachment to earthly things blinded him and would subsequently lead him to the edge of the abyss. To Abram, after Lot separated from him, the Lord said: This revelation, not without reason, follows the separation of Abram from Lot. God shows the first a new sign of his favor for the new experience of his trust in Providence, with which he offered the land that belonged to him by promise to another for election. Abram thought to receive it from God and therefore did not seek human consent for its possession, just as he did not fear contradiction. God also wants to show Abram with this new revelation that the promise belongs to him, without the participation of Lot. All the land that you see I will give to you and to your descendants forever. The event of this promise is known; except, perhaps, how the promised land belongs to the descendants of Abram forever, or forever. To explain this, others believe that possession means only hereditary and long-term possession and that the time of this possession should be counted until the first coming of Christ. In fact, the word עלם sometimes only means some indefinite continuation of time. Thus, the Old Testament Passover is called eternal (Ex. 12:14). So even in greetings they said: live forever (Dan.3:9). Others - that the word forever divinatoryly indicates the renewal and continuation of Abram's promise in its spiritual sign, after it has first been fulfilled or has already been fulfilled in a sensual way. According to this vast understanding of the promise, the boundaries of the promised land can only be measured by spiritual vision, just as Abram was commanded in revelation to measure it with his eyes; and this measure is infinite. Offspring are like the dust of the earth. In order to be convinced of the accuracy of this intense depiction of Avramov’s descendants, one only needs to take into account the long-term existence of the Jewish people, according to which they, acceptable in all their continuation, may be more numerous than other peoples who occupied vast countries; the uncertainty of the stay of the ten tribes of Israel, resettled by the king of Assyria, which, changing more or less, of course, continue to this day in one or many nations, known or unknown; finally, that all who are of faith, all of Christ, are Abram’s descendants and heirs according to the promise (Gal. 3:7, 29). Arise, walk through this land into its length and breadth; for I will give it to you. Without assigning the boundaries of the Promised Land, God commands us to go through it in length and breadth. This can be understood to mean that he commands Abram to go through and walk around the country set before him at will, with such assurance that every place where he sets his foot will belong to the promised land. Through this God inspires Abram that the measure of the promise is the measure of faith and that the boundaries of the Promised Land are very mobile, very vast and even invisible. Near the oak grove of Mamre. This name comes from the Amorite Malfe, an ally of Abram (Gen. 14:13). In Hebron. How Hebron received this name Hebron, the grandson of Caleb; in the time of Moses and even Joshua, it was still called by the ancient name Kiriatharba (Josh. 15:13; Judg. 1:10; 1 Chron. 2:42–43), then they rightly guess that the words: what is in Hebron, were introduced into the text of Moses by Ezra or someone else to explain the location of the oak grove of Mamre, when this last name became unfamiliar. If we mentally separate the individual circumstances of the individuals from the story of the separation of Abram and Lot, then at its foundation the distinctive properties and actions of two people will be revealed: one, devoted by faith to the will of God; another, by nature following his own will. Both of them have many common benefits, not only external, but sometimes also internal, such as: knowledge of the main truths of faith and good works of the law. But he who surrenders himself to the will of God, as he succeeds in mortifying his will, feels a contradiction between his motives and the actions of the natural man who deals with him in the community and, being, however, tied to him by love as to a neighbor and brother, seeks in some way to remove and hide himself from him in order to avoid mutual temptation. He who is devoted to the will of God provides his neighbors with all the benefits that he can and has the right to use, being disposed to be content, so to speak, with the remains of them from the hands of Providence. But the more he reduces and cuts off his own desires in order to make room for the will of God, the more God generously and enriches him with his gifts and promises, making his every action the seed of eternal life and with every step of his path bringing him closer to the heavenly Fatherland. On the contrary, natural man desires to possess as property everything that deceives his eyes; setting the goal of his activity to be his own benefit and tangible pleasure, he dreams of finding God’s paradise on earth, looking for pasture during the Egyptian years, spiritual joy - in the ecstasy of self-love. In this state, he is not far from establishing his home and fatherland in Sodom. Speaking about the separation of Abram and Lot, Moses noticed the mistake that the latter made by settling between evil and sinful people. Now he shows his misfortune, which was a consequence of this error, and continues to justify the behavior of Abram, who, by faith and hope in Providence, not only preserved his own safety, but was also able to return it to another. In one narrative, the war of nine kings is combined, as an incident to the disaster of Lot (Gen. 14: 1-11), the disaster of Lot itself and the help of Abram (Gen. 14: 12-16) and the triumph of Abram, brilliant both with the honors given to him, and even more so with his piety and selflessness (Gen. 14: 17-21). XIV. I. It happened in the days of Amraphel king of Shinar, Arioch king of Ellasar, Chedorlaomer king of Elan, and Tidal king of Goim, 2. that they went to war against Beri king of Sodom, against Birsha king of Gomorrah, Shinab king of Admah, Shemever king of Zeboim, and against the king of Bela, who is Tsoar. 3. All these gathered in the valley of Siddim, where is now the Salt Sea. 4. For twelve years they were enslaved by Chedorlaomer; and in the thirteenth year they were postponed. 5. So in the fourteenth year Chedorlaomer and the kings who were with him came and smote the Rephaim in Ashteroth-karnaim, the Emim in Ham, the Emim in Shave-Kiriathaim 6. and the Horites in their mountain Seir, as far as El Paran, which is by the desert. 7. Turning from there, they came to the spring of Mishpat, which is Kadet, and smote the whole field of the Amalekites and also the Amorites living in Hatzzon-tamar. 8. Then came out the king of Sodom, the king of Gomorrah, the king of Admah, the king of Zeboim, and the king of Bela, which is Zoar; and prepared to fight them in the valley of Siddim, 9. with Chedorlaomer king of Elam, Tidal king of Goim, Amraphel king of Shinar, Arioch king of Ellasar, four kings with five. 10. And in the valley of Siddim there were many wells of pitch. And so the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah, turning to flight, fell into them; and the rest fled to the mountains. 11. The victors took all the wealth of Sodom and Gomorrah and all their grain and left. In the days of Amraphel, king of Shinar. It is strange that the time of war is signified by the reign of Amraphel, who is not the chief of the warring kings, but only an ally of Chedorlaomer, and whose reign, like the others, is unknown in the Sacred History. Perhaps the reason for this is the primacy of the Babylonian kingdom in the time of its establishment and, perhaps, the order of its kings was still known according to legend in the time of Moses. King of Ellasar. Instead of Ellasar in Jonathan's translation it is put Talassar, and in Syriac - Dalassar. Taking these names as one, some are looking for the kingdom of Talassar near the Euphrates, where the Edenites were conquered by the Assyrians (Isa. 37:12). King of Goim. They think that King Goim, which means king of the nations, or pagan, is the same as Joshua’s king Goim le-Gilgal (Joshua 12:23), and Gilgal is the same as Gelil, or pagan Galilee, in Isaiah (Isaiah 9:1). The name of the kingdom of Goyim could have come from the mixing of different peoples in one area and under one rule. At least this is known about Galilee of subsequent times, inhabited, according to the legend of Strabo (L. XV. 4), by the Egyptians, Arabians, and Phoenicians. Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, Zeboim, Bela, which after Zoar, despite the division of the kingdoms, constituted one country, one union and, except for Bela, had one fate, which they deserved by their corruption (Deut. 29:23). But before He pours out all His wrath on them, God proclaims it to them and wants to turn them to repentance through the dangers and disasters of war. Siddim. According to Aben Ezra, this name should be derived from siddim שיד lime, and by this name one can understand earthen resin, or bitumen, which was found in great abundance in the Siddim valley and served instead of lime. The sea is salty. More common: Dead Sea. For twelve years they were enslaved by Chedorlaomer. It should be noted here that Noah’s prediction about the slavery of Canaan is already beginning to be partially fulfilled. Refaimov. The Rephaim were among the nations whose land God promised to the Israelites (Gen. 15:20). They lived in Bashan (Joshua 12:4, 13:12). In the translation of the seventy, the name of the Rephaim is sometimes replaced by the name of the giants: it actually sometimes has this sign in Holy Scripture (Deut. 2:11). From this we can make a guess about the qualities of the Rephaim people. Emimov. These lived in Moabite before the descendants of Lot (Deut. 2:10). Khorreyev. These are the inhabitants of the land of Edom, before the Edomites (Gen. 36:20). To El Faran. Or: to the Plain of Paran. The city of Paran existed even in the time of Jerome above Arabia, adjacent to Sracina (see Loc. Heb.). To the source of Mishpat, which is Cadet. These names mean: Source of judgment and Sanctification. The reason for these names, according to some, is found in the History of Moses (Num. 20:10–13). Field of Amalek. Since Amalek is a descendant of Esau (Gen. 36:12), then here or through the field of Amalek the ancient inhabitants of the land of Amalek should be understood, or the Amalekites should be given another ancient origin. This last guess is in some way confirmed by the hatred of the Jews against the Amalekites, confirmed by God himself (Exod. 17:14, 1 Sam. 15:2), while He forbade fighting with the sons of Esau (Deut. 2:5). In Khatsatson-Tamara. This place was later called En Gedi (2 Chronicles 20:2). Lots of salt wells. It is not known whether this refers to oil springs or depressions made in the ground when bitumen was taken from it. Lot's disaster and Abram's help 12. And they took Abram's nephew Lot, who lived in Sodom, and his property, and departed. 13. And one of the survivors came and told Abram the Jew, who was then living near the oak grove of Mamre, the Amorite, the brother of Eshkolu, and the brother of Aner, who were allies of Abram. 14. And so when Abram heard that his kinsman had been taken captive, he brought out the skilled men of his household, three hundred and eighteen, and pursued the enemies as far as Dan; 15 And divided, he attacked them by night, and smote them, and pursued them as far as Hobah, which is on the left side of Damascus. 16. And he returned all the wealth and Lot, his relative, and his property, and also the women and the people. Until Dan. If this signifies the city that received its name from Dan, the son of Jacob, which was formerly called Lais (Josh. 19:47, Judges 18:29), then this word, without a doubt, cannot belong to Moses. But Dan also, according to Josephus (Antiq. L. I, p. 10), was the name of one of the sources of the Jordan, and in this sign this name could be older than Moses. On the left side of Damascus. Based on Onkelos' translation: north of Damascus. This is explained by the fact that the Jews represent the east as the front side of the world, and the west as the back side, and therefore noon is called the right side (Ps. 89:13), and the north the left side. 17. When he was returning after the defeat of Chedorlaomer and the kings who were with him, the king of Sodom came out to meet him in the valley of Shaveh, which is the king's valley, 18. And Melchizedek king of Salem brought out bread and wine. He was a priest of the Most High God. 19. And he blessed him, and said, Blessed be Abram, of the Most High God, possessor of heaven and earth; 20. And blessed be God Most High, who hath delivered thy enemies into thy hand. Abram gave him a tenth of everything. 21 Then the king of Sodom said to Abram, Give me the people, and take the property for yourself. 22. But Abram said to the king of Sodom: I lift up my hand to the Lord, the Most High God, owner of heaven and earth, 23. I swear that I will not take even a thread or a shoe garter from all yours, lest you say: I have made Abram rich; 24. Besides only what the slaves ate, and besides the portion of the people who walked with me; Let Aner, Eshkol and Mamre take their plot. Shave. This valley is mentioned in the second book of Kings (2 Kings 18:18), but its position is not determined. It seems that it should lie north of Salim. Melchizedek. By this name they mean: Jonathan, interpreter of Jerusalem, - Sima; Damian, one of the Melchizedekians, - the Son of God (Epiph. Haer. LV), Hierax the Egyptian - the Holy Spirit (Haer. LXVII), Origen and Didymus - the Angel (Hieron. Ep. ad Euang.). Probably, says Blessed Theodoret (Quaest. LXIV. in Gen.), that he came from the peoples who lived in Palestine; for they had both a king and a priest. As simple and natural as this last opinion is, so all the others contradict every word of the legend of Moses. King of Salem. Jerusalem is sometimes called Salem (Ps. 75:3). However, there is another Salim. He brought out bread and wine. Here some people think to see the action of the priesthood, that is, the offering of bread and wine as a sacrifice, which is derived from the name of the priest immediately attributed to Melchizedek, but since this name is closer and more clearly related to the action of blessing, there is no need to assume another sacred action; and the Apostle attributes to Melchizedek only these two actions: meeting and blessing (Heb. 7:1). The meeting with bread and wine or water was in ancient times a common sign of respect, alliance and hospitality (Deut. 23:4). He was a priest of the Most High God. By the name of the Most High God, Melchizedek is distinguished from the servants of many deities (Ps. 97:9), and by the name of the priest - both from other kings 18 and from Abram himself; for although this one performed sacred rites, he was not called a priest. From this we can guess that Melchizedek was a glorious servant of the true God throughout Palestine. This is not impossible for times in which the measure of the sins of the Amorites has not yet been fulfilled (Gen. 15:16), if incomparably worse times could have produced Balaam. And he blessed. The prerogative of this blessing lies in the Melchizedek priesthood. In this capacity, standing between God and man as a mediator, he brings a blessing to God as a sacrifice of gratitude and gives it to man as a gift of grace. Possessor of heaven and earth. By this distinction the Supreme Being, professed by Melchizedek, is separated from those powerful beings to whom the ancients ascribed not the creation and dominion of the whole world, but the subordinate rule and custody of the various parts of it (Dan. 10:13). Superstition did not distinguish these serving creatures from the one Universal Ruler (Gen. 31:29, 1 Kings 20:23). A tenth of everything. Josephus, in agreement with the circumstances of Moses' narrative, asserts that Abram's tithe was taken not from all his wealth, but from all the spoils of war. This is what the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews speaks about her (Heb. 7:4). The reason for such great respect shown by the Patriarch to the king of Salem should not be considered royal dignity, to which Abram had no need to subordinate himself, being the conqueror and deliverer of kings; but priesthood and blessing in the name of the true God. Give me the people, and take the property for yourself. By the law of war, all captivity and all booty were the property of the winner: recognizing this right, the king of Sodom does not demand the return of his estate; but as a favor he asks only that his subjects who were in captivity be given to him. How great is the selflessness of Abram, who, having an indisputable right to everything, leaves nothing for himself! I raise my hand to the Lord. These words describe the ancient rite of oath (Deut.32:40, Dan.12:7, Rev.10:5). Raising your hand to the sky expresses the feeling of the presence of God and calling on God as a witness. Whatever you say: I made Abram rich. It is not out of pride that Abram anticipates and delays this thought, but often so that by retaining any property of the Sodomites, he does not plant the seeds of enmity and hatred in them; partly in order to show that its wealth is in one God. The face of Melchizedek is very mysterious. It seems that Abram himself felt this when he showed him such honor as he had never shown to any person. In subsequent times, even in the Old Testament, they looked at Melchizedek as a mysterious image of the future. What David says about a priest in the order or likeness of Melchizedek (Ps. 109) cannot be attributed to any human person, for no man can be a priest forever, and in no man except Melchizedek himself did God bless the titles of king and priest to be united. Uzziah, who attempted this, was severely punished (2 Chronicles 26). In the New Testament the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews (Heb. 7) presents Melchizedek, in all the circumstances of the Mosaic tales about him, as a deliberate and prepared image of the Son of God. The features of this image are: Melchizedek's name, which means king of righteousness. The Son of God is also called the Sun of righteousness (Mal.4:2) and the righteous King (Zech.9:9). Rank. Melchizedek is the king and king before whom the conqueror of kings bowed; and Christ the Son of God is the Prince of the kings of the earth (Rev. 1:5). Melchizedek is the king of the world, after the name of his royal city; Jesus Christ is the Prince of Peace (Isa. 9:6), according to the property and operation of His government. Melchizedek is the king and at the same time the priest of the Most High God, Jesus the Son of God is the great Bishop who entered into heaven (Heb. 4:14). Genus. Melchizedek in the narrative of Moses appears without a father, without a mother, without a genealogy; neither the beginning of his days nor the end of his life is visible. All these circumstances are omitted in the history of Melchizedek not by chance and simply, but with a mysterious intention, so that he, in the words of the Apostle, will be likened to the Son of God, Who is without a father in His temporary birth, and without a mother in His eternal birth; Whose generation is inscrutable (Is. 53:8), for it is above all created things; Who is without beginning and end, as He is, He who was, and He who is to come (Rev. 1:4). Blessing. Melchizedek blesses Abram, the father of believers, as the highest of the lowest: in Christ God himself blesses us with every spiritual blessing that is above the heavens (Eph. 1:3). The supremacy of the Melchizedek priesthood, which seems eternal because we see neither its predecessors nor its successors. But this is truly the priesthood of Jesus Christ. In the bread and wine of Melchizedek, some see the image of the sacrament of the body and blood of Christ; but the Apostle kept silent about this. Revelation to Abram about the fate of his descendants 1. After these incidents the word of the Lord came to Abram in a vision, and it was said: Do not be afraid, Abram; I am your shield; your reward is very great. 2. Abram said: Sovereign Lord! what will you give me? I am childless, this Eliezer from Damascus looks after my house. 3. And Abram said, Behold, thou hast not given me children, and behold, a member of my household shall be my heir. 4. And behold, the word of the Lord came to him, and said, He shall not be thy heir, but he who shall come from thy womb shall be thy heir. 5. And he brought him out into the courtyard and said: Look at the heavens and count the stars, can you count them? And he said to him: You will have so many descendants. 6. (Abram) believed God, and He counted it to him as righteousness. 7. And he said to him: I am the Lord, who brought you out of Ur of the Chaldeans, to give you this land for an inheritance. 8. He said: Lord! why do I know that I should inherit it? 9. The Lord answered him: take me a three-year-old ram, a turtledove and a young dove, 10. He took all of them, cut them in half and put one part opposite the other, but did not cut the birds. 11. And birds of prey swooped down on the corpses, but Abram drove them away. 12. When the sun set, Abram fell into a deep sleep, and behold, great horror and darkness fell upon him. 13. Then the Lord said to Abram: Know that your descendants will be strangers in a foreign land; and they will be in bondage and oppression for four hundred years. 14. But I will execute judgment on the people whose enslavement they are, after which they will come out with great wealth. 15. And you will go to your ancestors in peace and will be buried in a good old age. 16. In the fourth generation they will return here: for until now the measure of the iniquity of the Amorites has not yet been filled. 17. Finally, when the sun set, there was darkness; and behold, there was smoke as if from a furnace, and a lamp of fire passed among the cut-up animals. 18. On this day the Lord made a covenant with Abram, saying: To your descendants I give this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river Euphrates, 19. the Kenites, the Kenezites, the Kedmonites, 20. the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Rephaites, 21. the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Girgashites, and the Jebusites. After three short and one-part revelations, God gives Abram a fourth, lengthy and multi-part revelation. It lasts two nights (Gen. 15:1, 5, 12). Abram hears the voice of God; sees the sensory signs of His presence; talks and walks with him. According to the content of this revelation, it can be divided into three parts, which are the general promise of God’s favor, a particular prediction about Abram’s heir and his descendants (Gen. 15:2–6), and a particular revelation about the fate of his descendants before inheriting the Promised Land, approved by the covenant (Gen. 15:7–21). The first two parts of God's conversation contain almost everything that is already known to Abram from previous revelations, and therefore could seem unnecessary; but, filling him with living consolation and again strengthening his faith, they serve as a necessary preparation for the latter, in which there is something terrible. The solemn entry into the covenant also aims to calm Abram and convince him that God, having become his ally, as it were, will not leave his descendants, despite the sad foreknowledge and prediction about him. Fear not, Abram; I am your shield; your reward is very great. The calming word “do not be afraid” can be explained in two ways: either it points from afar to the subsequent terrible revelation about the misfortunes of Abram’s descendants and for this purpose first arms him with courage and hope; or it refers to his disposition of spirit after the victory over the kings, which gained him respect and glory, but which could also produce hatred towards him in the vanquished, envy in those who were delivered by him and fear in the allies and therefore made his position more dangerous than it was before. The following words of promise also befit this state of Abram: I am your shield, since you, protecting others from injustice and violence, do not see protection for yourself among people, then I myself will be your shield. Your reward is very great; since you did not want to enjoy the fruits of your exploits, so that they would not think that you were enriched by people and not by God, then I myself will reward you or I myself will be your reward. What will you give me? I am childless. Having heard the promise of a very great reward, Abram wants, as it were, to immediately release God from His promise, choosing from the many the one and the little. He shows that, having been filled with the gifts of God, he does not know what to desire or hope: what will you give me? and then he adds that the only thing he lacks is someone to whom he could communicate and leave as an inheritance the gifts of God: I am childless. This Eliezer is watching over my house. The idea behind these words is that instead of a son, who should have guarded his father’s house as his inheritance, Abram is forced to entrust his housekeeping to a foreign slave; or it is not yet completed here and is supplemented by the following words: he will be my heir. My household member will be my heir. By choosing a foreigner as his heir, Abram apparently forgets God's promises about his offspring. But how could he do this in the presence of God Himself, with His new promises? In order to enter into his true feeling, one must imagine that the father of believers could distinguish from birth according to the flesh, birth and inheritance according to promise (Gal. 4:23, 3:29); that he could, in some way, make Eliezer his seed through adoption, which was the custom of ancient times (Gen. 48:5); that he offered his election to the judgment of God; finally, that he does not reject the promises of God out of unbelief, but only reduces them out of humility. The one who comes from your loins will be your heir. Here, under the appearance and on the occasion of the dispensation of Abram's house, the Lord throws a new ray of light on His gracious promise: He shows that the seed of the promise will be together with its natural seed. Abram believed God, and He counted it to him as righteousness. Having shown the gradual revelation of Abram's promise from the outside and inside, the writer of everyday life finds here a decent place to preface the questions: why does God reveal His immutable predestination to Abram slowly and gradually? And why is this one honored with such special care and such great gifts? The resolution of these questions lies in this note: Abram believed God, and He counted it to him as righteousness. Faith was the consequence and end of God's mysterious guidance, and it was the beginning and foundation of God's favor. The closest object of Abram's faith appears here to be the one who will come from his loins, the essence of which, as true faith, must be placed in the all-sincere and unconditional surrender of the mind and will to God, in the acceptance of His testimony into oneself (1 John 5:10), contrary to the testimony of flesh and blood, rather than hope (Rom. 4:18). The word צדקה sometimes means a righteous deed (Deut. 24:13), and sometimes the permanent property of rightness, or righteousness (Is. 56:1). To impute originally means to put into account (Lev.25:27, 50, 52), and according to usage also: to attribute to someone some property, sometimes alien to him (Prov.17:28). To count as righteousness means to recognize as virtue and to assign as merit worthy of reward (Ps. 105:31). So, the saying: faith was imputed to Abram for righteousness is resolved to the following: Abram did not have his own and natural righteousness; he did not acquire it by external acts of virtue; his faith was not only recognized as a virtuous action, since it was not so much a transitory action as a permanent property; but it is also laid as the foundation of his righteousness, accepted before the immutable judgment of God instead of his merits. This is how the truth, or justification of Abram, is explained by the Apostle Paul (Rom. 4:3–5). I am the Lord. Abram, without a doubt, knew who he was talking to. But the Lord, as it were, again familiarizes himself with him with a reminder of His first revelation in order to prepare him for the next explanation of the promise of the land of Canaan. How do I know that I should inherit it? Taking this question as asking for a sign to strengthen faith, some reproach Abram, and some note that asking for a sign does not always imply reprehensible unbelief, since, on the contrary, renouncing a sign is not always a sign of pure faith (Judges 6:17; 2 Kings 20:8; Isaiah 7:12). But how incredible it is that Abram began to ask for a sign, while he was talking not with a prophet or some unknown messenger of God, but with God himself, and not for the first time; when he already believed and was justified by faith, and since in the subsequent revelation there is no such sign visible, according to which it would have more reliability than the previous one, then Abram’s question is more appropriately stated as follows: “Until now I live in the land promised to me as if it were alien and I do not know when and how I will become its owner; Perhaps this will require some work on my part; So, why can I know the time and occasion by which the fulfillment of the promise should begin? God answers exactly this question in the next revelation when entering into a covenant with Abram. A similar question was asked by the Apostles to Jesus Christ about the coming of His expected kingdom (Matthew 24:3). Take it for me, etc. Here begins the preparation for entering into the covenant. A three-year-old heifer, a three-year-old goat, a three-year-old ram, a turtle dove and a young dove. That is, all sacrificial animals are of perfect age according to their kind. Cut them in half. Without a doubt, both this division and the arrangement of the animals in parts was done at the command of God, although this latter is not complete in the narrative of Moses. The ritual described here was a common ritual in ancient times for entering into a covenant or union (Jer. 34:18–19), which was also used by the pagans (Boch. Hier. p. I. L. II, p. 33). From this rite came the expressions, taking an oath (Iliad. V. V. 124). The passage of the dissected animals entering into an alliance between the two halves, perhaps, signified that just as these dissections previously constituted one body and had one life, so both allied parties promise to be mutually guided by a single spirit and form a single society. God, using a ritual characteristic of human unions when entering into a covenant with Abram, makes some application to the fact that the Patriarch does not have fairly reliable allies on earth for his safety, and places himself in every possible proximity to him. Birds of Prey. since the writer found this worthy of note, then perhaps this is a symbol of the enemies of the fate of Abram and his tribe. Great horror and darkness. This fear was either simply the effect of the felt presence of God (Job 4:13–16), or a sad presentiment of what was contained in the next revelation. Then the Lord spoke to Abram. Here God reveals the fate of Abram's descendants as if He were announcing on His part the terms of His covenant at the conclusion of it. Four hundred years. The event of this prophecy is indicated in the book of Exodus (Exodus 12:40) and in the letter of the Apostle Paul to the Galatians (Gal.3:17), where 430 years are shown as the time of the wandering of the Jews, from the invasion of Abram from Mesopotamia into the Promised Land until the exodus of the sons of Israel from Egypt. Having excluded from here the first 25 years of Avramov’s wanderings before the birth of Isaac, we obtain a more accurate time for the wanderings and enslavement of his descendants – 405 years. God's judgment often means punishment (Is. 26:9, 51:10). You will go to your ancestors in peace. A similar expression after this signifies the death of Abram: and he joined his people (Gen. 25:8). Just as Abram did not go to his ancestors and did not join his people in body, because he died in a foreign land, then these expressions would be inappropriate if they did not refer to the state of the spiritual man after death. From this and other places of Holy Scripture one can see the ancient generally accepted opinion that people who are close to each other in the present are brought closer together in the future life, according to a certain unity of spirit and qualities, which naturally underlies the unity of fate (Is. 14:9-10; Ezek. 32:18 et seq.). In the fourth generation they will return here. Gender may mean: the time of an entire human life or such a continuation of time in which the entire modernity of people who make up any society changes completely. In one of these meanings, the ancients called the century; the time from the birth of the father to the birth of the son. Thus, the Egyptians considered birth at 33 years old; one name in the genealogy without a note of time. This is how the family name is adopted in the first chapter of the Gospel of Matthew. In this latter sense, the fourth type of return of the Jews should be counted from their entry into Egypt. For example: Kohath, Abram, Aaron, Eleazar. Until now, the measure of the iniquity of the Amorites has not yet been filled. since God combined the blessing of the Jews in his destinies with the punishment of the Amorites, or the Canaanites in general, then the time of temptation required for the former continues, equal to the time of long-suffering for the latter. But what is the filling of the measure of the iniquities of any people? Abram thought to determine this by gradually reducing a certain number of good over evil, but the questions that he proposed about this to the Lord Himself did not receive final resolution (Gen. 18:32-33). In order to get some understanding of this, you can take as help the comparison of the sinful state with the painful state, often used in the word of God. As long as the positive principle of life in the body prevails over the negative principle of death and destruction, life continues even in illness, otherwise death must follow. So among the people, as long as the beginnings of spiritual and moral life confront the still spreading principles of wickedness and depravity, until then their sinful illness does not yet lead to death, and the time of God’s long-suffering toward them continues; but when the destructive principles of wickedness and debauchery take a decisive advantage in the whole and in parts, especially those that give direction to others, then it follows: an increase in lawlessness, growing incessantly, quickly and uncontrollably; upon descent into the depths of evil, negligence or extreme inattention to the actions of the Divine, blocking all the paths of the life-giving influences of grace; finally, under the influence of opposing forces, complete destruction of a society or a people, like a body without a soul or a tree without nutritious sap. Of these, the first can be called filling the measure of iniquity, the second - abandonment from God, the third - judgment or punishment of God. And behold, smoke came from a furnace, and a lamp of fire. Since this special kind of manifestation of God must have had its own cause, it is likely that the smoke of the furnace forms the oppression of the people of God predicted here, which in other places of Holy Scripture is depicted as an iron furnace (Deut. 4:20; Jer. 11:4), and the lamp of fire signifies his deliverance and salvation, which Isaiah also likens to a lamp (Is. 62:1). The passage of these images between the dissected animals is the educational effect of entering into a covenant. Some guess that Abram, before or after these images, was also told to go between the cuttings to perform the cherished ritual on his part, but this guess is not favored by both the silence of the writer and the fact that Abram was in a frenzy at that time. It seems that in the vision itself both parties entering into the covenant were represented, that is, the tempted tribe of Abram - in a smoky cave, and God the Deliverer - in a lamp of fire. On this day the Lord concluded, etc. Here the narrator only seems to repeat the content of the previous tale. From the river of Egypt to the great river Euphrates. The domains of David and Solomon extended to these limits (2 Samuel 8:3; 2 Chronicles 9:26). Although in the strict sense these rivers were not the boundaries of the promised land, however, for a prophecy that should extend over many centuries, it was impossible to select the strongest and clearest signs in order to determine the location of the descendants of Abram. Keneev. They lived within the tribe of Judah (1 Samuel 27:10, 30:29). Kenizeev. If Caleb is called Kenizee (Josh. 14:6) from his place of residence, then the ancient Kenizeites should also be sought in the land of the tribe of Judah. Kadmoneev. This name means Eastern. And therefore, these are hardly the essence of the Hivites, or Hivites, the inhabitants of Hermon (Josh. 11:3; Judges 3:3), whose name changes with the name of the east (Ps. 89:13). Eliezer is noteworthy in the history of Abram as the first, although only imaginary, heir. In this capacity, he stands in some correspondence with Ishmael and Isaac, whose personal attributes are very significant. since Isaac, according to the allegorical presentation of the Apostle Paul (Gal. 4:22-28), represents the New Testament life, spiritually free, as the pure fruit of faith, and Ishmael - the Old Testament, morally laborious, as the fruit of mixing faith with the law, then according to the correspondence, in the person of Eliezer one can find the formation of a naturally well-ordered life and the relationship that it has to the true path of perfection. After some experiences of self-sacrifice, after some victories over the flesh and the world, the fruits of which the child of faith bestows on God as a helper and turns to the good of his neighbors, he sometimes feels himself in such a state of bewilderment and uncertainty that he hesitates between the fear of condemnation and the hope of retribution. Tired of the fact that after several trials and purifications his spiritual barrenness continues, he attempts to degrade the concept of gracious promises to the state of nature in which he still finds himself, instead of trying to elevate his state to the pure concept of spiritual promises. He relies on the natural virtues of philanthropy and mercy, in order to base on them the entire right of eternal inheritance. If this is done not out of pride and a high opinion of one’s own deeds, but out of simplicity, awareness of one’s powerlessness and ignorance of the higher path of perfection, and if a person still tries to approach God through prayer, then grace reveals to him that external natural virtues, as products of flesh and blood, cannot inherit the kingdom of God, but that it is granted to the internal regenerated person. He who accepts this with pure faith enters the path of justification. To the extent that he is confirmed in the covenant of faith and trust in God, it is revealed to him that the regenerated person will face new temptations, expulsions, oppressions, constant crosses, until he enters the heavenly fatherland. The legend about the birth of Ishmael presents: the marriage of Abram with Hagar (Gen. 16:1–4), the disagreement of Sarah and Hagar on the occasion of Ishmael’s conception (Gen. 16:4–6), the revelation to Hagar about his fate (Gen. 16:7–14), the very birth of Ishmael (Gen. 16:15–16). XVI. 1. But Sarah, Abram's wife, bore him no child. And when she had an Egyptian maid named Hagar, 2. Sarah said to Abram, Behold, the Lord hath shut up my womb, that I should not bear; therefore, go in to my maid; maybe I will have children from her. Abram listened to Sarai's words. 3. Thus, when Abram's sojourn in the land of Canaan had been ten years, Sarai, Abram's wife, took her Egyptian maid Hagar and gave her to her husband Abram as his wife. 4. He went in to Hagar and she conceived. Didn't give birth. Although Moses had already spoken about Sarah's barrenness (Gen. 11:30), he now mentions it again in order to show that now the temptation turns from Abram to her and that the following events should be explained by her barrenness: the marriage of Abram and the birth of Ishmael. Egyptian Maid. Chrysostom guesses that Abram received it as a gift from Pharaoh during his stay in Egypt. Hagar. Hence the name of the main city of stony Arabia: Hagar, otherwise Petra, the name of the people: Hagarians, otherwise Saracens, from the robbery. Sarah told Abram, etc. From this reasoning of Sarah, two unfavorable thoughts for her are revealed: the first is that, caring about her barrenness, she apparently does not pay attention to the gracious promise; second, he inclines his spouse to polygamy. In order to enter into her true position and intention, let us imagine that she was as confident in the truth of God’s promise as she was concerned about her barrenness. According to this assumption, her reasoning should take on the same form that it has in the legend of Moses: “God promised Abram a numerous descendant, but this has not yet been fulfilled; in Abram there is no obstacle to this; So, isn’t this obstacle in me? It is openly clear to Abram that his heir will come from him, but this is not said about me; Didn’t God already judge that I would remain barren forever? Behold, the Lord has shut up my womb so that I would not give birth. So, if I myself cannot fulfill the promises of God, I strive, at least, not to interfere with or even to facilitate their fulfillment in my spouse: I will give him another wife who would give him children; and so that through this I myself would not be cut off from the kind of promise, I will use for this purpose a slave, over whom I have the right of life and death, and whose children I can all the more unquestioningly make mine. Come in to my maid; maybe I will have children from her. This is how Sarah's intentions regarding Hagar's marriage should be explained. To Abram's excuse for his bigamy, we should also note: that it was offered to him by his wife and was thereby already removed from any form of intemperance; that Sarah’s infertility gave Abram the right to a second marriage, just as Sarah, for the same reason, could communicate her right to Hagar, deciding not to use it herself; that their actions are sanctified by the intention of acquiring the promised seed; that, finally, if any weaknesses of mortals are already covered by the mercy of the searching heart, then in vain they are condemned by people based on their appearance alone. After the completion of ten years of Avramov's stay in the land of Canaan. This number of years is noted here as the time in which Abram, starting from the first revelation of God, waited in vain for the resolution of Sarah's barrenness. 4. When she saw that she had conceived, she began to despise her mistress. 5. Then Sarai said to Abram, “I am offended; you are responsible for that; I gave my maid into your bosom, and she, seeing that she conceived, looks at me with contempt; The Lord will judge me with you. 6. Abram said to Sarai, “Behold, your maid is in your hands, do with her as you please.” And so Sarah treated her harshly, and she ran away from her. She began to despise her mistress. It is likely that Hagar went beyond the bounds of respect due to her mistress in the hope of being more pleasing to Abram if she bore him an heir (Gen. 29:34). Meanwhile, we should note in this case the punishment that righteously befell Sarah for her lack of faith, or at least for her excessive impatience, with which she wanted to produce children for herself, contrary to her natural state, instead of expecting them only from the promise and will of God, which obviously guided Abram. I'm offended; you are responsible for that. Literally from Hebrew: my grievance is with you. See similar expressions (Gen.27:13; Judg.19:20; Jer.2:35). For an insult made to a spouse in the home, the husband is responsible as her natural protector and guardian of family order. The Lord will judge me with you. The full significance of these words can be depicted as follows: God will judge us, and if I have given my maid an opportunity for indignation, He will condemn me; but if you arm her against me with excessive leniency, then she will punish you (1 Samuel 24:16). Behold, your maid is in your hands. Abram's indifference is amazing. He does not stand up for Hagar, who already carries his seed, but rather reproaches Sarah, who herself chose and exalted the proud slave. He renders justice to the offended wife, betraying the fate of his seed to the will of Providence. It may be that Hagar’s behavior made him understand that her fruit would not be the subject of a special blessing from God. Sarah treated her harshly. Ambrose (De Abrah, p. 14.) reproaches Sarah for this act, but God himself justifies her (Gen. 16:9). 7. And the Angel of the Lord found her at a spring of water in the desert, at a spring on the road to Shur. 8. And he said: Hagar, servant of Sarin! where did you come from? and where are you going? She answered: I am fleeing from the presence of Sarah my mistress. 9. But the Angel said to her: Return to your mistress and submit to her. 10. Then the Angel said to her: By multiplying I will multiply your descendants to an innumerable multitude. 11. Finally the Angel of the Lord said to her: Behold, you are with child, and you will give birth to a son, and you will call his name Ishmael, for the Lord has heard your suffering. 12. He will be among people like a wild horse; he will raise his hands against everyone, and everyone against him; he will live in the presence of all his brothers. 13. Then (Hagar) called the Lord who spoke to her by this name: You are the God of vision! For, she said, even here I saw the trail of the one who saw me! 14. Therefore that source is called Beerlahai-roi. It is located between Cadet and between Bared. And the Angel of the Lord found her. This description of the Epiphany shows that the Angel first appeared as a wanderer and then gradually made himself recognizable from the conversation. On the road to Sur. Sur, according to Josephus, is Pelusium, at the mouth of the Nile (Antiq.VI, 7. 3; 1 Sam. 15:7). Therefore, it is clear that Hagar was thinking about returning to her homeland. Hagar, servant Sarin! With this proclamation, the Angel makes Hagar aware of his omniscience and thus prepares her for the next command and prediction; and at the same time inspires her that it is in vain and unrighteousness that she rebels against the rights of her mistress, which do not stop by flight. Where did you come from? Having already shown his knowledge, the Angel takes on the image of ignorance in order to both of them together incline Hagar to sincerely admit her unrighteous act. I flee from the presence of Sarah my mistress. Now Hagar also recognizes herself as Sarah’s slave and, consequently, condemns her disobedience and flight. Come back and so on. The angel does not openly condemn either Hagar or Sarah, but only puts their mutual relationship in order. This shows that what happened between them was more confusion than ill-intentioned strife. The first thought that it was indecent for Abram’s wife to remain a slave any longer; the other was afraid that her slave would become her mistress. By multiplying I will multiply your descendants. This blessing, in its very expressions, is part of Abraham’s blessing, for it is such in its subject and basis. And you shall call his name Ishmael (which means: God will hear); for the Lord has heard your suffering. God sees or hears the suffering of people, according to their understanding, when he accepts their prayers and delivers them (Ex. 3:7). So, hearing Hagar's bitterness should not be taken as her justification and condemnation of Sarah; but only as an action of merciful Providence. Wild hinny: ημιονος. This animal, according to Pallas’s description, is more beautiful and agile than a donkey, but does not get used to people. Ishmael was similar to him in that he lived in the desert and did not join any people or society. His hand is against everyone, and everyone’s hand is against him. To lay hands on someone means to kill (Gen.37:27; Deut.13:9, 17:7). So, Ishmael’s lot is such that he must live in constant hostility with others and find in weapons the means of his safety and prosperity. The event of this prediction is not subject to doubt in the descendants of Ishmael 19 and, perhaps, extends to Mohammed and beyond. One may ask: what consolation was there for Hagar in the promise that from her would come a savage and cruel people? Answer: a people who are abused by their way of life are not therefore a rejected people; he may have his own virtues, just as, for example, the Arabs, when in an abusive spirit, are distinguished by faithfulness in speech and hospitality. The lot of Hagar's descendants is an earthly blessing, and this often goes to warred nations. However, it should not go unnoticed that the grumpy mood in which Hagar was at the conception of Ishmael becomes his ancestral heritage. He will live in the presence of all his brothers. That is, he and his descendants will live in the vicinity (Gen. 23:19, 25:9) or to the east of the peoples of the same tribe, which are the descendants of Abram from Keturah: Ammonites, Moabites, Israelites, Edomites. Ishmael and the Ishmaelites roamed empty and rocky Arabia. Then Hagar called the Lord who spoke to her . Hagar no longer calls on the Angel, but on God, because in the messenger he sees the Sender and in the instrument - the Acting One; just as Abigail bowed to David’s ambassadors and said as to David himself: behold your handmaid, and so on. (1 Samuel 25:40–41). You are the God of vision! for, she said, even here I saw the trace of the one who saw me. To understand these exclamations, one must imagine that Hagar at first probably considered the Angel to be a stranger; then from the conversation I gradually recognized him; and finally, when he became invisible and, perhaps at the last minute of the vision, shone, I clearly recognized in him the appearance of God. Then, in delight with surprise and joy, wanting to praise God for such an unexpected and so solemn revelation, she exclaims: “Thou art the God of vision!” You see everything, and we see everywhere; You're all a vision! For I thought that the grace of revelation dwells only in the house of Abram; no, even here, not only You see me, but I also saw You in your wake; I did not recognize Your revelation at the beginning, but I saw Your glory at the end of the vision.” Beer-lahai-roi. That is, the source of the Living One who sees me; or the source of the living God of vision. The living is the name of the true God (Josh. 3:10; Dan. 12:7), given in contrast to the dead gods (Ps. 105:28). 15. Then Hagar bore Abram a son; and he called the name of his son born of Hagar Ishmael. 16. Abram was eighty-six years old when Hagar gave birth to Abram Ishmael. The writer notes the summer of Abram here, probably to excuse his impatient desire to have offspring and to express that Hagar only enjoyed the rights of a wife for a short time. The birth of Ishmael places Abram in a certain middle state between the barrenness of nature and the goodness of the promise. He received a son according to the flesh, not according to promise, a son, but not an heir. The Apostle Paul finds here an allegorical image of the Old Testament from Mount Sinai, born into slavery (Gal.4:22-25). In continuation of this allegory to the formation of the Old Testament Church in general, Hagar, as the Apostle explains, signifies Mount Sinai, which is the mother of those under the law in time and the focus of the Old Testament Divine service, or, finally, the Jewish Church itself; and Ishmael represents the sons of this Church, that is, all who were under the law of Moses. The indispensable state of slavery characteristic of Hagar is depicted by the state of the law outside of faith and from birth, for the property of the law is to compel, frighten and hold in service, which is all characteristic of slavery. The mixing of the slavery of Hagar with the freedom and faith of Abram in the birth of Ishmael corresponds to the mixed action in those striving for revival, which in the Old Testament were partly (externally and educationally) under the guardianship of the law in anticipation of the faith that should be revealed (Gal. 3:23), and partly (internally and mysteriously) received a testimony of faith, although, however, they did not receive the promises in its full perfection and decisiveness event (Heb.11:39–40). Having accepted birth into slavery, or moral enslavement under the severity of the law, as an essential and distinctive property of the Old Testament, we can, like in the great church, find in the small church, that is, in the inner man, the state of the Old Testament and to this we also attach the allegory of Ishmael and Hagar. Sarah’s prolonged barrenness, that is, a state of soul in which she, even in many trials of faith, does not feel in herself the living and saving fruits of rebirth, and the confidence in the truth of the gracious promises, placed in opposition, can produce impatience and the desire to promote the actions of grace through the most intense self-action, if they can be accelerated and strengthened. For this purpose, Abram is combined with Hagar, that is, the life-giving spirit of faith is mixed with the killing letter of the law, the freedom of faith is combined with the slavery of the law - in the works of the flesh according to the law, which, although it should not be willfully rejected, but having been preserved, still leaves the executors of the commanded as slaves; a person imagines that he has acquired the right to be born through faith in the spiritual child of God. The fruit of this confusion cannot be the desired Isaac, but Ishmael, not the spirit of sonship, but the spirit of slavery. (Rom.8:15); not a perfect inner and spiritual life, bestowed and governed by God alone, but an educational life under guidance, moral in its source and working in its image, consisting of days of work, but not finding the Sabbath in God. In people in this state, one can often notice Ishmael’s property - to lay hands on everyone, that is, to condemn all those who are not following the same path as them, and to arm themselves against them with strong, but not always prudent, jealousy. However, they dwell in the presence of their brothers - at the very borders of the land of promise. This similarity between the external adventures of one Patriarch and between the known state of the Church, and also between the internal state of a person on the path to perfection, so that it does not seem to be an accidental and arbitrary consideration, should note the deep basis of this similarity in the internal state of Abram and Sarah at a time when their external adventures were so significant. Their faith seemed to be tired of its suffering state of waiting and not seeing (John 20:29), they wanted to nourish and strengthen it with self-action. They were not content to listen to the promises of the Lord with trust and devotion to His will; they began to think that they could or should contribute with their natural powers to bring them to fulfillment. From this inner state of Abram and Sarah came the birth of Ishmael; and this internal state of theirs was reflected in the external circumstances of his birth. Thus, going through the internal state of the Old Testament, they carried out the external transformation of the Old Testament. It seems that this Old Testament state of Abram is also revealed in the origin of the strict law of rituals, which followed shortly after the birth of Ishmael in the commandment of circumcision (Gen. 17:14). The end and intention of these considerations is the conclusion that just as the birth of Ishmael for Abram was not the fulfillment of the promise that was still to be expected in Isaac, just as the Old Testament was only a preparation for the New, so a busy and working life under the yoke of the law should not be revered by Christians as a treasure of merit and the last pretext of perfection; but, going through this field in patience and obedience, they must wait by faith for their freedom in the truth, their life in Christ and the life of Christ in themselves. Just as Abram was already tired of walking by faith alone, and not by sight, as can be seen from the circumstances of the birth of Ishmael, God, renewing the promise, gives this the image of the covenant, connected with a constant visible sign, which is circumcision. This sign becomes hereditary, just like a promise. If the covenant of circumcision is compared with the covenant of the fiery vision that preceded it (Gen. 15:18), then the covenant of circumcision can be considered a further explanation, renewal, addition and fulfillment of the first covenant. In the first, educational actions or covenant signs are presented most on the part of God; in the second - from Abram's side. The story about the covenant of circumcision is divided into the following parts: preparation for the covenant (Gen. 17:1–3), a new presentation of the covenant promise (Gen. 17:3–8), a depiction of the visible covenant on the part of Abram (Gen. 17:9–14), an explanation of the promise in relation to Sarah (Gen. 17:15–16), Abram’s bewilderment (Gen. 17:17), intercession for Ishmael (Gen. 17:18), the fate of Isaac and Ishmael in particular (Gen. 17:19–22), the fulfillment of the covenant on the part of Abram (Gen. 17:23, 27). 1. When Abram was ninety-nine years old from birth, the Lord appeared to Abram and said to him: I am God Almighty; walk before me and be blameless; 2. And I will establish My covenant between Me and you, and I will give you many, many descendants. 3. And Abram fell on his face. Ninety-nine years old. The timing of the covenant of circumcision is remarkable in three respects: in relation to the birth of Ishmael. For thirteen years, God left Abram in ignorance or, what is even more painful, in erroneous guessing about his fate; in relation to Abram himself. Ninety-nine years old, he accepted the promise of a future son and subjected himself to the painful act of circumcision; in relation to Isaac. The promise of his birth was connected with the exact timing of this event (Gen. 17:21). I am God almighty. By indicating His omnipotence, God prepares Abram for the subsequent command and promise, so that he would not doubt the possibility of both receiving the promise from His hand and fulfilling the command with His help. He even in some way reproaches Abram, who sought natural means to fulfill His promise. Walk before Me and be blameless. What Enoch and Noah were (Gen. 5:22, 6:9), Abram is commanded to be. However, one might think that God here gives him not a new commandment for him, but confirms him in the behavior he has already accepted and protects him from falls. As the patriarchs fulfilled the will of God, they themselves, without hesitation, confess this (Gen. 24:40, 48:15). And Abram fell on his face. Whether Abram fell out of fear or bowed down as a sign of reverence and gratitude, interpreters differ. Abram's silence best explains his inner state. He does not reject or confirm what God says: at this moment he is above these actions of his own mind and will; he surrenders himself to God, casts himself before Him and, as David puts it, disappears for His salvation (Ps. 119:81). New Statement of Promise God continued speaking to him and said: 4. This is my covenant with you: you will be the father of many nations. 5. And therefore from now on you will not be called Abram, but let your name be Abraham; for I have appointed you to be the father of many nations. 6. And I will increase you many, many times; and I will make nations from you, and kings will come from you. 7. And I will establish My covenant between Me and you and between your descendants throughout their generations, an everlasting covenant, that I may be your God and your descendants after you. 8. And I will give to you and your descendants after you the land in which you wander, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting inheritance, and I will be their God. I am my covenant with you. This speech seems to be suppressed and not in accordance with the rules of word composition. But as much as it is wrong, it is as significant as it is. In man there is nothing more hateful than I: in God there is nothing more majestic than I. And in the customs of antiquity, speaking without I was considered necessary before the highest decency, and therefore I, by superiority, befits the Most High Being. So, the short word “I” contains the whole introduction to the following speech: “I am God almighty, who alone am everything and before whom everything is nothing, I want, I command, I promise.” You will be the father of many nations. The many nations descended from Abram are known. It is noteworthy that he is called not only by many persons, but also by many peoples the father - a name that expresses the closest relationship and means the head of one family. Therefore, the name of the father of many nations in its full meaning implies not only that Abram’s descendants will be divided into many nations, but also that many nations will be united under him into a single family. But let your name be Abraham. Renaming in human customs sometimes means the power of the renamer and the appointment of the renamed to a new title or ministry, as, for example, Joseph was named Tsafnat-paneah (Gen.41:45), Daniel - Beltshatzar (Dan.1:7); and sometimes it corresponds to some change of state that has already occurred, as Naomi gave herself the name Mara (Ruth. 1:20). God also gives new names to people sometimes in memory of a special incident, as Jacob was given the name Israel in memory of the struggle with God (Gen. 32:28), and sometimes in expression of their special predestination, as Simon was named Peter (John 1:42; Matt. 16:18). This last generation is called Abraham, that is, the father of a great multitude. Names that have a Divine origin are of great importance, because they are not random signs of concepts, like simply human names. Those are the sensory imprints of the essence of things; they are connected with a deep knowledge of things; they contain within themselves the power of things, which appears when they are pronounced not only by the sensory organs, but by all the strength of the spirit. And kings will come from you. Jewish, Jewish, Israeli, Edomite, Saracen, etc. Finally, from Abraham himself is the King of kings and Lord of lords (Rev. 19:16) and the kings and priests appointed by him (Rev. 1:6). I will be your God and your descendants after you. It is not difficult to conclude about the importance of this promise from the fact that the continuation of one real conversation of God with Abraham, but is pronounced three times (Gen. 17: 7, 8, 19), and, finally, refers to Isaac primarily before Ishmael, as the main and essential accessory of the covenant. The external image or expression of this promise becomes clear from comparing it with the habit of idolaters to appropriate and call their own the imaginary deity that they honor in the idols of their home, city, country and from which they consider themselves to have the right to demand special protection. An example of this is Laban (Gen. 31:30). Perhaps the idea and desire to assimilate the gods was an ugly product of an initially true, but subsequently corrupted tradition about the predetermined assimilation of the Divinity to the chosen tribe. God, contrasting truth with error, reveals to Abraham that He will definitely be the God of him and his descendants, more than other people and nations. And God is the God of Abraham and his descendants: by name: God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob (Ex. 29:45–46); for the preservation of true knowledge of God and worship in their descendants; especially in terms of incarnation. For this reason, in the order of the promise, the eternal covenant and the eternal inheritance of the land of Canaan are first established, which was fulfilled before the Nativity of Christ, and the promise: I will be their God is the conclusion of all promises. 9. Then God said to Abraham, “You shall keep my covenant, you and your descendants after you throughout their generations.” 10. This is My covenant, which you must keep between Me and you and your descendants after you, that all your males may be circumcised.11. Trim the edge of your flesh; and this will be a sign of the covenant between Me and you. 12. Every male child among you who is born in the house and bought for money from any foreigner who is not from your tribe, shall be circumcised within eight days of his birth. 13. Let him who is born in your house and bought with money be circumcised without fail; and my covenant upon your body shall be an everlasting covenant. 14. An uncircumcised male who does not circumcise the edge of his flesh (on the eighth day), that soul will be cut off from his people, (for) he has broken My covenant. Trim, etc. The origin of this cherished rite is explained in an unworthy manner by those who think that Abraham himself was ready to accept circumcision from the Egyptians, and God only out of condescension made it the subject of his commandment. Jewish and Egyptian circumcision, as Origen notes against Celsus (L. V), has nothing in common at its very core, just like two sacred rites in honor of different deities. They also differ in many circumstances: Jews perform circumcision by law, and Egyptians by choice; Jews are subject to it in general, and among the Egyptians mainly priests and those who want to engage in secret sciences; Jews have only male sex, and Egyptians have female sex (Serab. L. XVII). For Jews on the eighth day of birth, and for Egyptians at the age of thirteen (Ambr. de Abrah. L. II, p. 11). Due to this last circumstance, it is more convenient to perform Egyptian circumcision from the Ishmaelites, the descendants of Abraham, than from the Egyptians of Abraham. Jesus Christ says about the beginning of circumcision that it is from the fathers, and shows that the law of circumcision is not lower than the law of the Sabbath (John 7:22). Philo (De circumcis.) considers four reasons convincing for the use of circumcision, drawn, as he says, from the ancient interpreters of Moses, which are the following: the prevention of some serious illness; cleanliness of all parts of the body, befitting a sacred rite; the application of circumcision to the heart and, finally, the preparation for procreation in greater numbers. These concepts confuse Jewish circumcision with pagan circumcision and guesswork with experience. Without moving our research away from the path indicated by Holy Scripture, we find two reasons sufficient for the establishment of circumcision, or what is the same, two interpretations of it: educational, or instructive, which Philo mentions, and transformative, or prophetic. The instructive sign of circumcision is revealed by the following expressions of the Holy Scripture in Moses: uncircumcised heart (Lev.26:41), circumcise the foreskin of your heart (Deut.10:16); in Jeremiah: all the house of Israel have uncircumcised hearts (Jer.9:26). In the speech of the first martyr Stephen: stiff-necked, whose hearts and ears are not circumcised (Acts 7:51). But the Apostle Paul expounds more fully and more definitively the educational property of external circumcision: this is not a Jew who is such only outwardly, and this is not circumcision that is performed only externally on the flesh, but that Jew who is such in secret; and that circumcision that is performed on the heart according to the Spirit, and not according to writing (Rom. 2:28–29). Why should circumcision instill in a person that from birth, by nature, his heart is in the uncleanness of the flesh, just as the flesh is uncircumcised; that he must come out of this state by putting off the body of sinful flesh ( Col. 2:11 ); that the effect of this mysterious circumcision should be directed at those parts from which carnal deeds are heard: on the heart, from where evil thoughts come, on the ears, through which temptations are introduced and implanted in the soul, but which are difficult to accept the word of God; that the fruit of this circumcision is entry into a covenant with God, union with Him in spirit and inheritance of His promises. The very union in which it is found with the promise of Abraham, as a visible sign of the covenant with its essential property and end, leads to the search for transformation in the establishment of circumcision. The Apostle explains this sign when he calls the circumcision of Abraham the seal of the righteousness of faith (Rom. 4:11) and when he calls our circumcision made without hands the circumcision of Christ (Col. 2:11). Just as the circumcision of believers made without hands in the New Testament is Christ’s, so the circumcision made with hands of believers in the Old Testament should also be Christ’s: one is spiritual and essential, and the other is transformative. And indeed, why is, for example, an ear or another body member common to both sexes not circumcised? In order, no doubt, that in the visible sign of the covenant there would be a close indication of the promise of the blessed seed that was to come from Abraham. Circumcision of a man's flesh is, as it were, a negative expression of the concept of a woman's seed. And this will be a sign of the covenant. Circumcision is a sign in three ways. Union sign. In ancient times, when concluding alliances, signs were used, such as, for example, war - a copy, and peace - an olive rod (caduceus) or images of these things (Vid. A. Gell. L. X, p. 27). There were also signs that the allies wore to recognize each other (Vid. Thomas, de eesseris.). Likewise, the action of circumcision signifies the entry into a covenant with God, and the state of circumcision signifies the immutability of this covenant. Sign of election. Things that are chosen and separated from others are sometimes marked by a sign or seal, as, for example, the Egyptian priests did over the animals they chose for sacrifice. Thus, by circumcision, people chosen by God from all nations are distinguished from others (Deut. 7:6). Seal or secret sign. Beneath the seal is hidden the mystery of writing: thus, beneath the visible sign of circumcision is hidden the mystery of faith and grace. Eight days. The eighth day after the baby’s birth, according to Aristotle’s remark (De animal. L. VII, p. 12), is important because until seven days are completed one cannot be sure of its vitality. In Holy Scripture, in general, the seventh number appears to be a mysterious number of completion, and things that have not reached this number are considered imperfect, which is why animals could not be offered to God before the fulfillment of seven days from their birth (Ex. 22:30). The eighth day of circumcision, perhaps, will mark the renewal of human nature by the Resurrection of Christ in the fullness of the week, or on the first to the seventh day, and also, perhaps, the cleansing of the whole world during the great seven days of God. Male. The female sex is not excluded from the covenant, but is included in it by its birth from those of the circumcision and those born of themselves by circumcision. This signifies that the covenant seed that saves husband and wife is not the wife, but the husband. Born in the house and bought. Circumcision of slaves and foreigners is prescribed, probably because the uncircumcised in the house of the circumcised would become an object of either disgust or temptation for the sons of the covenant. But it may also have a transformative sign - that in the covenant of God with Abraham lies the salvation of all peoples, races and states. The question is: could a master circumcise a slave against his will? Maimonides (De circumcis. L.I, p. 6) to resolve this believes that the slave had to either accept circumcision, or, in case of disagreement with this, be sold to another master. My covenant on your body will be an everlasting covenant. The covenant is called here eternal in the same way that the law is sometimes called eternal, that is, under the condition of the will of the legislator and a certain state of those under the law. That soul will be cut off from its people. Cutting off the uncircumcised, according to various opinions of Jewish and Christian interpreters, means deprivation of eternal life, premature death, childlessness, death by civil court, excommunication. Some condemn parents who do not circumcise their sons; and others - these very sons, if they, having come of age, do not fulfill what their parents omitted. The cutting off of a soul from one’s people, according to the use of this expression in Holy Scripture, marks Divine punishment (Lev. 16:10, 20:5–6, 23:29–30). Indeed, sometimes God apparently expressed his anger for neglecting the law of circumcision, as happened with Moses (Exodus 4:24–26). However, the concept of breaking a covenant is most closely associated with excommunication from the community of believers and deprivation of rights to the promises of the covenant. It was the custom of the Jews that those who received circumcision, but after the eighth day, were no longer equal to those circumcised on the eighth day (Phil. III. 5. Orig. Contra Cels. L. V). From this, perhaps, opinion, it happened that seventy interpreters, after the words “who will not circumcise the edges of his flesh,” added in their translation: on the eighth day. 15.God also said to Abraham: Do not call your wife Sarai; but let her name be Sarah. 16. I will bless her and give you a son by her; I will bless her, and nations will come from her, and kings of nations will come from her. According to Jewish pronunciation, the first name of Abraham's wife is Sarai (שרי), and the second (שרה). The first, according to the interpretation of Jerome (Trad. Heb.), signifies: my mistress, that is, the mistress of the house alone; the second is madam in general. But more appropriately with the name of Abraham, the name of Sarah can be decomposed as follows: המון שרת Sarafgamon, that is, the mistress of the multitude. 17. Then Abraham fell on his face and laughed, and said, “Shall a man who is a hundred years old have children?” and Sarah, being ninety years old, will she really give birth? This laughter and bewilderment of Abraham is condemned by St. Chrysostom (Hom. XL. in Gen.) and Jerome (Contra Pelag. L. Ill), and the first of them adds that the consequence of this laughter was the suffering of the tribe of Abraham in Egypt. However, the Patriarch is justified against this condemnation by the very word of God, when it ascribes to him a justifying faith (Gen. 15:6), which does not fail, despite the fact that the flesh is already dead (Rom. 4:18–22). The Chaldean interpreters soften the sign of the word laughed. Onkelos reads: rejoiced. From two other interpreters: amazed. St. Augustine finds in Abraham’s act a smile of joy, and not a smile of unbelief (De civ. Dei L. XVI, p. 26). They guess that the saying of Jesus Christ is applied to this saying of the book of Genesis when He says that Abraham, seeing his day, rejoiced (John 8:56). It is not at all strange, but quite natural, that the feeling of joy from a simple heart pours out with laughter and reverent surprise is expressed in the language of bewilderment. 18. And Abraham said to God: May Ishmael live before you. To live before the face of God in the sacred language means to enjoy prosperity and longevity under the special cover of Providence (see a similar expression, 1 Samuel 2:30 et seq.). But what prompts Abraham to ask Ishmael this? Perhaps distrust of the promise of Isaac, whose birth seemed unnatural. Perhaps there was a fear that the new promise of Sarah’s son would not be combined with the rejection of Hagar’s son, whose very conception now turned out to be unblessed. Abraham, as a father, was obliged to take care of Ishmael as his son. Faith is benevolent. Perhaps the humility and reverence of Abraham, so overwhelmed by God’s blessings that the feeling of their greatness was depicted as if by a desire to reduce them. “Is a poor hundred-year-old man,” he says, “worth changing the course of nature to give him a son?” 19 But God said, Sarah your wife will surely bear you a son; and you shall call his name Isaac; and I will establish my covenant with him and with his descendants after him, an everlasting covenant. 20. You have heard about Ishmael; Behold, I will bless him, and make him grow, and give him many, many descendants; twelve princes will be born from him; and I will make him into a great nation. 21. But I will establish my covenant with Isaac, whom Sarah will bear to you at this very time next year. 22. And God finished his conversation with Abraham and went up from him. Exactly. With this word begins God's answer to Abraham's perplexity and intercession for Ishmael; and it shows that God did not find in his words any reprehensible contradiction of His will: without rejecting his feelings, He only deigned to stop his amazement, confirm and explain His prediction. Isaac. This means: he will laugh, or, according to the reason in which this word was used above in the legend about Abraham, he will rejoice. This signification of the name of Isaac is commemorative, in relation to the feeling of Abraham at the promise about him; prophetic, for the same circumstance of laughter or joy is renewed with the subsequent revelation to Sarah (Gen. 18:12) and after the birth of Isaac (Gen. 21:6); mysterious, since it refers to the faith and love of Abraham, according to which he was glad to see the day of Christ and, having seen it, rejoiced. And I will establish My covenant with him. It does not mean that there is only one external covenant of circumcision, for Ishmael was also in this covenant, but God does not promise to establish His covenant with him, but only with Isaac (Gen. 17:21). So, the covenant of God with Isaac is that eternal covenant, which, having become obsolete in Israel, was renewed in Christ, in which God remembered his mercy to Abraham and his seed forever (Luke 1:54-55). In general, the two blessings depicted here, Isaac and Ishmael, differ from each other as gracious, spiritual, eternal promises and natural, earthly, temporary gifts. Twelve Princes. Moses shows the event of this blessing below (Gen. 25:13–16). The twelve leaders of the tribes of Ishmael correspond to the twelve patriarchs of Israel. This equivalence shows that the measure of visible blessings does not always mean the measure of internal gifts. The two descendants of Abraham are like two beautiful flowers, of which one is a barren flower, and the other is filled with the power of life and, withering, leaves a fruit that gives rebirth to the root and flowers. This time next year. That is, exactly one year later. 23 And Abraham took Ishmael his son, and all those born in his house, and all those he had bought with his money, even all the males of the house of Abraham; and he circumcised the edge of their flesh on that very day, as God had spoken to him. 24 Abraham was ninety-nine years old when he cut off the edge of his flesh. 25 And Ishmael his son was thirteen years old when he was born, when the edge of his flesh was cut off. 26. On the same day Abraham and Ishmael his son were circumcised; 27. And with him all the males of his house were circumcised, those born in the house and bought with money from the strangers. On that very day. That is, on the same day on which God appeared and revealed the law of circumcision to Abraham, Abraham did what God commanded. This haste in fulfilling the will of God is all the more worthy of surprise since the revelation did not set a time for circumcision for Abraham, but only for newborns in his tribe. Haste in difficult cases, but connected with a well-known and sacred duty, is a prudent precaution against perplexity and obstacles. And Ishmael his son was thirteen years old, etc. At the same age, the Arabians, the descendants of Ishmael, were circumcised, as Josephus writes (Antiq. 1.1, p. 11); At the same time, for the most part, the Turks are also observing. All the male sex of his house. And here one cannot help but be surprised at the improvement of Abraham’s house and the obedience of his household and slaves. Not one of them objected to the ritual being performed on themselves, which was painful and, at first glance, very strange. With such power, faith and spiritual anointing act on everything around us and subjugate everything to itself. Just as in Ishmael the state of the Old Testament and slavery under the law is presented, then in the new promise about Isaac, more clear than the previous ones and close to the event, one can see the immediate preparation of man for the state of the New Testament, for the birth into freedom of the children of God. Abraham, by all indications, still hopes for the events of the promise at Ishmael, as God predicts to him the birth of Isaac and the fulfillment of His high promises in him. So even at a time when a person relies on the works of the law and affirms his trust in them, God sometimes appears from the depths of his soul with some presentiments, some revelations of a higher inner life, allowing him to see, beyond the mixture of nature and grace, the pure state of grace. Abraham, in a state of mortification of the flesh, hears with amazement the prediction of the birth of a son from him: a man, exhausted amid the labors of correcting his outer life, learns with amazement that the inner one must be established on its ruins. Abraham, with the promise of Isaac, prays to God for Ishmael: a weak man, and even with the beginnings of life by faith, he still cares so that his deeds do not perish, and tries to bring them into the attention of the Divine. God, at the intercession of Abraham, does not reject Ishmael, but establishes an everlasting covenant with Isaac: God does not reject the works of the law, which is aided and for which faith stands; but it predetermines eternal union with Himself only by the graciously implanted inner life of faith and love in the soul. As the seal of the promise about Isaac and the guarantee of his birth, God places on Abraham his new name and circumcision. He who is committed to spiritual life also receives a new name, that is, a new life, a new property with which he is imprinted, and a new higher purpose in action. The closest preparation for rebirth is also circumcision: circumcision of the heart, ears, absolute circumcision of everything carnal, truncation of everything that excites its own activity according to the elements of the world, and not according to Christ - everything that nourishes and strengthens a life that is more external and natural than spiritual and grace-filled. The blessed fruit of faith and promise is called by Isaac, that is, joy: the most significant name for the fruit of the spiritual, inner life is also joy (Gal. 5:22), and joy in the Holy Spirit (Rom. 14:17). Divine visitation with the last prophecy of the birth of Isaac The clear and definitive prediction of the birth of Isaac made to Abraham at the establishment of the covenant of circumcision is followed by a new revelation of the same content. The special intention of this repetition is to instruct Sarah in the promise, just as Abraham was previously instructed. One must think that this was the first Epiphany for her. For this reason, God hides the glory of His appearance under the simple image of human wanderers and makes Himself known to Abraham more than to her, which is not difficult to discern from the narrative of Moses. In the order of this narrative, Moses first shows the general content of the narrative, that this is the Epiphany (Gen. 18:1). Then the image of the Epiphany, or the action of God in human form (Gen. 18:2–8), and finally, the subject of the Epiphany, that is, the very revelation about Isaac (Gen. 18:9–15). Contents of the following story 1. Again the Lord appeared to him at the oak grove of Mamre, when he was sitting at the door of the tent, during the heat of the day. The writer finds it necessary to preface the reader that this is about the appearance of God Himself, since in the following legend three men are presented first (Gen. 18:2), then, in the same persons, the Lord (Gen. 18:22) and two Angels (Gen. 19:1), and therefore one could doubt who visited Abraham. But since the appearances of God Himself can be different and differently understood, this general note by Moses does not completely prevent the research and disagreement of interpreters about the three visitors of Abraham in particular. Saint Ambrose believes that these were the three persons of the Holy Trinity 20. Blessed Augustine has no doubt that these were three created Angels, in whom God was present and known only as in His prophets 21. St. Justin 22, Irenaeus 23, Tertullian 24 and Chrysostom 25 recognize among the three two created Angels and the second Person of the Holy Trinity. Ambrose's opinion, apparently, is favored by the fact that Abraham worships and speaks of three as one (Gen. 19:3), but this was when the Patriarch still considered his visitors to be simple wanderers, and therefore his speech should not refer to the three in general, but to the one foremost among them. Lot speaks in a similar way to his two visitors (Gen. 19:18–19). But they themselves speak about themselves in multiple ways (Gen. 19:13). The opinion of St. Augustine, for the most part, is approved by the newest interpreters, reinforcing it by applying to the present case what the Apostle said, that through their love of hospitability some showed hospitality to Angels without knowing it (Heb. 13:2). But this argument is rejected by the fact that the words of the Apostle can be attributed to Lot, and that he speaks of the visit of Angels, keeping silent about the visit of God, so that the example he presents for imitation does not seem too high and unattainable. To the advantage of the latter opinion, the visitors of Abraham are very clearly distinguished in the following words: two men turned and went from there to Sodom; Abraham still stood before the Lord (Gen. 18:22). The Son of God is especially recognized under the name of the Lord when Abraham calls Him Judge of all the earth, but with this name he convinces Him to show mercy (Gen. 18:24), for such judgment is all given to the Son of God (John 5:22). Two other persons are recognized more from the name of Angels (Gen. 19:1) and reveal themselves to Lot as messengers of the Lord (Gen. 19:13). When asked about the reason for the trinity in which God appeared to Abraham, the Jews answer that one of those who appeared was the herald of the birth of Isaac, the other was the deliverer of Lot, the third was the executor of judgment on Sodom. But this division is unfounded, at least in relation to the last two; because these two together attribute to themselves the destruction of Sodom (Gen. 19:13) and both together save Lot and his family (Gen. 19:15 et seq.). The custom of the Church to represent on icons the mystery of the Holy Trinity in the image of the three Angels who appeared to Abraham shows that pious antiquity precisely included the symbol of the Holy Trinity among these Angels, for, however, one cannot look for this symbol in their faces, since no one has ever represented God the Father and God the Holy Spirit in the image of Angels. This interpretation of the Mamvrian Epiphany must be very ancient, for the symbolic icons in the Church are older than the historical ones. I sat at the door of the tent. With these words, the narrator makes it clear on what occasion God appeared in the form of wanderers. Abraham, out of his love of strangeness, despite the heat of the day, sits at his tent, wanting to see a traveler to whom he could show hospitality. 2. He lifted up his eyes and looked, and behold, three men stood against him. He saw and ran to meet them from the door of the tent, and bowed to the ground. 3. And he said: My lord! If I have found favor in your sight, do not pass by your servant. 4. Let me bring some water and wash your feet; and rest under this tree. 5. And I will bring bread to refresh your hearts; then you will go: for for this reason you pass by your servant. They answered: do as you say. 6. And Abraham hurried to Sarah’s tent and said, “Knead quickly three measures of fine flour and make unleavened bread.” 7. Abraham also ran to the herd, and took a young and fat calf, and gave it to the young man, who hastened to prepare it. 8. And he took butter and milk and the prepared calf, and set it before them; and he stood before them under the tree, and they ate. And three men stood against him. Standing on the path near the house was, in the customs of antiquity, a humble request for hospitality (Odys. A, v. 103). And he bowed to the ground. This worship does not refer to God, whom Abraham had not yet recognized, but to strangers, according to the custom of the country and time. In the same way, Lot bowed to the Angels (Gen. 19:1) and Abraham bowed to the sons of Heth (Gen. 23:7). If I have found grace in your sight, do not pass by your servant. The power of this invitation is accurately depicted by the ancient hospitable Russian greeting: you are welcome. Pious love for one's neighbor, sharing the gifts of God with others, does not think that by doing so he is extending his grace and mercy to others, but considers this to be the grace and mercy of others towards himself. Wash your feet. Among the ancients, the first act of hospitality was the washing of feet (Gen.19:2) and was performed especially before the table (Gen.24:32-33; Judg.19:21). This custom continued until the time of the apostles (1 Tim. 5:10). Residents of hot countries know the value of this treat. I'll bring some bread. Abraham promises less than he fulfills. For this reason you pass near your servant. The host points to a favorable opportunity as a work of Providence in order to justify and reinforce his request. Three measures. The Hebrew name for the measure in this place is סאה third part of ephah. Three such measures add up to more than 30 pounds of our weight (Cumberl. et Bernard, De mensuris et ponderibus veterum). From this Fleury (in the book Morals of the Israelites) concludes that in ancient times people generally consumed larger amounts of food than now. But, perhaps, offering a large amount of food of one kind was between the decencies of the treat, just as now, instead of that, a multitude of dishes of different types is required. So, Joseph at his table gave Benjamin five times more than the other brothers (Gen. 43:34). Unleavened bread. עגות εγϰϱυφιας. A type of bread that is still baked in Arabia on hot sand, under ashes and coals (Trevenot. Itiner. Orienet. L. II. p. 32). And they ate. Jonathan puts it this way: it seemed to him that they were eating. In fact, what did bodily food serve for spiritual beings? The angel who appeared to Manoah denied her (Judges 13:16). Angel Tobiin also says about himself that he did not eat or drink, but only showed a vision of these actions (Tov.12:19). But Blessed Augustine (Serm. 362. De Resurr.) admits that Angels, just like humans, can take food, with the difference that these are by need, and those by choice. To put an end to the bewilderment, it is enough to say that Angels, or spiritual beings in general, can take on a body to the extent that they can also take on bodily food. 9 And they asked him, “Where is Sarah your wife?” He answered: here, in the tent. 10. And the first of them said: I will certainly be with you again at this time, and Sarah your wife will have a son. Sarah heard this through the doors of the tent that were behind it. 11. Abraham and Sarah were old and advanced in years; and the custom among women ceased with Sarah. 12. So Sarah laughed inwardly, saying: Shall I, when I am old, have this consolation? and my lord is old. 13. But the Lord said to Abraham: Why did Sarah laugh, saying: Will I really give birth when I am old? 14. Is there anything difficult for the Lord? At the appointed time, I will be with you at the same time; and Sarah will have a son. 15. Sarah did not confess, but said: I did not laugh. For she came to fear. But He said: no, you laughed. At the same time. From Hebrew literally: like the time of life. To explain this expression, interpreters apply the concept of life either to Abraham and Sarah, then to the son promised to them, or to their visitors themselves. But we must recognize in these words the idiocy of the Hebrew language, which is resolved as follows: at the same time in the continuation of life, that is, throughout the year (2 Kings 4:16-17). In the history of Abraham, we do not see that God actually visited him in a similar way a year after this appearance. Some believe this second visit to be in the event of promise, that is, in the birth of Isaac. But here we can say about Old Testament history the same thing that John said about the Gospel (John 20:30): God did many other miracles before his chosen ones, which are not described in these books; These things are written so that you may believe. Laughed. This laughter of Sarah is not as innocent as the laughter of Abraham in a similar case before. Her laughter, interpreted by God Himself: Am I really going to give birth? and condemned by God Himself: is there anything difficult for the Lord? - without a doubt, along with pleasure, he also contained distrust of the prediction. One thing can serve as an excuse for her, that at that time she had not yet fully recognized the Foreteller, which is why she feared Him after her offense. My lord. That is, the spouse. The Apostle presented this expression of a wife's respect for her husband as a model for the wives of his time (1 Pet. 3:6). I didn't laugh. Apparently, Sarah contradicts herself and her inquiry with this act. She is afraid because she knows the Knower of the Heart, and yet she wants to hide her heart from Him. But this contradiction disappears if we attribute to her the intention not so much to cover up as to correct our error. She not only holds back her laughter, but also wishes that it did not exist at all. She seems to be saying: I believe, help my unbelief. The destruction of Sodom and the accompanying adventures of Lot The story of the destruction of Sodom and the associated adventures of Lot is introduced into the story of Abraham as part of it. It really belongs to it, because in a special way it reveals God’s favor to Abraham, both in the fact that the fate of Sodom was previously shown to him, and in the fact that Lot was pulled out of the abyss for him (Gen. 19:29). The details of this narrative are as follows: the revelation to Abraham about the fate of Sodom (Gen. 18:16-21), Abraham's prayerful conversation with God about the ways of justice and mercy (Gen. 18:22-32), Lot's hospitality (Gen. 19:1-3), the extreme corruption of the Sodomites (Gen. 19:4-11), the last experience of preaching about the approaching judgment ( Gen. 19:12–14), the expulsion of Lot from Sodom ( Gen. 19:15–17 ), the preservation of Zoar for his sake ( Gen. 19:18–23 ), the execution of Sodom ( Gen. 19:24–25 ), the misfortune of Lot’s wife ( Gen. 19:26 ), the conclusion of the narrative ( Gen. 19:27–29 ), the addition of Lot’s descendants ( Gen. 19:30–38 ). 16. Then these men arose and turned from there to Sodom; Abraham walked with them, seeing them off. 17. Then the Lord said: Will I hide from Abraham (my servant) what I want to do? 18. From Abraham will certainly come a great and strong nation, and in him all the nations of the earth will be blessed. 19. For I began to know him because he would command his sons and his household after him to walk in the way of the Lord and to be good and just, so that the Lord might fulfill on Abraham what he said about him. 20. And the Lord said, The cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is great, and their sins are very grievous. 21. I will go and see and find out whether they have accomplished that about which the cry goes up to Me, or not? Seeing them off. Although Abraham, without a doubt, recognized the Lord from His conversation, he nevertheless accompanies Him in the same way as he received Him, that is, as a stranger. He does this out of reverence and obedience, just as subjects of a king who appeared under a false name and in the appearance of an unknown person would not dare to pay royal honors. Then the Lord said. The following speech of God contains three things: Abraham's preparation for the revelation (Gen. 18:17), the motive for the revelation (Gen. 18:18–19), and the revelation of Sodom itself (Gen. 18:20–21). Will I hide it and so on? God anticipates Abraham about the subsequent revelation of His will, as if he could not hide it from him. Such is the closeness of blessed people to God. It is as if He has no secret for them (Ps. 24:14). His will is, as it were, naturally reflected in the soul devoted to Him. And so on will certainly come from Abraham. With the favor of God, the decisive and special reason why the fate of Sodom is revealed to Abraham is that a blessed people should come from it. Thus, the intention of this revelation is: to commemorate future generations the adventure of Sodom through such a people in which it would be known longer and more accurately, and to betray it so that it does not seem to be a matter of chance, but a pre-prepared action of the judgment of God, preceded by long-suffering and accompanied by mercy. For I began to know him because of what he would command his sons and his household after him. Knowledge here means election (Amos 3:2). Continuing to explain the reason for the subsequent revelation, God also points to the reason for the initial election of Abraham, which he believes to be foreknowledge (Rom. 8:29). Walk in the way of the Lord and be kind and just. This, in fact, is the subject of grace-filled foreknowledge and the basis of election. The way of the Lord is the way of law and love (Deut. 8:6, 10:12). Good and just, or, literally from Hebrew, truth and judgment, also embrace all the duties of a person who pleases God with such a difference, as it seems, that under the name of truth there are especially duties towards God (Gen. 15:6; Luke 1:6.), and under the name of judgment - duties towards others (Is. 1:17). The cry of Sodom. The appropriate sign of the word cry can be deduced from the corresponding word sins here and also from the opposite word of truth in Isaiah (Is. 5:7). But how and what particular untruths and sins constitute a cry? The cry to God is attributed in Holy Scripture to the blood of Cain (Gen.4:10), the poor (Ps.9:13; Job 34:28), and martyrs (Rev.6:10). Therefore, the cry of Sodom can mean the cry of the innocence oppressed by the iniquities of the Sodomites, of which we see an example in Lot, who, living among them, was daily tormented in his good soul by what he saw and heard (2 Pet. 2:8). Otherwise, a sinful cry to God can mean such depravity that, subverting the very foundations of piety and good morals, the very rights of nature, cannot be corrected by human and natural means, but calls on the vengeful hand of God. Hence the name known in the Church for egregious sins. I’ll go take a look and find out if it’s completed, etc. That is, has Sodom already reached the extreme degree of its iniquities, and is its corruption so complete that long-suffering is useless and correction is impossible (1 Samuel 20:33). In order to reconcile the test visit to Sodom with God's omniscience, one must imagine that God, in justification of His destinies and for the instruction of future generations, deigns to reveal to Abraham, on the one hand, the extreme wickedness of the Sodomites, on the other, His long-suffering and, finally, righteous condemnation. It is His will to explain all this either in the words of human language or in other intelligible signs. So, He chooses for this the sensory action of a test visit, which for those who have simple concepts about the Divine is more significant than verbal explanations. A sensual visit to Sodom was also necessary for Lot’s deliverance, and the form of invisibility accepted by God also had something to do with Abraham, which called him to intercede for Lot, which can be seen in the continuation of this conversation. Prayerful conversation about the paths of justice and mercy 22. Meanwhile. two men turned and went from there to Sodom; Abraham still stood before the Lord. 23. And Abraham drew near and said, “Will You destroy the righteous with the wicked?” 24. Perhaps there will be fifty righteous people in this city? Will you really destroy and not spare that place for the fifty righteous who are there?25. It cannot be that You would do such a thing, that You should destroy the righteous with the wicked, that the same thing should happen to the righteous as to the wicked; cannot be from You! Will the judge of all the earth act unjustly? 26. The Lord said: If I find fifty righteous people in the city of Sodom, I will spare this whole place for them. 27. Abraham answered, “I dare now to speak to the Lord, though I am dust and ashes.” 28. Maybe there will be five missing to reach fifty righteous people? Will you really destroy the whole city for the lack of five? He said: I will not destroy if I find forty-five righteous people there. 29. Abraham, continuing his speech with him, said: Perhaps there will be forty righteous people there? He said: I will not do this even for forty righteous people. 30. After this, Abraham said: May my Lord not be angry if I say again, maybe there will be thirty righteous people there? He said: I won’t do it if I find even thirty there. 31. Abraham said: I dare again to say to the Lord: perhaps there will be twenty righteous people there? He said: I will not destroy even twenty. 32. Abraham said: May my Lord not be angry if I say one more time: perhaps there will be ten righteous people there? He said: I will not destroy even ten. 33. And the Lord departed after finishing his conversation with Abraham; Abraham returned to his place. Abraham still stood before the Lord. Onkelos thinks that Abraham stood before God in prayer. Indeed, standing before the face of God sometimes means praying (Jer. 15:1). But the word also shows that the writer is speaking here simply about Abraham’s continued sensory presence before God who appeared. And Abraham drew near. Or, out of reverence, he has stood until now at some distance from the Lord; or he hesitated for some time whether to open his feelings, while the Lord seemed to be leaving. Will You destroy the righteous with the wicked? This and subsequent questions of Abraham should not be taken as a simple act of curiosity testing the destinies of God, since in this case not one of them would be worthy of God’s answer. All of them have a prayer sign for pardon for sinners for the sake of the righteous. In particular, Abraham has Lot in mind here, who was later saved through his prayer (Gen. 19:29) He does not pronounce his name either because he recognizes the audacity of his intercession, or because he relies on the omniscience of the Lord. Maybe there are fifty righteous people in this city? Abraham does not mention babies here, although these sometimes prompt God to mercy, as we see in prophecy (John 4:11). From this it can again be noted that the subject of his intercession is especially Lot. Maybe there will be five missing to reach fifty righteous people, etc. That is, if fifty righteous people would save a city, but there are only forty-five in it, then does the lack of five make such a difference that it will decide the fate of the whole city to its destruction? And the Lord departed. It is not known whether Abraham stopped his prayerful inquiries, imagining that, of course, there would be ten righteous people in Sodom, or whether God interrupted his conversation with him by His departure. So that it does not seem unfinished, it should be noted that it is complemented by the very adventures of Sodom and Lot. XIX. 1. Meanwhile two Angels came to Sodom at dusk, while Lot was sitting at the gates of Sodom. Lot saw and stood up to meet them and bowed down with his face to the ground. 2. And he said: my lords! Please, go now to your servant’s house and spend the night and wash your feet, and when you get up in the morning, you will go on your way. But they said: no, we spend the night on the street. 3. But he begged them earnestly, and they went in to him and came to his house. He made food for them and baked unleavened bread, and they ate. Lot was sitting at the gates of Sodom. The gates of the ancients were the place of elders and public and private affairs (Gen.34:20; Deut.21:19; Ruth.4:1). Therefore, the rabbis think that Lot was one of the judges of Sodom. But this does not agree with the narrative of Moses (Gen. 19:9). It is likely that Lot was at the city gates, looking for an opportunity to show hospitality to strangers. No, we spend the night on the street. The angels hide their intention to visit Lot for a while, in order to further reveal his zeal. We have a similar example in Jesus Christ himself (Luke 24:28–29). The Extreme Depravity of the Sodomites 4. They had not yet gone to bed when the city dwellers, the Sodomites, from young to old, all the people from all parts of the city, surrounded the house, 5. and began to call Lot, and said to him: “Where are the people who came to you this night?” Bring them out to us, we will know them. 6. Lot went out to them from the house and, having locked the doors behind him, 7. said: Please, brothers, do no evil. 8. Here I have two daughters who do not know their husband; I’d rather bring them out to you, do whatever you want with them, just don’t do that with these people, for they came under the roof of my house for this safety. 9. But they said: Come here! And they said: Can one stranger who has come here judge us? For this we will do worse to you than to them. And they stepped on the man, Lot, with violence and came up to break down the doors. 10. Then the guests stretched out their hands, and took Lot into their house, and locked the doors, 11. And they struck the people who were behind the doors of the house with blindness, so that they were tormented, looking for the doors. The words: all the people, of course, cannot be accepted here in an accurate and complete sign. They denote a large mixed crowd. However, such an incredible rush of the brutal crowd towards the two wanderers is explained by the hope of impunity. From the words of the Sodomites to Lot (Gen. 19:9) it is clear that public court and civil rights could still set some limits to their mutual outrages; but where they did not fear civil law, they trampled on the rights of humanity and nature. Now, I have two daughters and so on. St. Chrysostom (In Genes. Hom. 43) says that this act of Lot is above any kind of strangeness. But some of the newest interpreters condemn it, believing that in order to avert an atrocity, one should not give advice to another atrocity, rather than save innocence by destroying innocence (Calm, in h. I). In order to give this act a true purpose, it must be noted separately that Lot, instead of a greater crime, offers the Sodomites a lesser one, just as someone would offer to a robber attempting to commit murder, to reduce the evil, to be content with robbery; that he exposes his daughters only to misfortune, and not to crime, for violence cannot violate chastity; that the rights of hospitality, especially important in ancient times, and in general love for one’s neighbor would justify him if he sacrificed his life for the innocent strangers who entrusted themselves to his house; on the same basis he sacrifices family honor; that he could hope with such an unexpected and courageous proposal to completely avert any atrocity, since his family was in Sodom under the protection of civil rights, which were still somewhat respected by the lawless. With all this, we must admit that Lot’s first mistake, or sin, is that he lived and was disposed to enter into family ties among a people whose depravity could not be unknown to him. They were struck with blindness. This was not loss of vision, but a certain disorder of sensations and imagination, which prevented us from distinguishing and recognizing objects, just as this happened to the Syrian army through the prayer of Elisha (2 Kings 6:18–20). Last Salvation Sermon in Sodom 12. Finally the guests said to Lot: Who else do you have here? Whether your son-in-law, your sons, or your daughters, and whoever you have in this city, bring them all out of this place. 18. For we will immediately destroy this place, because the cry to God from here is great, and the Lord has sent us to destroy it. 14. And so Lot went and spoke to his sons-in-law, who were taking his daughters for themselves, and said: Arise, get out of this place, for the Lord will immediately destroy this city, but it seemed to his sons-in-law that he was joking. Showing special favor to Lot, God at the same time pours out the last drops of the oil of His goodness on the unworthy people and gives the last evidence of the need for His judgment on them. Both the judgment and the means of salvation are revealed in good time, although without success, to the relatives of Lot, that is, the best of the Sodomites, so that after this judgment no one would think that Sodom could be saved like Nineveh. Lot's sons-in-law were probably those to whom Lot's two daughters, who were still in his house, were betrothed. 15. When dawn rose, the Angels began to hurry Lot, saying: Arise, take your wife and your two daughters who are here, so that you too do not perish for the iniquities of this city. 16. But as he hesitated, they, by the mercy of the Lord towards him, took him by the hands, and his wife, and his two daughters, and brought him out and placed him outside the city. 17. When they took them out of the city, one said: save your life, don’t look back and don’t stop anywhere on the plain, save yourself on the mountain so that you don’t die. He hesitated. Such are earthly passions that even mortal danger does not suddenly dissolve their bonds. One said. It seems that here the Lord appears to Lot, as before to Abraham, for it is incredible that anyone but Him would have the power to decide the fate of Zoar (Gen. 19:21). Don't look back. Some think that it is not so much the view of Sodom that is forbidden here, but dangerous slowness in those places that should perish with it. But it is not surprising if even one glance at Sodom is prohibited for the temptation of faith and obedience, or even because of the natural danger from the destructive forces flowing from such an extraordinary fire. Escape to the mountain. That is, to the mountains of Moab, as they were later called. For Zoar, which should lie on the way to the mountains of Lot’s refuge, belongs to Moab (Is. 15:5; Jer. 48:33–34). 18. But Lot said to them: No, Lord! 19. Behold, Thy servant has found grace in Thy sight, and great is Thy mercy which Thou hast done to me, that Thou hast saved my life; but I cannot escape to the mountain, lest this misfortune overtakes me and I die. 20. Look, it’s closer to flee to this city, but it’s small; let me escape into it, isn't it true that it is small? my life would be preserved in it. 21. To this he said to him: Behold, I will do this favor to you, so as not to destroy the city of which you speak. 22. Do not delay, save yourself in it, for I cannot do my work until you go there. From this adventure the name of this city was given, Zoar. 23. The sun rose over the earth, and Lot came to Zoar. I can't escape to the mountain. That is, I cannot quickly reach the mountains, and meanwhile the destruction will begin and reach me. He's small. Lot says this twice, justifying his request, so that it does not seem daring and contrary to the judgment of God. I will do you this favor too. More precisely from the Hebrew: I accept your face in this. This expression contains the concept of partiality, which, in fact, is the action of the court, based on the qualities of the person being tried, and not on the quality of the case. It can be twofold: either showing mercy to one while violating the rights of another, or merciful and elevating someone without offending others. The first is not characteristic of God (Deut. 10:17) and is forbidden by the law to man (Deut. 16:19). The latter is an advantage of supreme power. 24. Then Jehovah sent brimstone and fire from the Lord out of heaven to rain on Sodom and Gomorrah. 25. And he destroyed these cities, and all this plain, and all the inhabitants of these cities, and all the growth of the earth. The Jews do not find any particular significance in the amplification of the name of Jehovah in this place, but explain it simply from the properties of the language. But some Christian teachers find here an indication of the division of the persons of the Holy Trinity (Ignae. Ep. ad Aneideh). According to this guess, the text can be stated as follows: The Lord, who appeared to Abraham, rained brimstone and fire on Sodom and Gomorrah, from Jehovah, who unapparently abides in heaven. Sodom and Gomorrah are mentioned here as the most notable of the lost cities, which Moses names four in the book of Deuteronomy (Deut. 29:23), and the book of Wisdom (Wis. 10:6) counts five. This last number, perhaps, is Zohar. Ezekiel (Ezekiel 16:48) also mentions the daughters of Sodom, that is, the cities subordinate to Sodom. Some explain the action of the destruction of Sodom as an action of nature. It is believed that sulfur and fire in the legend of Moses mean the same as sulfuric fire, and sulfuric fire is the same as the fire of lightning, usually accompanied by a sulfuric smell; that strong lightning ignited not only the villages, but also the land of the Jordanian plain, which was replete with bitumen and oil, substances of the same kind that easily ignite; that as a result of this fire and, perhaps, the earthquake that was added to it, the Jordanian plain, which was previously low and filled with water, became even deeper, then completely flooded and, giving the water the properties of soil, turned into the so-called Dead Sea. It is not difficult to agree that this explanation is probable. The only thing that has not been proven is that the words brimstone and fire definitely mean lightning. Their signs cannot be determined by their use in other places of Holy Scripture (Ps. 10:6; Ezek. 38:22). For these passages, not without reason, can be taken as indications of the history of Sodom and therefore should be explained by it, and not explained by it. It is necessary to recognize a supernatural action in the consumption of Sodom: since it was predicted by God; since the Angels attribute it to God as the first cause, and to themselves as instruments (Gen. 19:13); since the fire brought down by Jehovah from the Lord, by the intensity of this expression itself, means something more than a simple action of nature. And in other places of Holy Scripture, fire from the face of Jehovah (Lev.9:24), also fire from heaven (2 Chronicles 7:1) means miraculous fire. Some prophets speak of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah as the final destruction (Isa.13:19–20; Jer.49:18; Zeph.2:9). But Ezekiel, calling Sodom and Samaria sisters of Jerusalem in iniquity, predicts conversion and restoration for all of them (Ezek. 16:46–47, 53, 55). Jerome points to Sodom on the shores of the Dead Sea. The history of the Christian Churches mentions the Bishop of Sodom, who belonged to the metropolis of Petra (Labb, t. 1. Concl.). One must think that the prophet's Sodom means the debauchery of the pagans; in Jerome - the ruins or traces of a city, and in church history - a city that has nothing in common with ancient Sodom except the name, and no connection except confused legends. 22. Lot’s wife looked back and became an idol of salt. Some of the newest interpreters, unable to agree with the way they thought about this transformation of Lot’s wife, turn her idol into a monument erected to her (Michaelis); and others (Date, Meissner) try to interpret from the words of Moses only the meaning that she is stuck in salt. On the contrary, the ancients generally believed that Lot’s wife was turned into a stone and salt image or pillar (Wis.10:7). Clement of Rome says that this image remained until his days (Ep, ad Corinth. P. XI). Josephus (Antiq. L. I, p. 12.) writes that he even saw it himself. This transformation can be represented in this way: fear and pity could lead a cowardly woman into frenzy and insensibility; the outflow from the fierce fire with sulfur and salt (Deut. 29:23) - completely kill; and then the earth and air, also saturated with sulfur and salt, complete petrification. Abbot Rousseau (Secrets de I, Abbe Rousseau), traveling through Arabia, found in this country a petrifying power in amazing abundance. However, the ancient, and according to antiquity important, opinion about the petrification of Lot’s wife should not be indiscriminately mixed with legends that do not have a pure source about the ongoing female seizures of her idol, about the daily renewal of the parts taken away from it (Carm. de Sodoma in org. Tert. Iren. L. IV, p. 51.) and the news of those who travel, which do not agree with each other. If this idol does not exist now, therefore it cannot yet be said that it did not exist. The crime that destroyed Lot's wife was not so much a view of Sodom as disobedience to the commandment of God and addiction to the dwelling of depravity (Luke 17:31-32). Conclusion of the previous story 27 Meanwhile Abraham went in the morning to the place where he stood before the Lord. 28 And when he looked towards Sodom and Gomorrah, and throughout the whole expanse of the plain, he saw smoke rising from the earth like the smoke of a furnace. 29. Thus, when God destroyed the cities of this plain, God remembered Abraham and brought Lot out of the midst of destruction, while he destroyed the cities in which Lot lived. The fact that Abraham hastens to see Sodom is a consequence of his conversation with God, according to which he remained waiting. God remembered Abraham and brought Lot out. This conclusion of the legend about Sodom reveals the connection of this legend with the history of Abraham, resolves and complements the conversation of the Lord with Abraham, which in its content was, as it were, interrupted and unfinished, and justifies the mercy of God to the family of Lot, which in their adventures, after leaving Sodom, seems unworthy of it. Addition about Lot's descendants 30. Then Lot left Zoar and began to live in the mountain, and his two daughters with him: for he was afraid to live in Zoar. And so he lived in a cave, and his two daughters were with him. 31. And the elder said to the younger: Our father is old; and there is no one on this earth who would take us in marriage according to the custom of all the earth; 32. So let us give our father wine to drink and sleep with him, and we will receive children from our father. 33. And that night they gave their father wine to drink; and the eldest went and slept with her father: but he did not recognize her either when she lay down or when she got up. 34. The next day the eldest said to the younger: behold, yesterday I slept with my father; let us give him wine to drink this night; and you go and sleep with him in order to receive children from our father. 35. And they made their father drink wine that night; and the youngest got up and went to sleep with him: but he did not recognize her either when she went to bed or when she got up. 36. Thus both of Lot's daughters conceived from their father. 37. The eldest gave birth to a son and called his name Moab, this is the father of the Moabites, so called to this day. 38. The younger also gave birth to a son and named him Ben-Ammi; this is the father of the Ammonites, so called to this day. The story of Lot's family can have two purposes: to explain the final idea of ​​the previous story, that Lot was preserved for Abraham's sake, and to give the Israelites the necessary understanding of the origins of the Moabites and Ammonites. I was afraid to live in Tsohar. Lot could have been intimidated by the proximity of the ongoing Sodom fire and the Sodomite morals of the inhabitants of Zoar. But since he was already reassured by God about the safety of the city (Gen. 19:21), his flight from it was an act of lack of faith, which is why it was accompanied by new confusion. Lived in a cave. This type of dwelling, although it shows need, was not unusual in the countries lying around Judea (Hab.1:3). There is no one on earth and so on. You must distinguish between the words: earth and all earth. The latter here means the universe, and the former means the country. Lot's daughters were threatened with husbandlessness by his removal from the community, poverty, and the fact that the country from which he came had become a terrible parable in the world. We will receive children from our father. A good intention, but which does not justify illegal means. However, the Holy Scripture tells about the incest of Lot, without condemning or justifying it, - this is an instruction to us, so that, looking at the examples presented to us, we should not judge others so much as judge ourselves (1 Cop. 11:31). “I fear,” says Origen (in Genes. Hom. V), “that this incest will not be purer than the purity of many.” Sodom and Gomorrah, according to the Apostle Jude (Jude 1:7), are an example, having been punished with eternal fire. Jesus Christ likens the day of Lot's departure from Sodom to the day of His appearance and commands that Lot's wife be remembered (Luke 17:28–32). The last executions of the enemies of God in the Apocalypse (Rev. 14:10–11, 19:20, 20:9–10) are depicted with the same features as the execution of Sodom. These meetings boil down to the general idea that the fate of Sodom and Lot represents in a small way the fate of the world and man. The whole world and the visible heavens are reserved for fire for the day of judgment and destruction of wicked people (2 Pet. 3:7). The time of judgment will come unexpectedly while they are eating, drinking, buying, selling, planting, building. It is postponed only until the number of the chosen and sealed is filled, who, like Lot, must leave the pernicious land before its destruction. Those who come from the world are brought out of it by the hand of the Lord, although not always visible; others swear by what is coming, they themselves do not see their own path. Those leaving must hurry and not look around: No one who takes up a plow and looks back will lead himself into the kingdom of God (Luke 9:62). Safety and salvation in grief lies in constant withdrawal from the world, approaching God and exploring His will. But whoever God brought into the small city should no longer look for other ways to his safety, but should preach repentance, grace and salvation to others. The soul, filled with images of the world, and the flesh, averse to mortification, are dangerous interlocutors of the spirit, which, after leaving the world, begins to enter itself. One must watch over them and not put them to sleep. The wisdom that is carried with them from the world is like wine taken along the path. Some, thinking to strengthen and encourage themselves with this wine during times of fatigue and despondency, darken their pure meaning and insensitively fall into the works of darkness. Temptation of Abraham at Gerar 1. Abraham went from there to the land of midday, and began to live between Kadesh and Shur; and came to Gerar for a time. 2. And Abraham said of Sarah his wife, This is my sister (for he was afraid to say that this was his wife, lest the inhabitants of that city should kill him for her). And Abimelech king of Gerar sent and took Sarah. 3. But God came to Abimelech in a dream at night and said to him: behold, you will die for this woman, for she has a husband, 4. However, Abimelech did not touch her and therefore said: Lord! Will You really destroy an innocent people? 5. Didn’t he himself say to me, “This is my sister?” And she herself said: this is my brother. I did this with a simple heart and clean hands. 6. And God said to him in a dream: And I know that you did this with a simple heart: therefore I kept you from sin before Me; That’s why I didn’t allow you to touch her. 7. Now return the wife to her husband: for he is a Prophet, and he will pray for you, and you will live; and if you do not return it, then know that you and all yours will certainly die. 8. Abimelech arose early, and called all his servants, and spake all these words in their ears; and these people were very afraid. 9. Then Abimelech called Abraham and said to him, “What have you done to us?” How did I sin against you that you brought such a great sin upon me and my kingdom? You have done things to us that are not done. 10. Abimelech also said to Abraham: What did you see, why did you act in this way? 11. Abraham answered: because I said within myself: perhaps there is no fear of God in this place; and therefore they will kill me for my wife. 12. And besides, she is truly my sister; She is the daughter of my father, but not the daughter of my mother, and she became my wife. 13. And so when God led me from my father’s house to wander, I said to her: do this kindness to me: wherever we come, say everywhere about me: this is my brother. 14. Then Abimelech took (a thousand didrachms of silver), and flocks and herds, and male and female servants, and gave them to Abraham, and restored to him Sarah his wife. 15. And Abimelech said, Behold, my land is before thee; live where you please. 16 And he said to Sarah, Behold, I have given your brother a thousand shekels of silver; Behold, this is a covering for your eyes, before all those who are with you and before all others, so that they may know you. 17. And Abraham prayed to God; and God healed Abimelech, and his wife, and his handmaids, and they began to give birth. 18. For the Lord completely shut up every womb in the house of Abimelech for Sarah Abraham's wife. Abraham's adventure in Gerar is, so to speak, a repetition of what happened to him in Egypt (Gen. 12:11-20). The holy narrator, offering two such similar incidents, teaches that the same stumbling blocks that the righteous hit at the beginning of their path can be found throughout the course and even at the end of it; and that faith, even after the clearest promises and the grandest revelations, has ghost times. The time of the adventure of Gerar (about which some are perplexed) cannot be other than that which is revealed from the order of the narrative of Moses, that is, between the destruction of Sodom and the birth of Isaac. For the order of the story obviously follows here the order of Abraham's journeys. From the time of separation from Lot until the destruction of Sodom, Abraham was constantly at the oak grove of Mamre (Gen. 13:18, 14:13, 18:1, 19:27–28). After the birth of Isaac, he was already in the land of Gerar, or in general the Philistines, and dwelt in it for many days (Gen. 21:33–34). Consequently, the migration to Gerar must be placed exactly in the time that elapsed between the destruction of Sodom and the birth of Isaac. And since this time is one year (Gen. 18:10), it is necessary that what happened in the house of Abimelech happened in a short time before the conception of Isaac or shortly after his conception, when Sarah’s appearance still could not recognize her as pregnant. Through the concept of the time of Abraham's resettlement to Gerar, the reason for the resettlement becomes clear: the horror of the execution of Sodom and the sulfuric poisonous stench that spread from the place of extermination. Abraham went from there. That is, from the Mamre oak grove. Gerar. One of the ancient Philistine villages on the southern border of the land of Canaan (Gen.10:19). For he was afraid and so on. This explanation is read only in the Greek text and was probably added by guesswork, following the example of a similar legend in Chapter XII. Abimelech king of Gerar sent and took Sarah. It is worthy of note that it is not said here, as before in a similar case, about the beauty of Sarah, who is now, of course, no longer in the years of blooming beauty, having been 90 years old from birth. It can be assumed that Abimelech’s intention to enter into marriage with Sarah was inclined to, through this family connection, add to his people and kingdom the populous, strong, rich and dangerous for him house of Abraham outside the union. God came to Abimelech. So persistent is Providence from those who trust in God. While in the natural course of things there was no barrier left for Abimelech from sin and no barrier for Abraham from disaster, God Himself comes to intercede for the safety of one and to keep the other from falling into sin. Behold, you will die. At first glance, these words represent a decisive definition of condemnation and execution. But soon after this, God says that He kept Abimelech from sin, and offers him life and death according to what he does with Sarah. This weakening of the initially strict threat should not seem like a contradiction and vicissitude unworthy of the speaking God: it is an action of justice combined with mercy. Every threat to the word of God has a double reason and intention - condemnation of the sinner and a call to conversion. Therefore, the same petition to a person on the path of sin is heard as a stern voice of condemnation, and on the path of beginning conversion - as a meek voice of calling. For she has a husband. Abimelech is condemned not for Abraham's wife, but in general for a wife who has a husband. Thus, death is proclaimed here for all adultery. God! Will you really destroy the innocent people? Some guess that Abimelech with these words compares himself and his people with the Sodomites. In fact, the relationship in which Abimelech now finds himself with Abraham is, in appearance, similar to those in which the Sodomites were with Lot and the Angels who were strangely received from him; and God also threatens Abimelech with destruction. When Abimelech speaks about the danger of an entire nation, he assumes that the king’s sin, along with the execution, can fall on the people, which is also clear from his subsequent words to Abraham (Gen. 20:9). The truth of this assumption is confirmed by the words of God’s rebuke: you and all yours will die. The clearest example of such a judgment of God is David, who was punished for the numbering of the people by a deadly plague that lasted three days throughout the entire nation of Israel (2 Samuel 24:15-17). The foundations of God's destinies like this are deeply hidden in the abyss of God's wisdom, so that human eyes cannot always open them. However, it can be noted that a person who rules in society with the power of spirit, both by his external power, and by example and, as it were, by the transfusion of his spirit, arouses in those around him those qualities that are aroused in him; and, disposing them to common virtues or vices, thus posits a natural basis for the same fate. Spirits, installed as leaders of others, according to the Divine order, should be the first successors of the highest powers and gifts for themselves and others; opening or blocking the path of grace to themselves, they at the same time open or close it for others. Without a doubt, the truth of God knows how to observe in public punishments, so that if the case that opens them is not the crime of everyone, the severity of the disaster, fragmented, falls on everyone in such an extent that would correspond to his internal state in particular. Kept you from sin. God showed this mercy to Abimelech first through some illness of his (Gen. 20:17-18), which made Sarah inviolable; and then by this very revelation. Prophet נביא (whether derived from נוב to bear fruit, in a figurative sense, to pronounce words (Prov. 10:31) or better from the Arabic נבא to proclaim), in general, means a messenger or interpreter. In this sense, Aaron is called the prophet of Moses (Ex. 7:1). Abraham is called a prophet especially because God wants, through him as an interpreter, to accept the prayer of Abimelech. And in subsequent times, the prophets were both messengers of the will of God among people, and messengers of human petitions before God; and prayer was the test stone of true prophets (Jer. 14:11, 27:18). The word נביא prophet leads some into temptation to doubt the authenticity or integrity of the books of Moses, for they say that this word came into use after the time of the Judges (1 Samuel 9:9). But the saying of the book of Kings, which gave rise to this doubt, means only that the word seer fell out of popular use and that instead of it the word prophet became used, and not that this last word did not exist in the language at all until that time. It must be assumed that this word has been used since ancient times; that during the time of the judges in popular conversation it was replaced by the word ראה seer, or seer, which is more understandable in origin; Finally, in tsarist, more educated times, with the help of books, it again came into general use. All his slaves. That is, those of the subjects who either serve in the royal court or have access to it. Things that don't get done. That is, what should not be done. The expression is modest. What did you see? and so on. That is, have you seen anything here that would make you wary and resort to cunning? Have you seen wives kidnapped or foreigners killed here? Truly sister. The Jews consider Sarah to be one and the same person with Eskha, the daughter of Arran (Gen. 11:29), and they think that the words: daughter of my father, but not the daughter of my mother, mean the birth of Arran not from the same mother as Abraham. Others, more simply, believe that Sarah was the daughter of Terah, not the same mother as Abraham. The danger of being lost among the pagans could lead a pious house to the extreme of entering into such marriages. However, the power of the natural law, which speaks against incest, had its effect not only in Abraham, but also in the Canaanites. This can be seen from the fact that in the name of his sister, given to his wife, he hoped to completely hide his marriage from them; so especially from the fact that, having spoken about his marriage with his sister, he immediately added in apology for this union: not my mother’s daughter. When God led me and so on. Literally from Hebrew: When Elohim led me, etc. The word Elohim is stated in this place: about the idolatrous princes of the Chaldeans, from whom Abraham withdrew. But it was not they who actually forced him to wander; about God according to the concept of Abimelech. But Abimelech, like Abraham, was a worshiper of the one God; about the Angels who guided Abraham. But there is a good reason to attribute it to the true God, for he led Abraham from his father's house (Gen. 12:1). It may seem strange that here God is spoken of in plurality and without the meaning of unity; but there are other places of Holy Scripture in which the same image of expression is used (Gen. 35:7; 2 Sam. 7:23. Compare: 1 Chron. 17:21). The spirit of this expression is that it signifies the action of the one God, coupled with the mediating forces that serve Him, but are higher and Divine for people. Behold, my land is before you. In this case, Abimelech is not like Pharaoh. This latter fears the righteous and removes him from himself; and the first seeks cohabitation and peace with him. This is a cover for your eyes and so on. This expression comes from the custom according to which women wore a veil over their faces as a sign of modesty and submission to their husband (Gen. 24:65; 1 Cor. 11:10). The meaning of the words of Abimelech (which are subject to various interpretations, but which a detailed study would not bring much benefit) is probably the following: “behold, this is all that has now happened - your care for your spouse at the risk of your own, miracles for your safety, the glorious cessation of temptation - this is your covering of eyes, the best decoration and evidence of your chastity and marital fidelity, which have now become reliably known to everyone.” The Lord completely shut up every womb. One cannot think that this was barrenness, for barrenness could not be quickly noticed, and Sarah could not have been safe if Abimelech had not been quickly brought to his senses. Perhaps the conclusion of the womb consisted in the fact that pregnant women could not be delivered from their burden, or in another similar extraordinary thing, by which one could soon recognize the punishing hand of God. Birth and inheritance of Isaac 1. And the Lord visited Sarah, as he had said; and the Lord did to Sarah as he had spoken. 2. Sarah conceived and bore Abraham a son in his old age, at the appointed time that God had foretold to him. 3 And Abraham called the name of the son who was born to him, whom Sarah bore to him, Isaac. 4. And Abraham circumcised Isaac his son eight days old, as God commanded him. 5 Now Abraham was a hundred years old when Isaac his son was born to him. 6. Then Sarah said, “God has made me laugh; whoever hears about me will laugh. 7. And she said, Who would have said to Abraham, Sarah will suckle the children? for in his old age I gave birth to a son. 8. The child has grown and is weaned; and Abraham made a great feast on the day that Isaac was weaned. 9. And Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian, whom she bore to Abraham, laughing (at her son Isaac); 10. And she said to Abraham, Drive out this slave girl and her son; for the son of this servant shall not inherit with my son Isaac. 11. These words seemed very cruel to Abraham because of his son. 12. But God said to Abraham: Do not be upset for the boy and for your servant; Whatever Sarah says to you, obey her word: for in Isaac your seed will be called. 13. However, even from the son of the slave woman I will make a nation, because he too is your seed. 14 So Abraham rose early and took bread and a skin of water; and he gave it to Hagar, placing it on her shoulders, and gave it to the boy, and sent her away. She went and got lost in the desert of Beershava. 15. And when the water from the fur was all exhausted, she left the boy under one bush 16. and went and sat aside, leaving one shot from the bow. For she said: I don’t want to see the boy dying. And so she sat down to the side, and raised a cry, and wept. 17. And God heard the voice of the lad; and the Angel of God called Hagar from heaven and said to her: What are you, Hagar? don't be afraid; God heard the voice-actor from the place where he is. 18. Arise, take the lad and strengthen him with your hand, for I will make from him a great nation. 19. Then God opened her eyes, and she saw a source of water, and she went and filled a bottle with water, and gave the boy a drink. 20. And God was with the boy; and he grew up and began to live in the desert; and became an archer. 21. He lived in the desert of Paran; and his mother took him a wife out of the land of Egypt. The story of the birth of Isaac is preceded by an introduction that preliminarily sets out the spirit of this story, which is to show the true event of the words of God's promise (Gen. 21:1). In accordance with this intention, the continuation of the legend shows the birth itself with its time, which was predicted (Gen. 18:10), (Gen. 21: 2, 5); naming, also predicted (Gen.17:19), (Gen.21:3); circumcision, in accordance with what God predicted and the preservation of His law in the tribe of Abraham (Gen.18:19), (Gen.21:4); the joy of the birth of Isaac, predicted in his very name (Gen. 21:6–7); confirmation of his rights as an heir with the exception of Ishmael, to whom Isaac was preferred, also even before his birth (Gen. 17:19–21), (Gen. 21:8–14). Finally, so that Ishmael does not seem completely rejected, a narrative is added about his preservation and the establishment of his house (Gen. 21:14-21). Visited. The visitation of God here does not mean the appearance of God, as some people think, although, however, God promised such a phenomenon at the time of the birth of Isaac (Gen. 18:10). The writer himself explains the word visited with the word created. God visits with the actions of His Providence, tangible and decisive. The essence of visiting judgment (Exodus 20:5, 32:34) and visiting mercy (Genesis 50:24; Exodus 3:16). God, as it were, approaches man in them in order to bring man closer to Himself. Thus He visited Sarah when, through the miraculous birth of Isaac, He revealed in her the power of His grace and gave new strength to her faith. As he said - as he said. With this aggravated indication of the word of God, the writer, in addition to showing the exact and indispensable event of the words of promise and delineating the image of the next narrative, especially reveals the true image of the visit of God and the birth of Isaac. His birth does not initially refer to Abraham and Sarah, not to human nature or merit, but to the word of God. They had the blessed fruit of the womb, because God spoke in them His all-fruitfulness: let it be. Justice requires that all benefits acceptable from God be primarily and solely attributed to His word, promise, and grace. Isaac. The naming of this name, like some others in ancient times, is a kind of confession of faith in the promise. For since the promise was connected with this name even before the birth of the son of Sarah, Abraham could not impose the name until he had attached the promise to it by faith. As God commanded him. In the example of Abraham, who circumcised his newborn son, as God commanded him, there is a general rule necessary for the use of the Sacraments. They should be used as much as possible, exactly according to God’s commandment, and not according to one’s own wisdom. Laughter . Now, with a pure laugh of joy, Sarah corrects the former mixed laugh of joy and bewilderment. Who would tell Abraham, etc. That is, who would dare to encourage Abraham that Sarah could have children? It should be noted that Sarah says to breastfeed instead of give birth. Luxury now separates these actions, but in the nature and intentions of God they constitute one property of the mother. Weaned. The period of feeding infants with milk, according to Jerome (Quaest. Heb.), lasted five years in ancient times. Traces of this custom can be seen in history. Samuel (1 Samuel 1:22; 2:11). Under the Maccabees and, as it seems, even under the kings of Judah, the time of milking ended in the third year of age (2 Macc. 7:27; 2 Chron. 31:16). Great feast. The feast on the occasion of the weaning of the baby, apparently, is an incident of very little importance for the history of the son of promise, unless it is in some special way included in the order of the narrative. One can guess: is it not because Moses mentions Isaac's feast that this celebration gave Ishmael the opportunity to act, which decided his fate in comparison with Isaac. But the example of Abraham is instructive here too. He tells us that faith does not reject social decency, but tries to ennoble them with its influence. Laughing. According to the text of the seventy interpreters: playing with her son Isaac. The addition that Ishmael's laughter referred to Isaac is worthy of attention, but the translation of the player is insufficient; for the game of Ishmael with Isaac cannot explain Sarah’s intentions to expel the former. According to the legends of the Jews, Isaac was ridiculed by Ishmael for not bowing to the idols that the latter made for fun. But this cannot be deduced from the words of the sacred narrative, although laughter, or better yet play, is included among the accessories of idolatry (Ex. 32:6). The hatred of the Jews for idolatry, to which alone they attribute all their misfortunes, is the reason that they do not want to see in all those condemned any other crime than idolatry. Some, arguing that the word צחק or שחק also means to play with life (2 Samuel 2:14), attribute to Ishmael the same intention against Isaac that Esau had against Jacob (Gen. 27:41). But in this case, Sarah’s intention to expel Ishmael would not have seemed cruel to Abraham. The Apostle Paul calls Ishmael's laughter persecution of Isaac (Gal.4:29). It could consist in the fact that the impudent youth, into whom his mother had managed to instill the proud thought of birthright, was jealous of the celebration made for his younger brother, and immediately marked his imaginary insult with signs of abuse and contempt for the innocent baby. Thus, both sons of Abraham are sons of laughter, but one is the laughter of the joy of grace, the other is the laughter of blasphemy against grace, and therefore cannot be together. Drive out this slave and her son. Sarah's demand might seem, as it did at first to Abraham himself, partial or strict; for from the example of the sons of Jacob we see that no law forbade the sons of slave women to inherit with the sons of free men. But in this case it is above human judgment, because it was inspired and justified by God Himself (Gal.4:30). The expulsion of Hagar and Ishmael was necessary because, just as they despised Sarah and Isaac under Abraham, if they had remained in the house after Abraham’s death, they would, of course, have expelled Sarah and disinherited Isaac. Hagar righteously shares the same lot with Ishmael because, without a doubt, she contributed to the revelation in him of those properties by which such a lot was prepared. Whatever Sarah tells you, obey her words. Through Sarah, God reveals His will about Ishmael and Hagar, in order to correct the initial error of her own will about them and at the same time console her for what she suffered from them. Your seed will be called Isaac. The seed destined for Abraham is: Jews, primarily called his children; all who believe, as children of the promise according to Isaac (Rom.9:8; Gal.4:28) above all and before all; Christ is the beginning and image of every sonship (Gal.3:16); Ishmael was also predestined (Gen. 16:10), but only to Hagar, not to Abraham. And from the son of the slave woman I will make a nation; because he too is your seed. It means so much to be born from a blessed father! Rich in the blessings of God, he spreads them to numerous and distant posterity. From this it follows that parents who do not try to attract God’s blessing upon themselves are enemies both to themselves and to their offspring; and that descendants who neglect their ancestors humiliate themselves either by injustice and ingratitude, or by admitting that they are wild branches of wild roots. And he took some bread and a skin of water and gave it to Hagar, putting it on her shoulders. By dismissing his son and wife with such a wretched farewell, Abraham appears to be showing greater cruelty than that which outraged him in Sarah. However, this act, without prejudice, can be explained by the fact that he hastens to fulfill the known will of God, without worrying about the unknown consequences of this, and, perhaps, with the intention of leaving Hagar helpless, so that she would not move away from his house ahead of time. Afterwards he rewarded Ishmael in the same way as other sons who were not recognized as heirs (Gen. 25:6). Be'er Shava. This name is used here as a preliminary (Gen. 21:31). God heard the voice of the youth. Hagar cries - God hears the voice of Ishmael. Because it is so that grace flows through Abraham to Ishmael. From the place where he is. Ishmael is banished by his father; Ishmael is abandoned by his mother, but God hears his voice wherever he is. Then God opened her eyes (see above note on Genesis 3:7). Source of water. Some believe that it opened miraculously. One can, however, think that Hagar spotted a treasure trove that had not been noticed before; for the inhabitants of the Arabian deserts, according to the testimony of Diodorus (Bibl. LXIX), are in the habit of covering the openings of the treasures they have built and making them inconspicuous. And God was with the boy. Not only grace-filled, but also natural gifts are from God. In the person of Sarah giving birth to Isaac, the Apostle shows us the image of the new, high Jerusalem, which is the mother of us all (Gal.4:26), that is, the Church, renewed and exalted by the incarnation of the Son of God. The fruit of this mother is, firstly, the Son of God himself, by incarnation the firstborn among many earthly brothers; then - a new higher education of the society of believers and, finally, the indwelling of Christ by faith into the hearts of men (Eph. 3:17). Therefore, in the birth of Isaac, the following could have been destined: the Nativity of Christ, the rebirth of Judaism into Christianity and the rebirth of the Christian. The birth of Isaac was preceded for several years by predictions, from time to time the clearest, of which the last was given to his mother, signifying the approaching fulfillment of it; The birth of Jesus Christ was preceded by prophecies of several centuries, concluded, before His very conception, by the Annunciation of the Angel of the Mother of God. Isaac's name was foretold in revelation before his conception. Likewise the name of Jesus (Luke 1:31). Sarah accepts the prediction of the birth of Isaac with bewilderment: am I really going to give birth? (Gen.18:13). The news of the upcoming birth of Jesus is received by His Mother, although not with the same bewilderment, but with a similar question: how will this happen? (Luke 1:34). Isaac is born seedless due to barrenness and old age. Jesus is born from a seedless virgin through unskilled virginity. Isaac is the only begotten by his mother, but has brothers from his father; Jesus is the only begotten of both the eternal Father and the earthly Mother; but meanwhile he has brothers in the whole human race. The infant Isaac is persecuted by Ishmael as a rival in the inheritance; The infant Jesus is persecuted by Herod as a rival in the reign. Isaac is the only heir in the house of Abraham. Jesus is the heir of all things (Heb. 1:2) in the great house of God. In Isaac is the seed of life and the blessing of all nations; this life and this blessing is Jesus himself. The general rebirth of the Church through Christianity, like the birth of Isaac, is preceded by barrenness and, as it were, old age, in which the life-giving power of Grace seemed to have dried up and threatened the highest Jerusalem with complete despair. But rejoice, O barren one, says Isaiah (Is. 54:1). He who was born according to the flesh persecuted him who was spiritual (Gal.4:29). So the old Israel is the new Israel. The persecutor himself was expelled along with his slave mother. Thus the synagogue is rejected, and the yoke of slavery of the law is removed from the free children. All the promises that the Jewish Church appropriated to itself are inherited by the Christian Church. The inner Isaac, or spiritual life of a person, is born through the action of the visitation and gracious word of God, in deep peace and mortification of everything that is human. Mortifying circumcision must continue in those who are regenerated, just as in those who are preparing for regeneration; so that mortification serves as a seal and sign of regeneration. While the baby of the new life grows, the old life raises its last strength against him. In the affairs of the law, although slavish, she finds tangible food for herself, realizes her advantage and therefore does not recognize another, higher right to the inheritance of bliss. But the voice of God, already heard in the soul, assigns to this inheritance a single life of pure faith and love, not enslaved to fear and not inspired by selfish hope. To stop the internal struggle, the slave and her son must be expelled. The probationary state of the Old Testament must pass away; The slavery of the law must be rejected, without a doubt, not by breaking the law, but by fulfilling in the freedom of love what was previously accomplished by the power of the law. Thus, the spiritual and free life of faith and love must continually grow, strengthen, multiply, and inherit everything. But if someone, due to the internal struggle of the life of the law with the life of grace, is partialized to the slavish state of the law, he must wander with Ishmael in the wilderness and endure mortal thirst, until he recognizes his poverty, God will hear his cry and will again open his eyes to find the source of grace and the water of life. Abraham's Union with Abimilech 22. At that time it happened that Abimelech with Phichol, his commander, said to Abraham thus: God is with you in everything that you do, 23. So swear to me here by God that you will not offend me, nor my son, nor my grandson, that the same favor that I showed you, you will show me and this land in which you are staying. 24. Abraham answered: I swear. 25. At this Abraham complained to Abimelech about the well of water, which Abimelech's servants had taken away. 26 And Abimelech said, I did not know who did it, and you did not tell me; I had never even heard of it until now. 27 Then Abraham took flocks and herds and gave them to Abimelech, and they both made a covenant. 28 And Abraham set seven lambs apart from the flock. 29. And Abimelech said to Abraham, “What are these seven lambs for, which you have set apart?” 30. He said, “Take these seven lambs out of my hand, that they may be for me as a testimony that I have dug this well.” 31. For this reason he called the place Beershava; for here they both swore. 32. Thus they made an alliance at Beershava. And Abimelech and Phichol his captain arose and returned to the land of the Philistines. 33. And (Abraham) planted a grove near Beershava, and there he called on the name of the Lord, the God of eternity. 34 And Abraham lived in the land of the Philistines as a foreigner for many days. In the order of this legend, the following should be noted: the case of the union (Gen. 21:22), the subject of the union (Gen. 21:23–26), the rites of the union (Gen. 21:27–32) and the subsequent circumstances of Abraham’s life (Gen. 21:33–34). God is with you in everything. In general, these words mean that Abimelech sees Abraham under the special protection of God's Providence. In connection with those that follow, they must contain the case or reason why Abimelech seeks an alliance with Abraham. In this special respect, they can be explained from the special sign of God's favor towards Abraham, shown in Isaac. Abimelech could have known how miraculously and with what promises God had given Abraham an heir, and, submitting to the will of Providence, he hastened to establish himself in the favor of the predestined owner of the land of Canaan. That is why he desired a hereditary union (Gen. 21:23). That you won’t offend and so on. Literally from Hebrew: if you lie to me, or my son, or my grandson, etc. This speech, by the nature of the Hebrew language, is not finished. Due to some noble modesty, the threat or call for God's vengeance is silent here. The same favor that I showed you (see Gen. 20:14–16) you will show me and this land. What Abimelech requires in the proposed alliance is generally fidelity and security. But when both the subjects and the descendants of Abimelech are brought into an alliance with Abraham, how can one agree with this alliance that the land of the Philistines, which was not actually Canaanite, was later counted among the inheritance of the descendants of Abraham (Joshua 13:1-2)? Without mentioning that this was done by the will of that very God, under whose protection the union of Abimelech and Abraham was concluded and who, in case of unworthiness of one side, had the power to dissolve it, we can resolve the proposed bewilderment by the fact that the Philistines themselves violated the union of Abraham in the days of Isaac (Gen. 26:14-15); and although they entered into a new alliance with this latter, in this there is no mention of offspring (Gen. 26:28–29); and that among the Philistine cities provided by Providence to the Israelites, there is no Gerar (Joshua 13:3–4, 15:45, 47). It could be that he fell even before the time of Moses. At the same time, Abraham complained to Abimelech about the well of water. How grave the offense is when a treasure is taken away should be judged by the nature of the Arabian country, which, according to the testimony of Diodorus (Lib. XIX), is completely impassable for those who have not prepared treasures for themselves. However, Abraham covered this insult with patience and now, on occasion, opens it only in order to make the inviolability of his treasure a condition of the alliance. I didn't know and so on. By this apology, Abimelech shows that he accepts satisfaction of Abraham’s complaint as a condition of the alliance. Then Abraham took flocks and herds and gave them to Abimelech. Gifts, when not reciprocated, according to the custom of the ancients, mean submission or respect for the higher (1 Samuel 9:7, 10:27, 16:20). So, Abraham shows deep humility, giving gifts to Abimelech as a sign of fidelity, while this one had previously expressed the need for his union and while he himself, according to the promise of God, could consider himself an independent ruler of the land in which he lived. Thus, true servants of God do not greedily anticipate what God gives and what people concede. Take these seven lambs from my hand, that they may be a testimony to me that I have dug this well. The lambs, of course, did not serve as evidence of an argument about the matter itself, but as evidence of an expression of the sincerity of Abraham’s assurance and the acceptance of this assurance by Abimelech. While the written language was not yet in use, characteristic of our times, and yet they felt that a language more durable than the language of sounds and words was needed, the language of things, with which thoughts and feelings were arbitrarily combined, was accepted with the same confidence as the written language is now. Hence the hill is a witness (Gen. 31:46–47), hence the lambs as a witness. However, these latter could also have another purpose for Abraham - a decent redemption of the treasure. Be'er-shava. A treasure trove of oaths. They ask how the same well received the same name later from Isaac (Gen. 26:33), if this name had already been given by Abraham? This is resolved by the story of Isaac, where it is said that he again dug up his father’s treasures and another time gave them their former names (Gen. 26:18). And Abraham planted a grove near Beershava. This grove was planted either as a place of calm from the heat of the country, which is why Abraham previously lived near the oak grove (Gen. 18:1, 4, 8), or as a place of worship, for in ancient times altars and dedicated monuments were often built near oak groves (Gen. 12:6–7, 13:18; Josh. 24:26), until abuse made such places worship hateful to God. The choice of secluded places for worship and shaded by trees could be based on the fact that these places seemed the more pure on earth and worthy of the Divine, the less touched they were for people; or on this universal thought that worship should be mysterious. And there he called on the name of the Lord. That is, through a solemn service he brought thanks to God for the security granted to himself from his neighbors. God of eternity, or eternal. In the name of the eternal, the true God is separated from creatures and contrasted with imaginary pagan deities, many of whom were revered only as durable and not eternal 26. And Abraham lived in the land of the Philistines as a foreigner for many days. For many days, however, he lived as a foreigner, and did not establish a fixed dwelling for himself. The Great Temptation and Promise 1. And it came to pass after these events that God tempted Abraham, and said to him: Abraham! He answered: here I am. 2. God said: Take your son, your only son, whom you love, Isaac, and go to the land of Moriah, and there offer him as a burnt offering on one of the mountains that I will show you. 3. And so Abraham arose early, saddled his donkey, and took with him two of his servants and Isaac his son; He chopped wood for the burnt offering and, getting up, went to the place that God had shown him. 4. On the third day Abraham lifted up his eyes and saw the place from afar. 5. Then Abraham said to his servants: Stay here with the donkey, and I and my son will go there and worship and return to you. 6. And Abraham took the wood for the burnt offering and laid it on the shoulders of Isaac his son, and he himself took fire and a knife in his hands, and they both went together.7. And Isaac began to speak to Abraham his father and said: Father! He said: what about my son? And he said: here is fire and wood; where is the lamb for the burnt offering? 8. Abraham said, God will provide for himself the lamb for a burnt offering, my son. And they both walked on together. 9. And when they came to the place that God had shown him, then Abraham created an altar there, laid out the wood and, having bound his son Isaac, laid him on the altar on top of the wood. 10 And Abraham stretched out his hand and took a knife to kill his son. 11. Then the Angel of the Lord called him from heaven and said: Abraham! Abraham! He said: here I am 12. The angel said: do not raise your hand against the boy and do not do anything to him; for now I know that you fear God, since you did not withhold your son, your only son, for Me. 13. And Abraham lifted up his eyes and saw, and behold, one ram caught in a thicket by its horns. Abraham went and took the ram and offered it as a burnt offering in place of his son. 14. Then Abraham called the name of the place: Jehovah-jireh. Therefore, even now it is said: on the mountain of Jehovah it will be provided. 15. Then the angel of the Lord called to Abraham a second time from heaven 16. and said: By me I swear, says the Lord, that because you have done this deed and have not withheld your son, your only son; 17. then by blessing I will bless you, and by multiplying I will multiply your seed like the stars of heaven and like the sand on the shore of the sea; and your seed will inherit the city of their enemies; 18. And through your seed all the nations of the earth will be blessed, because you have obeyed My voice. 19 And Abraham returned to his servants, and they arose and went together to Beershava; and Abraham lived in Beershava. The sacrifice of a son is the supreme act of Abraham's faith. It is a decisive test for the completion of education, or, so to speak, the Divine education of the father of believers; it is the last step on the path of gracious promises and therefore the essential conclusion of the history of Abraham as the father of believers. In the few subsequent tales about him, the voice of God's promises is no longer heard; and Abraham, the father of the family, is more visible than Abraham, the father of the believers. The importance of the incident now being considered, unfortunately accepted by some Christians with cold bewilderment, was, of course, also felt by the Mohammedans when they considered it an honor in their legends to transfer the adventure of Isaac on the person of their Patriarch Ishmael and set up a holiday in his memory. The simplicity with which Moses describes such an amazing incident is beyond any art. She makes, and she alone could make, his story a pure imprint of truth and bring closer to understanding such feelings and actions for the depiction of which human language is very insufficient. And it happened after these incidents. This indicates the time of the next incident, however, in such a way that the indication does not actually and precisely refer to the last of the previous Epiphanies, below to the last adventure of Abraham in Gerar, but indefinitely to the previous incidents of Abraham’s life. Therefore, the full meaning of the text can be this: after many internal and external temptations, by which Abraham was purified and confirmed in faith for so long, and after some rest given to him in Gerar, as if to renew his strength for a new feat, the greatest and Divine temptation finally followed. God tempted Abraham. Here some are stopped by the thought of how the effect of temptation can be attributed to God, who is a knower of the heart and who, according to the testimony of the Apostle James, does not tempt anyone (James 1:13). Avoiding these difficulties, one of the interpreters (Cleric, in comm.) believes that the tempter of Abraham was an Angel who wanted to find out whether Abraham loved his God as much as the pagans honor theirs by making human sacrifices to them. But in this conjecture it cannot be proven that human sacrifices were in use among the pagans before the time of Abraham 27; the fact that the tempter was an Angel contradicts the legend of Moses, where the speaker is first presented as God Himself (Gen. 22:1), then, although an Angel (Gen. 22:11), but by will (Gen. 22:16) and even in the person of God Himself (Gen. 22:12). Finally, if an Angel tested a righteous person for God, this is the same as God himself testing; but if for himself, then what motivation could he have for this and what power to do this? Other opinions of the newest critics, whether God’s requirement of Isaac as a sacrifice and its fulfillment were seen by Abraham in a dream (Eichhorn), or that he was about to undertake this sacrifice following the example of the Phoenicians, but suddenly abandoned this intention, having received a better understanding of worship (Bruns), are so incompatible with the clear expressions of the Mosaic narrative that they have no right to refutation, as dreams of the mind and the product of a stubborn disbelief in being and action higher powers, pagan in Christianity. Temptation, according to the universal concept of this word in Holy Scripture, is bringing any creature into a state in which its hidden properties would be revealed in action (Ex. 25:25, 27:2; 1 Kings 10:1). Since this can be done for many reasons and motives, the basis of temptation should not always be the ignorance of the tempter (John 6:6). In the spiritual sense, temptation is twofold: temptation in evil, or the stimulation to action of evil inclinations hidden in a person, and temptation in good, or the direction given to the principle of good operating in it to openly fight against evil or against obstacles in good, in order to achieve victory and glory. The first is not from God, but is a consequence of being abandoned by God (2 Chronicles 32:31). The second is from God and, to the extent of spiritual strength, is sent as grace to those who are worthy to receive from the fulfillment of the incarnate Son of God and grace upon grace. David asked for such a temptation for himself (Ps. 25:2). Jesus Christ himself was tempted in every way (Heb. 4:15) and at the end of countless temptations from the devil and men was in the Divine temptation in the Garden of Gethsemane (Matt. 26:38–39). This was the kind of temptation of Abraham in Isaac. This temptation of Abraham, with its end and fruit, should have confirmed in him faith, hope and love in their highest order, in which the latter should be greater than the first two (1 Cor. 13:13), that is, to subjugate them, to embrace them, as it were, to devour them, without destroying them; indicating to others who are called to the path of spiritual life what height they are called to; a prototype both for Abram himself and for the descendants of the great sacrifice of the Son of God. Take your son, your only son, whom you love, Isaac, and go to the land of Moriah, and there offer him as a burnt offering on one of the mountains that I will show you. Instead of a single translation of seventy, it appends to Isaac the name of his beloved, just as in other places it does not maintain the significance of the first of these words, as, for example, when it is appended to Solomon (Proverbs 4:3). But be that as it may in this last case, Isaac is definitely the only one among Abraham, according to the promise and according to his destiny to inherit, although he is not the only begotten according to the flesh. The land of Moriah seventy is called the high land; Symmachus and according to him Jerome - the land of vision (from ראה to see), Onkelos and Jonathan - the land of Divine service (from ירא to fear), some of the newest people consider the earth to be the appeared God (יהמראה) and think that this name is used here in advance in accordance with the subsequent legend and the naming of the place from Abraham ( Gen.22:14). The country of Moriah, without a doubt, is the same where Mount Moriah, the site of the temple of Jerusalem (2 Chron. 3:1). One of the mountains is vaguely mentioned because this country had many, whose situation, of course, was not yet known to Abraham (Ps. 24:2). The spirit of the tempting command is such that each word contains a special temptation or many more temptations. These were, so to speak, many arrows, one after another striking the shield of Abraham’s faith. Take your son. Renounce your fatherly feelings and decide not only to lose your son, but also to take his life yourself. The only one yours. You sacrificed your first son for the welfare of your second and expelled him; You don’t want to have a third; sacrifice all your consolations and aspirations in your only one. The one you love. The man of the heart knows that not every father loves his son as much as you do, and that you yourself did not love your first son as much as your second. For the last time, feel the full power of sowing love and reject it. Isaac. The one whom you called joy from his birth, on whom all your promises are confirmed, who is destined for an everlasting covenant, in which the blessing of all nations is contained, that same one you killed without descendants. “How will the promises be fulfilled? How will the word of God be fulfilled: Your seed will be called Isaac? What will happen to the tribes of the earth when their blessing flows from the earth? And go to the land of Moriah. Three days of travel (Gen. 22:3) are given to you so that you do not shy away from the internal struggle by quickly fulfilling what is commanded and so that this fulfillment does not seem to be the result of a rash decision. Before the required external one, you must perform an internal sacrifice, which is incomparably more difficult and lengthy. And offer it there as a burnt offering. Bring it to the God whom you believe and serve with all your heart and who promised to be your shield and reward; With the same love with which you loved Him who gave you the son of promise, now love Him who takes away. On one of the mountains that I will show you. You will not know the place where your sacrifice will take place until during the sacrifice itself. You will not see your son’s coffin and, perhaps, you will not find after the place where his ashes will be scattered. With such a concept of the testing command of God, which, apparently, is necessarily born from the very words of the command, how could it happen that Abraham recognized this revelation as true, and he decided to act on it, despite the contradictions visible in it against his natural feeling and conviction? He could not doubt the truth of revelation, because the image of true revelations was known to him from repeated experiences. The ray of light that illuminated and encouraged Abraham in this burden of faith was, as the Apostle explains this state of his (Rom. 4:17; Heb. 11:19), the thought of the resurrection of the dead, which represented to him the death of Isaac as not entirely his irretrievable loss and, thus, still nourished the faith and hope of the promise. However, since the same apostle notes that Abraham believed with hope beyond hope (Rom. 4:18), it must be admitted that at that time faith and hope were hidden in his love for God as temporary, preparatory and particular virtues in the general, complete and eternal. Filled with the power of this Divine love, Abraham does its work; and since she believes everything, hopes everything, and never falls away (1 Cor. 13:7-8), then faith and hope could not be shaken by this, although they lost the visible means to achieve their object. He saddled his donkey. The donkey was for Abraham alone, either because of old age, or because of custom, according to which only the strongest of people enjoyed this advantage (Gen. 22:3, Judg. 10:4). Two of the slaves. Probably to carry firewood. I chopped some firewood because I needed dry wood. On the third day. Flavius ​​and Jerome count exactly three days' journey from Bathsheba to Mount Moriah. I saw the place from afar. Of course, according to some sign given from God. Stay here with the donkey. Slaves were not supposed to see sacrifices, as they did not know the secrets of faith. They could have held Abraham like he was furious. And we will return to you, bowing. Abraham said this either with pretense in order to hide his intention; or, as usual, understanding the universal condition: if Providence pleases. But his spirit was so close to God that he prophesied without noticing. And they both went together. Father and son, and they are the priest and the victim! And the immensely generous father does not feel the need to withdraw even temporarily from his dear victim in order to indulge in his feelings or to hide them. They are both together, they are alone, but the grave secret lies inviolably in the soul of the Patriarch. Father. How painful this proclamation must have been for Abraham, which he could have venerated last! God will provide for himself a lamb for a burnt offering, my son. Without revealing the truth, so as not to prematurely disturb Isaac, Abraham insensitively prepares him for the discovery, first making it clear that the matter is being carried out under direct commands from God. Meanwhile, here lies an unexpected prediction. By tying up. One must think that it is more a sacrificial ritual than a need. Isaac was in such a strong position, and Abraham was in such an old age, that the former could not otherwise be bound to the slaughter by the latter, except by his own consent. Abraham! Abraham! Summoning haste. It shows that Abraham was restrained just before committing the fatal blow. So, in Abraham's heart the sacrifice was already completed. Now I know and so on. The knowledge attributed to God in the language of Holy Scripture does not presuppose in Him any previous ignorance. This is what David says: test me, O God, and know my heart (Ps. 139:23), and he says this immediately after depicting the omniscience and omnipresence of God. Just as God, in the highest purity of His being, positively knows the only good, and removes evil both from His all-good will, as well as from His all-encompassing mind (Luke 13:27), then when He, through a strong and active temptation, cleanses, elevates, affirms in good and unites with Himself, then we can say that He knows a person. So He knew Moses by name (Ex. 33:17). Thus he knew Abraham in the sacrifice of his son. “You have gone through,” He says, “many temptations 28,” but which only gradually developed and increased the seed of the fear of God and faith sown in you; now it has borne ripe fruit: you have reached your destination; you appeared as predicted; you have now come to the measure of eternal knowledge. Now I know. You're afraid. The fear here is, of course, not slavish, which is cast out by love (1 John 4:18), but pure, which abides forever (Ps. 19:10). One Aries. Instead of אחד one in the current Hebrew text it reads אחר, which is thought to mean back. But in this meaning it would be necessary to say אחור; and how could Abraham see the ram that was behind him? From this it is clear that the true reading is the first of these, which is found in the texts of the Samaritans, the seventy interpreters and the ancients in general. In more often. This meaning, under different words, is given to the word סבך for the most part by the ancient translators and the seventy interpreters themselves in the book of Isaiah (Is. 9:18). Therefore, their translation in the present place: εν φυτω σαβεϰ, in which the word savek is taken as the name of a certain plant, does not deserve trust. I took the ram. The Jews say that this ram was created and prepared for this sacrifice on the sixth day of the world. Either very fabulous, or very mysterious! Christian lawyers ask: what right did Abraham have to sacrifice a ram that did not belong to him? To this it must be said that at the sight of the ram, he felt the truth of his unexpected prediction: God is looking for a lamb for Himself, and accepted a sacrifice from God to bring to God. Jehovah-jireh. That is, Jehovah will provide. This name is taken from the previous words of Abraham to Isaac: God will provide for Himself a lamb, which words had both an unexpected and a joyful event. Names, especially places, among Jews often consist of several words (Gen. 28:19; Exod. 16:15). This is why it is said today. Moses cites here a proverb of his time with a double benefit: the surviving proverb testifies to an ancient incident; An ancient incident teaches us about the deep meaning of the proverb. On the mountain of Jehovah it will be seen. It’s simpler: when you come to the mountain where the Lord is calling, you will see there. Such a proverb is appropriate for those cases in which temptation seems to be constantly increasing, and a person, wanting to fulfill the will of God, is approaching obvious danger. In these cases, those who know the example of Abraham should say to themselves: ascend the mountain of temptation with confidence along the path indicated by God, and do not worry about your safety ahead of time; when you reach the very top of the mountain and are ready to sacrifice your blood itself, and then there will still be time for the Lord to show you His mercy and create temptation and abundance: He will look at your faith and obedience, and you will see His salvation. I swear by me. The apostle explained the power and basis of this oath in the Epistle to the Hebrews (Heb. 6:13-20). Likewise, God swears by His great name (Jer.44:26), by His soul (Jer.51:14), by His holiness (Am.4:2). By blessing I will bless you, and by multiplying I will multiply your seed, and so on. Now all the previous multi-part blessings and promises, cumulatively and with aggravation, pour on the head of the Patriarch. Like the stars of heaven and like sand on the seashore. The fathers note here two seeds: heavenly and earthly. In the gradual revelation of the promises, earthly things were first shown to Abraham (Gen. 13:16), then heavenly things: look at heaven, and so on. (Gen.15:5). So in the event of promises, Abraham's children on earth appeared first, according to the flesh; then children in spirit - heavenly. The story of Isaac being sacrificed in the New Testament is called the parable of the resurrection from the dead (Heb. 11:19). The Death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ is the closest and truest resolution to this parable. Abraham, out of love for God, sacrifices his only son to Him. God, out of love for man, did not spare His only begotten Son, but gave Him up for us all (John 3:16; Rom.8:32). Isaac, leaving the slaves with the donkey, ascends alone with his father to the mountain of sacrifice. Jesus, abandoned by his disciples, who had not yet completely renounced the flesh, ascends the heated mountain (which was the same, if not its part and peak, then its common foundation), so that one could trample the winepress (Is. 63:3). The wood is laid on Isaac, then he is laid on the wood. Jesus carries the cross up the mountain, then ascends to the cross himself. Isaac does not resist his slaughter. Jesus is obedient even to death, and even death on the cross (Phil. 2:8). With the sacrifice of his son, Abraham wanted, as insufficient, to replenish and seal his previous sacrifices of rams and calves. With the sacrifice of His Son on the cross, God deigned to seal all the bloody sacrifices that were not perfect and only transformative. Isaac, having been slain for three days by the decisive will of his father, having already been placed on the wood of the burnt offering, receives life from heaven, leaving his death to the ram revealed by God. Jesus, having been put to death in the flesh like a lamb, having been made alive in the Spirit (1 Peter 3:18), like God, rises from the tomb on three days. The sacrifice of Isaac brings down the richest blessings of God upon all the descendants of Abraham. The sacrifice of Jesus Christ attracts countless blessings to the entire Church, the entire human race and the entire world. Those whom God leads on the inner path in the footsteps of the Father of believers can see in His great sacrifice the image of the highest spiritual sacrifice. If the words of the Lord: whoever wants to save his soul will lose it; and whoever loses his soul for the sake of Me and the Gospel will save it (Mark 8:35), which contain the immutable law of those who are being saved, then there must be a place on the inner path where, in the measure of love, they sacrifice not only their body, deeds, thoughts, but their very soul, just as Abraham offered Isaac - the soul of his family. When Moses, in the heat of prayer for God’s chosen people, desires to be blotted out from the book of God (Exod. 32:32), when Paul is testified by the Holy Spirit that he himself would like to be excommunicated from Christ in order to bring Israel to him (Rom. 9:3), these men, for the love of God, forget their own aspirations for future blessings; they mysteriously lose their soul, animated by pure zeal for the glory of His name; they sacrifice their only Isaac. People enslaved either to the law of the flesh by lust, or to the law of external affairs only by pride and hypocrisy, do not reach this height of love; do not comprehend it and are even rejected. A spiritual person is not acceptable even to the Spirit of God (1 Cor. 2:14). Instead of leaving everything earthly and bearing their cross, ascending the mountain of the appearing God in order to partake of the death and resurrection of Christ, they remain under the mountain and guard their donkey. Death of Sarah and marriage of Isaac In the marriage of Isaac, Moses shows how Providence contributed to the establishment and spread of the blessed tribe in Abraham. For this, firstly, he notes that the intention to take Isaac a wife from the land of the Chaldeans was not in Abraham the fruit of his own determination, but also the consequence of a special incident, although apparently unimportant, however, a righteous man who looked at everything in God, of course accepted as an instruction from above. It was unexpected news about the spread of the house of Nahor and about the birth of Rebekah in it, received by Abraham at the time when Isaac entered the age of marriage (Gen. 22: 20–24). Secondly, the writer makes it clear that neither the ardor of the young man nor the impatience of the old man, who was in a hurry to see the sons of his son, took part in setting the time for Isaac’s marriage. The death of Sarah, without a doubt, leaving a great void in a family as small as that of Abraham, prompted him to seek consolation for himself and him in the marriage of his son (Gen. 24:67) and improvement of the house. From these considerations came three, apparently diverse, but, in fact, having one inextricable connection and purpose, legends: 1) the legend about the family of Nahor (Gen. 22:20–24); 2) the story of the death of Sarah (Gen.23); 3) the legend about the marriage of Isaac (Gen. 24). 20. After these things it happened that they told Abraham and said, Behold, Milcah has given birth to thy brother Nahor, sons: 21. Uz his firstborn, Buz his brother, Kemuel the father of Aram, 22. Kesed, Hazo, Pildash, Idlath, and Bethuel. 23. Bethuel gave birth to Rebekah. These eight Milkah bare to Nahor Abraham's brother. 24. And his concubine, whose name was Reumah, also gave birth to Tebaha, Haham, Tachash and Maacah. Utsa. Of the three men of this name, known in ancient genealogies, the one mentioned here is revered as the Patriarch of the land of Uz, or, according to the translation of the seventy, Austidia, which was the fatherland of Job (Job 1:1) and the people of the Ausites, or, according to Ptolemy, the Aisites, who lived in empty Arabia near the Euphrates. University This name is found in Jeremiah, (Jer.25:23), between the kings to whom the Prophet gives the cup of wrath, and in Job, (Job.32:2), in the meaning of the fatherland of Elius. Kemuel, father of Aramov. There is the most ancient Aram, the son of Shem (Gen. 10:22). It may be that the same-named tribes of Aram Simov and Aram Kemuelov are united under the name Syrians. Grotius from Aram and Wusus produces the Mesopotamian cities of Reman and Wusan, mentioned by Ammianus (L. XVIII). Cheseda. From this they are called Hasdim, that is, Chaldeans. Concubine פלגש (hence παλλαϰις and pellex). According to the definition of the rabbis, a concubine is a wife from slaves, without a marriage record and betrothal, whose children should use gifts, not inheritance. The Jews, not only before the law, but also under the law, allowed themselves concubines, for example: Manasseh (1 Chronicles 7:14); Caleb, (1 Chronicles 2:46, 48); Gideon, (Judges 8:31); Dove (2 Samuel 13); Solomon, (1 Kings 11:3). It is likely that in this custom the example of the patriarchs Abraham (Gen. 25:1, 6) and Jacob (Gen. 35:22) was turned into a rule of permission. The patriarchs, as far as one can notice, partly followed in this custom adopted before them, partly they yielded to impatience to have offspring (already blessed by God), which impatience (to their greater justification) was revealed especially in their wives (Gen. 16:2, 30:3). Therefore, one should not judge Nahor, who had a concubine, too harshly. The number of the sons of Nahor is twelve, just like Ishmael and Jacob. XXIII. 1. Sarah's life was one hundred and twenty-seven years: these were the years of Sarah's life. 2. And Sarah died in Kiriatharba (which is now Hebron), in the land of Canaan. And Abraham came to weep for Sarah and mourn her. 3. Then he departed from the presence of his dead woman and began to speak to the sons of Heth, and said: 4. I am a stranger and a stranger among you; give me ownership of the place of the coffin between you, so that I can bury my dead from my eyes. 5. The sons of Heth answered Abraham and said to him: 6. Listen to us, our lord; You are the prince of God among us, bury your dead in the best of our burial places; none of us will refuse you our burial place for the burial of your deceased. 7. Abraham stood up and bowed to the people of the land, the sons of Heth, 8. and began to speak to them and said: If it is in your heart to allow me to bury my dead from my sight, then intercede with Ephron the son of Tsochar, 9. that he give me the cave of Machpelah, which he has at the end of his field, so that for a reasonable price I will give it to Ephron in the midst of you, as a property for the tomb. 10. Ephron sat in the midst of the sons of Heth; and Ephron the Hittite answered Abraham in the hearing of the sons of Heth, all who entered the gates of his city, and said: 11. No, my lord, listen to me, I give you the field and the cave that is in it, I give it to you; in the sight of the children of my people I give it to you; bury your dead. 12. Abraham bowed down before the people of that land 13. and began to speak to Ephron in the hearing of the people of that land and said: do me a favor, listen to me, I will give you silver for the field, you take it from me; then I will bury my dead there. 14. Ephron answered Abraham and said to him: 15. My lord, listen to me: the land is worth four hundred shekels of silver; between me and you what does this mean? bury your dead. 16. Atraam listened to Ephron, and Abraham weighed out silver to Ephron, as much as he had declared in the hearing of the sons of Heth, that is, four hundred shekels of silver, such as the merchants had. 17. Thus the field of Ephron, which is at Machpelah, opposite Mamre, the field and the cave that is in it, and there are trees that are in the field, in all its borders, around, established. 18. for Abraham's possession in the sight of the children of Heth, all who entered into the gates of his city. 19. After this Abraham buried Sarah his wife in a cave in the field at Machpelah, opposite Mamre (which is now Hebron), in the land of Canaan. 20. So Abraham received from the sons of Heth the field and the cave that was in it as property for the tomb. Sarrina's life was one hundred and twenty-seven years old. Sarah alone among the wives has this advantage, that the years of her life are shown in Holy Scripture. In Kiriath Arba. This name can mean: city of four. The Jews derive it from the fact that four great men are buried in this place: Adam, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, but according to the very text of the book of Joshua (Joshua 14:15), which confirms this tradition, 29 it is more likely that Arba is the name of the famous ancestor of the Anakimites (Joshua 15:13). What is Hebron now? Words added by someone after Moses to explain a place. They ask how it happened that Sarah died in Hebron, while Abraham and Isaac, as many as can be noted (Gen. 22:19, 24:62, 23:2), lived in the land of midday? It is likely that since Abraham's estate, which consisted mostly of herds, had to be divided into different places, then part of the slaves and shelter for the householders themselves remained in Hebron from the time the entire house was first in this place. Weep for Sarah and mourn her. The ancient Jewish rituals of mourning the dead, in addition to weeping, were: tearing apart garments and putting on sackcloth (Gen. 37:34). Was it proper for the father of believers to cry over death, which, apparently, is characteristic only of those who have no hope (1 Thess. 4:13)? (Thessalonians are now Thessalonians. - Ed.) It is fitting that he mourned her not only as a family misfortune, but also as the fruit of a universal curse lying on the human race. I am a stranger and a stranger among you; give me ownership of the place for the coffin between you. By introducing this request, Abraham either expresses gratitude to the Hittites for the hospitality of their country, or rejects the suspicion of a purchase, showing that he does not intend to establish himself in their land as a permanent resident. It was necessary for Abraham to approve the cemetery for himself through the purchase, because without this the Hittites, although this time affectionate, later, either through negligence or some kind of displeasure, could have disturbed the ashes of his wife. Moreover, it would be painful for him to indiscriminately mix her ashes with the ashes of those from whom he always tried to separate himself. But the importance of the burial place is better understood by Jacob (Gen. 49:29) and Joseph (Gen. 50:25), who, dying outside the land of Canaan, bequeathed to bring their remains into it. The reason for this, no doubt, was faith in the promised inheritance of this land, for which of the pious patriarchs would want to be buried in a foreign and pagan land? The same faith led Abraham to purchase a burial plot as a sign that the land, which was not his property in life, would be his property at death, that is, it would belong to his descendants. Providence reveals in this incident an even higher truth, that the promises of the Father of believers only begin in this life, but are more accurately and more fully assimilated after death. You are the prince of God among us. The word prince here does not mean an independent owner of the land, but only a rich and strong man, which is the opinion that Abraham acquired about himself by his alliance with Mamre and the war against the four kings. Prince of God, according to the property of the Hebrew language, means great prince. What does this mean between you and me? That is, this is such a small thing for me and for you that it’s not worth the trouble to take it into account. And he weighed it. A sign that the coin at this time consisted only of weight, and not of metal. Thus the field of Efronovo and so on. Two doubts are presented against this passage from the speech of Stephen, written in the Acts of the Apostles: first, that, according to him, Abraham was not given an inheritance in the land of Canaan lower enough to set his foot (Acts 7:5). Secondly, he honors Hamor of Shechem as the former owner of the burial place purchased by Abraham (Acts 7:16). The first of these doubts is resolved by the fact that by the name of inheritance Stephen means the hereditary land of habitation and possession, serving the needs of life; and that the burial ground, although one’s own, is never included in the heritage. The second bewilderment, which some are forced to explain by the error of Stephen's memory, or even the damage to St. text from the scribes, in accordance with the dignity of Holy Scripture, is resolved by the fact that in the words of Stephen (Acts 7:15–16), due to the brevity of his speech, the various adventures of the patriarchs are offered under one general view, which is in accordance with the order and intention of his speech. His words can be stated as follows: Jacob came to Egypt, and he and our fathers died and were transferred (μετετεϑησαν) to Shechem (like Joseph or, according to legend, all twelve patriarchs) and were laid (ετεϑησαν) in the tomb, which Abraham bought at the price of silver (like Jacob, not brought from Egyptian tomb, but directly laid in the cave of Machpelah), except (the tomb) that of the sons of Hamor (father of Shechem). According to the real reading of the Greek text: παϱα των υιων Ἐμμοϱ του Συχεμ, according to conjecture: παϱα το (μνημα) των υιων Ἐμμοϱ του Συχεμ. The last places of the text have been added to better distinguish between the two burial places. XXIV. 1. Abraham was already old and advanced in years. The Lord blessed Abraham with everything. 2. And Abraham said to his servant, the eldest in his house, who was in charge of all that he had, “Put your hand under my thigh.” 3. And swear to me by the Lord God of heaven and the God of earth, that you will not take a wife for my son from the daughters of the Canaanites, among whom I live, 4. but you will go to my land, to my homeland, to take a wife for my son Isaac. 5. The servant said to him: Perhaps the woman will not want to go with me to this land, should I return your son to the land from which you came? 6. Abraham said to him, Beware that you do not return my son there; 7. The Lord God of heaven [and the God of the earth], who took me from my father's house and from the land of my birth, who promised me and who swore to me, saying: To your descendants I will give this land, He will send His angel before you, and you will take a wife for my son [Isaac] from there; 8. If the woman does not want to go with you, you will be free from this oath of mine; Just don’t return my son there. 9. Then the servant put his hand under the whip of Abraham his master, and swore to him of this. 10. Then the servant took ten camels from his master's camels and went. He also had in his hands all the treasures of his master. He got up and went to Mesopotamia, to the city of Nahor. 11. And he stopped the camels outside the city, at the source of water, in the evening, at the time when the women go out to fetch water. 12. And he said: Lord God of my master Abraham! Prosper me now and show mercy to my lord Abraham. 13. Behold, I stand at the source of water, and the daughters of the inhabitants of the city come out to draw water. 14. Therefore, make sure that, O maiden, to whom I say, “Tilt down your pitcher and I will drink,” and who says, “Drink, I will give your camels something to drink, this is the one whom You show to Your servant for Isaac; and by this I know that You show mercy to my master. 15. He had not yet stopped speaking [in his mind] when Rebekah came out, who was born of Bethuel the son of Milcah, the wife of Nahor, Abraham's brother. There was a jug on her shoulder. 16. She was a beautiful looking maiden, a maiden whom her husband did not know. She went down to the source, filled her jug ​​and went up. 17. Then the servant ran to meet her and said: Let me drink a little water from your jug. 18. She said: Drink, my lord. And immediately she lowered her pitcher onto her hand and gave him drink. 19. And when she had given him something to drink, she said, “I will also draw for your camels until [they all] have drunk.” 20. And immediately she poured water from her jug ​​into the swill and ran again to the well to draw [water], and drew for all his camels. 21. The man looked at her with amazement in silence, wanting to understand whether the Lord blessed his path or not. 22 And when the camels had stopped drinking, then the man took gold earrings weighing half a shekel, and two bracelets for her hands, weighing ten shekels of gold; 23. [and asked her] and said: Whose daughter are you? tell me, is there a place for us to spend the night in your father’s house? 24. She answered him: I am the daughter of Bethuel, the son of Milcah, whom she bore to Nahor. 25 And she also said to him: We have plenty of straw and feed, and a place to stay for the night. 26. And the man bowed down and worshiped the Lord, 27. and said: Blessed is the Lord God of my master Abraham, who did not forsake my master in His mercy and in His truth! The Lord led me straight to the house of my master's brother. 28. The girl ran and told about this in her mother’s house. 29. Rebekah had a brother named Laban. Laban ran out to the man outside the city, to the spring. 30. And when he saw the earrings and bracelets on the hands of his sister, and heard the words of Rebekah his sister, who said, Thus spake this man unto me, he came to the man, and found him standing by the camels by the spring, 31. and said, Come in, thou blessed of the Lord; why are you standing outside? I have prepared a house and a place for the camels. 32. And a man entered. Laban unsaddled the camels and gave straw and food to the camels, and water to wash the feet of him and the people who were with him. 33. And food was offered to him; but he said: I will not eat until I say what I have to say. Laban said: Speak. 34. He said: I am Abraham's servant; 35. The Lord blessed my master greatly, so that he became great, for He gave him sheep and oxen, silver and gold, male and female servants, camels and donkeys. 36. Sarah my master's wife, when she was old, bore my master a son, to whom he gave all that he had. 37. And my lord took an oath from me, saying: Do not take a wife for my son from the daughters of the Canaanites, in whose land I live, 38. But go to my father’s house and to my relatives, and take a wife for my son. 39. I said to my master, “Perhaps the woman will not go with me.” 40. He said to me: The Lord, before whom I walk, will send His angel with you and make your way prosperous, and you will take a wife for my son from among my relatives and from my father’s house. 41. Then you will be free from the oath given to me when you go to my relatives; and if they do not give it to you, then you will be free from your oath to me. 42. And so now I came to the source and said: Lord God of my master Abraham! If You make good the path that I take, 43. then, behold, I stand at the source of water; make sure that the girl who comes out to fetch water and to whom I say, “Let me drink a little water from your pitcher,” 44. and who says to me, “You drink too, and I will draw for your camels,” be the woman whom the Lord has appointed for my master’s son. 45. I had not yet finished these words in my heart, when Rebekah came out with a jug on her shoulder and went down to the source and drew; then I told her: give me something to drink. 46. ​​She immediately lowered her pitcher from her shoulder and said, Drink, I will water your camels. And so I drank, and she gave water to the camels. 47. I asked her and said: whose daughter are you? She said: the daughter of Bethuel the son of Nahor, whom Milcah bore to him. Then I gave her earrings and wrists for her hands. 48. And I bowed down and worshiped the Lord, and blessed the God of my master Abraham, who had led me in the right way, to marry my master’s brother’s daughter to his son. 49. So now, if you intend to do mercy and truth to my lord, tell me, and if not, tell me to turn to the right or to the left. 50. Laban and Bethuel answered, “This word has come from the Lord; We cannot tell you in spite of either good or bad; 51. Behold Rebekah is before you; take it and go; Let her be the wife of your master's son, as the Lord has said. 52. When Abraham's servant heard their words, he worshiped the Lord to the ground. 53. And the servant took out silver things and gold things and clothes and gave them to Rebekah; He also gave rich gifts to her brother and her mother. 54. And he and the people who were with him ate and drank, and spent the night. When they got up in the morning, he said: Let me go to my lord. 55. But her brother and her mother said: Let the girl stay with us for at least ten days, then you will go. 56. On the contrary, he said to them: Do not hold me back, for the Lord has blessed my way; let me go, and I will go to my lord. 57. They said: Let's call the girl and ask her. 58. And they called Rebekah and said to her, “Will you go with this man?” She answered: I’ll go. 59. So they sent away Rebekah their sister and her nurse, and Abraham’s servant, and his men. 60. And they blessed Rebekah, and said to her: Our sister! May thousands of thousands be born of you, and may your descendants possess the cities of your enemies! 61 So Rebekah and her handmaids arose, and mounted the camels, and rode after the man. So the slave took Rebekah and set off. 62. Meanwhile Isaac went to Beer-lahai-roi and returned. He lived in the land of noon. 63. One day, when evening came, Isaac went out into the field to meditate, and lifted up his eyes, and saw: behold, camels coming. 64. Rebekah lifted up her eyes and, seeing Isaac, threw herself off the camel 65. and said to the servant: Who is this man walking across the field towards us? The servant answered: This is my master. Then she took the blanket and covered herself. 66. The servant told Isaac everything that he had done. 67. And Isaac brought her into the tent of his mother Sarah, and took Rebekah, and she became his wife, and he loved her; and Isaac was comforted by the death of his mother. And Abraham said to his servant. By guesswork they think it was Eliezer. Place your hand under my thigh. Whether this rite of oath began with Abraham is unknown, but it is known that it did not end with Abraham. It was used by Jacob (Gen.47:29). Josephus (Antiq. L. I, p. 16) writes that this was the greatest image of an oath, when they placed each other’s hands under the hips and called on God as a witness to the promises. It should be thought that the mutual action of the ritual was used for mutual promises, and for one-sided ones - one-sided. Various meanings are attributed to this rite, according to different interpreters. The Jews, according to Jerome, refer to it as a covenant with God and circumcision as a sign of this covenant. So the Chaldean Jerusalem interpreter, instead of the words: under the stitch of my covenant, put in his translation: under the stitch of my covenant; and Jonathan: for the truncation of my circumcision. Abenezra thinks that the position of the hands under the hips depicts submission. Similarly, one of the newest (Cleric) guesses whether this rite is not taken from the image of a slave supporting the master’s whip when he mounts a camel. But this ritual could no longer be mutual. Another one of the newest (Grot.) came up with the idea that the one who swears on the whip swears by a sword worn on the hip. Christian teachers, such as Ambrose (L. I de Abrah p. 9) and Augustine (Quaest. 62. in Genes. et de C. L. XVI, p. 33), who try to see Christ both in the canopy and in the fortune-telling of the Old Testament, claim that the position of the hands under the crest is an indication of the seed of promise. This conjecture is confirmed both by the expression used in the Hebrew language for progeny through the procession from the loins (Gen. 46:26; Heb. 7:10), and by the very extraordinary nature of the ritual action. So, the meaning of this action can be represented in the following words: “I swear to fulfill my promise as sincerely and surely as I sincerely and surely desire to belong to the blessed seed of promise; In case of violation of the vow, I subject myself and my offspring to consumption from this seed.” You will not take a wife for your son Isaac from the daughters of the Canaanites. The patriarchs avoided the daughters of the Canaanites, because the morals of these latter were dangerous for their families (Gen. 26:35); because the Canaanites were already condemned by God to destruction (Gen. 15:16); because God Himself guided them to preserve His chosen tribe in all possible purity and separation from others until the appearance of the Messiah. Maybe the woman won’t want it, etc. Prudent and fair caution, when before taking an oath, they carefully delve into the exact meaning of the obligations acceptable to it. Lord God of heaven, etc. Abraham bases his hope of God’s help in finding a wife of the same tribe for Isaac, firstly, on the fact that God Himself took him from his father’s house; and secondly, on the fact that God promised his descendants the land of Canaan. The power of this last thought is palpable: for He who promised inheritance and heirs, no doubt, foresaw and ordained the means to achieve both. But how does the Patriarch, cut off by God from his family, hope to reunite with it? This can be explained by the fact that Abraham took the unexpected news of the blessing of Nahor with abundant offspring as the voice of Providence calling for an alliance with his house. The action of God's help is depicted by the sending of an Angel. This image, as well as similar ones in Holy Scripture (Is. 40:3; Mal. 3:1), are taken from travelers who, for an unhindered and speedy journey, send forerunners to prepare the path and the needs of the path. Such a similarity vividly represents the invisible action of the spirits sent to serve, and in the midst of difficulties and uncertainty, the timing and readiness of the highest help. Just don't return my son there. That is, do not agree to a marriage contract that contains this condition. Abraham is alienated from foreigners, but even more alienated from his fatherland, because he was taken from it by God. In his hands were also all kinds of his master's treasures. That is, he took everything that was needed for the marriage gifts (see Gen. 24:10, 53). To the city of Nakhorov. Haran (Gen.27:43). It must be thought that Nahor moved here from Ur with his father, although, however, history does not mention this (Gen. 11:31). When they go out for water. A common position for maidens in ancient times (1 Samuel 9:11). It was on this custom that Abraham’s servant based his method of choosing a bride for his master. The Lord God of my master Abraham. The servant calls on the God of Abraham not because he places himself outside His Providence, but because the subject of the prayer concerns Abraham, and its success depends on the promise given to him. By this I know that You show mercy to my master. This test of God's will through an arbitrarily chosen sign seems to some to be insolence and superstition. But the act of Abraham's servant is not condemned by the word of God; the success of his petition is justified and, as pleasing to God, is confirmed by similar actions of Gideon (Judges 6:16, 37–39) and Jonathan (1 Sam. 14:8–10). However, following these examples, which can indeed lead the unwary into confusion and superstition, should be limited by the following rules: Then it is only permissible to pray to God for a sign when we find the perspicacity of our mind given by Him insufficient for the knowledge of His will for us that is necessary for our good or that of our neighbors. The request for a sign must be brought to God with undoubted faith; otherwise it will be both fruitless and offensive to God, for everything that is not of faith is sin (Rom. 14:23). Let him who asks God by means of any sign decide to follow the answer without fail: otherwise how can one hope for an answer from Him who does not like to lose His words (Joshua 23:4). Without extreme need and special inner motivation, one should not tempt God by asking for miraculous signs; It is enough to ask Him for those who, without departing from the natural order of things, would give us the necessary suggestions, for which Providence has countless means. Thus, the servant of Abraham, in order to recognize a well-behaved maiden, chooses a sign that could be a natural consequence of a kind and philanthropic disposition of the soul. In my mind. The words added in the translation are seventy, in the explanation of the original, exactly according to the mind of the writer. He looked at her and so on. Surprise at the speedy fulfillment of the prayer rendered him speechless; Meanwhile, he delved into what was happening in order to better ascertain whether Providence was accurately responding to his request. Then he took it and so on. That is, he prepared his gifts, but they were actually given only when he found out who the girl was (see below Gen. 24:47). Earrings . This is not the well-known decoration of the ears, but a similar decoration of the nostrils (see Gen. 24:47; Ezek. 16:12; Prov. 11:22). Blessed be the Lord. Abraham's servant thanks God for such a work, which has not yet been completed. But he sees the finger of God in it and therefore has no doubt about its successful completion. By His mercy and His truth. Grace can be attributed to the abundance of promises given to Abraham, and truth - to an event; words of God. In his mother's house. It is strange that in this legend the mother and brothers of Rebekah are mentioned and presented as active, especially Laban (Gen. 24:29, 53, 55. D 59, 60), and Bethuel is mentioned only once, and then after Laban, as if not about the father, but about the brother (Gen. 24:50). Flavius ​​says that Bethuel, Rebekah's father, was not present at this time; was already alive, and Laban remained the family’s trustee with his mother. Others think that (according to the custom of the time, marriages most depended on brothers (see Gen. 34:13). Then they offered him food, but he said: I won't eat. Laban follows the custom of hospitality, which forbade disturbing the stranger with curiosity or burdening him with business before he was treated and relieved of his journey (1 Samuel 9:19). But the pious and faithful servant of Abraham puts aside the custom in order to first fulfill the duty. So that I can turn either to the right or to the left. An adjective expression, which when applied to this story means: I will calm down or take other measures. We cannot say anything bad or good in spite of you. That is, we will not dare to contradict you in any way. For the addition of words: neither bad nor good, by the nature of the language, gives special strength and complete completeness to denial (Gen. 31:24). The attention of Laban and Bethuel to the works of Providence may serve as an instruction or even a shame for some among Christians themselves. At least ten days. Some translate עשור או ימים: year or ten months. But the demand for such a great delay is incredible. The Samaritan text reads: month of days. But the first translation, which is seventy, agrees with the ordinary Hebrew reading and does not contradict the circumstances of the incident. I'll go. This decisive consent of Rebekah to go to a distant country and join an unknown family - how can it be explained if not a trust in Providence? For thought. This is what the Hebrew word שוח and the Greek word αδολεσχειν mean for the seventy (Ps. 77:4, 7, 13). Others translate to take a walk or look. Rebekah puts the veil on herself according to that universal custom in Arabia, according to which the female sex appears in society only under a veil, and, perhaps, especially because of the presence of the groom. Tertullian turns this example to the instruction and reproof of Christian wives 30. And Isaac was comforted by the death of his mother. Consequently, the time of mourning lasted three years (Gen. 17:17, 23:1, 25:20). If Isaac is the image of Christ, then the betrothal of Isaac to Rebekah may be an image of the betrothal of Christ to the Church. The Apostle brings the image closer to the one being formed when he calls Christ one man, the Church - a pure virgin, and presents himself as a betrothed (2 Cor. 11:2). This image can also be applied to the Jewish Church, which through the servant of God, the most faithful in the house of God, Moses, was sought out in Egypt and raised to the Promised Land; and to the Christian Church, which through the apostles was called out of paganism to the place of the deceased Jewish Church. The Last Adventures of Abraham Moses ends the story of Abraham with such tales that, while giving it its final completeness, at the same time serve as an introduction to the story of Isaac and draw all the reader’s attention to him. For this purpose, it is said about the many sons of Abraham, but in such a way that Isaac is made the highest of all and his only heir; the advantage of Ishmael is shown, who participated with Isaac in the sacred work of burying the parents, who, in accordance with the promise, produced twelve sons of the ancestors; but meanwhile it is noted that God’s blessing remained on Isaac, who was childless for twenty years of marriage. This is the general spirit of three short legends: about the marriage of Abraham with Hethurah (Gen. 25:1–6), the death of Abraham (Gen. 25:7–11), and the life of Ishmael (Gen. 25:12–18). Marriage of Abraham and Keturah XXIV.1. And Abraham took another wife, named Keturah. 2. She bore him Zimran, Jokshan, Medan, Midian, Ishbak and Shuah. 3. Sheba and Dedan were born to Jokshan. The sons of Dedan were Ashurim, Letushim and Leumim. 4. The sons of Midian: Epha, Ether, Hanoch, Abida and Eldaa. All these are the sons of Keturah. 5. However, Abraham gave all his property to Isaac. 6. And Abraham gave gifts to the sons of the concubines that Abraham had, and sent them away from Isaac his son, while he was still alive, to the east, to the land of the East. If the order of the narrative of Moses in this place, as in others, follows the order of events, then it may seem strange that Abraham, who even in the hundredth year of his life did not naturally hope to have children (Gen. 17:17) and, according to the Apostle, had already mortified flesh (Rom. 4:19), no less than one hundred and forty years from birth (Gen. 25:20) enters into a new marriage. Interpreters are trying to get out of this difficulty in various ways. Chaldean commentators and many rabbis believe that Keturah is one person with Hagar. But this guess is refuted by the fact that Moses speaks multiple times about Abraham’s concubines (Gen. 25:6), and in the first book of Chronicles (1 Chr. 1:28, 32) the sons of Keturah are separated from Ishmael, the son of Hagar. Others believe that the marriage with Heturah took place before the death of Sarah. But, besides the fact that this opinion has no basis in history, it, while destroying one thing, introduces another bewilderment: how could Abraham decide on such a marriage? The marriage with Hagar at the will of Sarah, which ended in divorce also at the will of Sarah, not only cannot serve as an example here, but also completely excludes any other marriage during Sarah’s life. The thought of St. Augustine (Contra Julian. L. III), that perhaps the gift of childbearing, sent down from God to Abraham, remained in him for a long time, completely explains the event narrated by Moses. Nothing prevents us from thinking, experience once shows that Abraham, at the birth of Isaac, received not a one-time and instantaneous stimulation of vital forces, but a complete and constant, in the words of the Prophet (Ps. 102:5), renewal of his youth, like an eagle; and that, having fulfilled the sacred duties of the law and faith in relation to Sarah and Isaac, he decided to take advantage of the excess of God's blessing that he still felt in himself, in order to glorify God as much as possible with his offspring. Midiana. Hence the Midianites. The city of Midian, according to Jerome (In. loc. Heb.), lay further than rocky Arabia to the south; in the Saracen Desert. There Ptolemy posits the cities of Midiana and Modiana. Shuaha. From this is the fatherland of Ballad, the friend of Joblev (Job.2:11). Ptolemy has a city called Soaka in the country of Darr, not far from Midian. Sheva. The dwelling of his descendants should be not far from Navatei (see Serab. LXVI). From this, according to Bochart's guess, Sheba are predators of Job's flocks (Job 1:15). Dedan. See note. on (Gen.10:7). Epha. In Isaiah (Is.60:6) this name is combined with the name of Midian. Concubines. That is, Hagar and Keturah. It is worthy of note that Keturah, taken into marriage after the death of Sarah when Abraham had no other wife, is called only a concubine. This is how monogamy is respected. He sent them away from Isaac his son while he was still alive. Through this, the Patriarch warns the confusion of tribes and heritages, so that the land assigned by God to Isaac remains inviolable from his other brothers. To the land of the East. This name does not refer to the country of the world, which is already indicated by the word to the east, but signifies in St. books, a special country (Judges 6:3; 1 Kings 4:30; Job 1:3; Isaiah 11:14; Jeremiah 49:28), whose inhabitants, as one might guess, were later called in Arabic שרקיין Sharkiin, that is, Eastern, simply Saracens, although, however, some give this name a different origin. Josephus (L.I. p. 15) writes that they were hardworking and witty (1 Kings 4:30; Matt. 2:1). 7. The days of Abraham's life that he lived were one hundred and seventy-five years. 8. Finally Abraham grew weak and died in a good old age, being old and full (of life), and joined his people. 9 And Isaac and Ishmael his sons buried him in the cave of Machpelah, in the field of Ephron the son of Zohair the Hittite, which is opposite Mamre. 10. In the field that Abraham acquired from the sons of Heth. Abraham and Sarah his wife were buried there. 11. After the death of Abraham, God blessed Isaac his son. Isaac lived at Beer-lahai-roi. Full of life. In Jewish codes, for the most part, only saturated is read; but this expression appears more fully below, about the death of Isaac (Gen. 35:29). This feature, to depict the peaceful and joyful death of the righteous, was taken from the image of the feast. He joined his people (see note on Gen. 15:15). And Isaac and Ishmael his sons buried him. Only two are credited with performing this filial duty, probably not only by the proximity of their stay to the place of Abraham’s death, but also by the right of their seniority. 12. These are the race of Ishmael, the son of Abraham, whom Hagar the Egyptian, Sarah's handmaid, bore to Abraham, and 13. these are the names of the sons of Ishmael, their names according to their generations: the firstborn of Ishmael, Nebaioth, after him Kedar, Adbeel, Mibsam, 14. Mishma, Duma, Maesa, 15. Hadar, Thema, Jetur, Naphish and Kedma. 16. These are the sons of Ishmael, and these are their names, in their hordes, in their nomads. These are the twelve princes of their nations. 17. The years of Izmail’s life were one hundred and thirty-seven years; at last he fainted, and died, and was joined to his people. 18. His descendants spread from Havilah to Sur, which is at the entrance to Egypt, and even to Assyria. So his lot fell to live in the face of all his brothers. Firstborn Izmailov Nevaioth. Hence the Nebatites, rich in rams (Is. 60:7). Kedar. And from this a noble tribe, also abundant in cattle breeding. It seems that rocky Arabia is often generally designated by his name in the Holy Books (Ps. 119:5; Song 1:4; Is. 21:16–17, 42:11, 60:7; Jer. 49:28). In Pliny (L.V, p. 11) Cedrea. Duma. A city of this name still exists today, as can be seen in the descriptions of Arabia by Abulfeda and Niebuhr. Hadar. In the Samaritan text Hadad; as well as in the book of Chronicles (1 Chronicles 1:30). Fema. This tribe is mentioned in Isaiah (Isaiah 21:14) and Jeremiah (Jeremiah 25:23). Yetur. From this comes the name Iturea, the country beyond the Jordan, where the tribe of Manasseh lived (1 Chron. 5:19). Kedma. From this, perhaps, the name of the desert is Kedemoth (Deut. 2:26). These are the twelve princes of their nations. The Arabians are still governed by the elders of generations, under the name of emirs. So his lot fell to live in front of all his brothers. This expression against the Jewish one has been supplemented by comparison with a similar complete expression (Ps. 15:5-6). Lot means here the provision of God's Providence. The writer indicates here the event of the prediction (Gen. 16:12). The ancients generally thought so. Joseph: χωϱις αιματος, εν τουτω γαϱ η ψυχη. No blood; for the soul is in it. Plutarch: το αιμα νομη ϰαι τϱοφη εστι του πνευματος. De Poesi Homerica. Blood is pasture and food for the spirit. None of the people insults these, for they are revered as saints, and no one has a weapon of war. They resolve disputes among the surrounding inhabitants. Anyone who resorts to them is not insulted by anyone. Herodotus calls this people Argippaeans; but Pliny from Herodotus, Arimthea, Hist. nat. L. VI, p. 13. The legend about one original language was also found among the pagans. They thought that during Saturn all animals spoke the same language, but that people, not knowing how to value their happiness, asked Saturn by embassy to save them from death, so that they would not seem humiliated before the serpent, which is renewed annually; that, finally, the angry Saturn deprived them of a common language, and they scattered. Plat in Politics. Phil, de confus. ling. Those who say that in ancient times every king was also a priest can be asked: why was the king of Sodom not called a priest? Plin. L. VI, p. 28. Ex innumeris populis (Arabum) pars aequa in commerciis aut latrociniis degit. This writer especially mentions Arabes feri, which is very close to the real description of Ishmael. Aug. de C. D. L. XVI, p. 29. Deus apparuit Abrahae ad quereum Mambrae, in tribus viris, quos dubitandum non est Angelos fuisse, quamvis quidam existimant, unum in eis fuisse Dominum Christum. Inseminatus ubique est in scripturis Filius Dei, aliquando quidem cum Abrahamo loquens, aliquando cum eodem comesurus, aliquando Sodomitis inducens judicium. Haeres. L. IV, c. 23. The Son of God is everywhere in the scriptures: He either talks to Abraham, then eats food with him, or brings down judgment on the Sodomites. Ipse cum Angelis Domini apud Abraham in veritate quidem carnis apparuit, sed nondum natae, quia nondum moriturae, sed et discentis jam inter homines conversari. Adv. Marc. L.III. He and the Angels of God appeared to Abraham in the true flesh, but not yet born, for it was not yet time for her to die, but she was already in the habit of circulating among people. In Gen. Note. XLII. At one time, three people were visible in Abraham’s booth: both the angels and their Lord. But after that, those, like ministers, were sent to destroy these cities, but the Lord himself remained and, like a friend with his friend, talked with the righteous man about what he wanted to do. Sanchoniaton has two eternal gods: Air and Chaos. Eus. The oldest evidence about victims of this kind is from Sankhoniaton, East. Fin., book. I, cited by Eusebius, Evang. L.V. p.16. The ancients (speaking of the Phoenicians) had a custom according to which, in times of danger of great troubles, as a substitute for general destruction, the leaders of a city or people would sacrifice the most kindly of their children as a ransom to the punishing spirits. He presents the first example of this custom in Saturn. Κϱονος τοινυν, ον οι Φοινιϰες Ίσϱαηλ πϱοσαγοϱευουσιν, βασιλευων της χωϱας, εξ επιχωϱιας νυμφης ΄Aνωφϱετ λεγομενης υιον εχων μονογενη, ον δια τουτο Ίεουδ εϰαλουν, του μονογενους ουτως ετι νυν ϰαλουμενου παϱα τοις Φοινιξι, ϰινδυνων εϰ πολεμου μεγιστων ????? ϰατεσϰευασαμενος ϰατεϑυσεν. So Cronus, whom the Phoenicians call Israel, reigned in that country, from a native Nymph (bride) called Anovred (according to the guess of Bochart Chan (L. II, p. 2) עוברת חן by grace, she conceives), who had an only-begotten son, for this reason called Yeud (יחוד or יחיד Gen. 22:2), by which the Phoenicians still call their only begotten, during the greatest danger from war that befell that country, he clothed this son in royal clothes and built an altar, and sacrificed him. It is not difficult to notice that this legend about Saturn is a corrupted legend about Abraham. If anyone accepts this about Saturn, known among the Greeks, then it will not reach not only the times of Abraham, but below Moses. The temptations that Abraham went through are counted as ten: 1) exodus from his homeland, 2) famine in the land of Canaan, 3) the abduction of Sarah in Egypt, 4) warfare against four kings, 5) Sarah’s barrenness, which is why she married Hagar, 6) the expulsion of Hagar, who was already with child, 7) circumcision, 8) the abduction of Sarah in Gerar, 9) excommunication of Ishmael, 10) sacrifice of Isaac. ׃ הוא בענקים הגדול האדם ארבע קרית in some codes added: De Virg. vel. P. XI. desponsatae habent exemplum Rebeccae; quae cum ad sponsum adhuc ignota perduceretur, simul ipsum cognovit esse, quem de longinquo prospexerat, non sustinuit dexterae colluctationem, nec osculi congressionem, nec salutationis communicationem, sed confessa quod censerat, id est, spiritu nuptam negavit virginem velata. S. XVI. Judicabunt vos Arabiae faeminae ethnicae, quae non caput, sed faciem quoque ita totam tegunt, ut uno oculo liberate, contentae sunt dimidia frui luce, quam totam faciem prostituere. The betrothed have an example in Rebekah, who, when, without being known, was approaching the groom, as soon as she saw from afar, she recognized that it was he, did not allow him to touch her hand, nor to approach her to kiss her, nor to greet her lower, but confessed what she felt, that is, the virgin was covered in spirit, and it became clear that there was no married woman here. You will be judged by the pagan Arabian wives, who cover not only their heads, but also their entire faces, so that they would rather be content with half the light than to give up their entire faces to the lust of the eyes. You might be interested in: